Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Rand Paul supporter asks for apology from woman he stomped? An apology guide

Doesn't anyone understand how apologies are supposed to work?

First, Virginia Thomas calls Anita Hill to demand an apology for whatever it was that happened 20 years ago.

Now Tim Profitt, the Rand Paul supporter who subdued a woman by stepping on her is saying she should apologize to him.

I know our culture is full of confusing cues about apologizing. There's that old saying that love means never having to say you're sorry. This led to a lot of confusion in my past relationships. "If I say I love you, then apologize, which one didn't I mean?"

Then there's that Elton John song (this week's theme!) about how sorry seems to be the hardest word.

In fact, apologies are simple. An apology, from the Greek apo + logia, which roughly translates to "I am fairly certain that wasn't my fault, but I want to rehabilitate my public image," is something that Person A says to Person B when Person A has wronged Person B in some way, or Person B has complained about Person A to someone else, for instance, the news media.

The following are a few scenarios in which apologies are called for.

- You inadvertently award the Nobel Peace prize to the wrong political dissident crusader for human rights, because of a Google Translator error.

- While out hunting with a friend, you shoot him with buckshot. You are vice president of the United States.

- You attempt (unsuccessfully) to assassinate someone, then find yourself sitting next to him at a dinner party.

For all other scenarios, I've prepared a handy chart. Next time, consult this before you demand or offer an apology!

apologize.GIF

By Alexandra Petri  | October 27, 2010; 12:05 PM ET
Categories:  Petri, That's awkward  | Tags:  Rand Paul, Virginia Thomas, apologies  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: DiFi sees doom; Rand Paul supporter votes with his feet; Soros drops $1 million for marijuana
Next: What is wrong with Joe Miller?

Comments

You need to understand the full story before you blast this out to hundreds of thousands of readers. You owe that to being a journalist.

This MoveOn.org worker was causing a huge scene. No one is reporting this. She was not standing there, holding a sign, simply "exercising her first amendment rights."

Watch this video and include it in your article. You really should not leave it up unless you tell the full story.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiLeud-sxrM

Posted by: joshlowry | October 27, 2010 4:03 PM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter if she was sticking out her tongue and blowing raspberries at the candidate. This lady was no threat to Paul. She was unarmed. She was holding a piece of paper, a sign. This man was not a police officer or even a security guard.

No matter HOW big a scene she was causing, THE MAN STEPPED ON HER HEAD like a frigging gestapo officer. *She* deserves an apology, not him. What *he* needs is to grow up and stop pretending and imagining that he's a storm trooper.

He made a bad decision, and he's lost his job because of it. I imagine he's feeling pretty dumb right now and KNOWS that he made a mistake. But his pride and arrogance won't allow him to admit any mistake on his own part at the moment.

The fact that some people think that his reaction to her protest was in any way reasonable or justified is a pathetic commentary on where we are as an allegedly civilized society. This man's actions should be roundly condemned by everyone, as it has been by the Paul campaign.

Posted by: MDPoster | October 27, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

So, joshlowry, it's your opinion that following complete immobilization by Mr. Proffitt's friends, Mr. Proffitt, calmly walking up to his victim, placing his foot just so upon her neck, and finally initiating a swift downward application of force (causing a concussion and associated bruising), was justified in the treatment of his victim? Maybe to "teach her a lesson"?

Yeah, I want to live in *your* world, joshlowry!!! But next time, how about adding some knee length leather boots and a riding crop tucked under the arm to Herr Proffitt's outfit? It'll add some style points, and make it so much more satisfying to his admirers, I'm sure.

Posted by: RonHildebrand | October 27, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

When will Leftists condemn the ObamaCare union-goons (inspired by ObaMao's angry calls to "punch back twice as hard") vicious assault on a black tax austerity protester while screaming racial epithets? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,538799,00.html

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | October 27, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

When will Leftists condemn this scalding assault on an Iraq War veteran in Ohio? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPmxWLXnAB4

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | October 27, 2010 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Keep trying to change the subject liberals-- This is really pathetic.

A professional paid provocateur wanted for a Felony for a recent political stunt she pulled in Louisiana was trying to harass Paul. A couple of Paul's supporters got totally out of line and behaved reprehensibly. The Paul campaign disassociated himself from the supporters and condemned the indecent. Now, he'd like to actually talk about jobs, and health care and the issues facing people in Kentucky and throughout America.

But the leftist media keep beating the drum frantically, because that's all they can do-- sling mud and change the subject.

Of all of the election night victories we are going to have, the Kentucky Senate will be the most satisfying.

Posted by: credentials | October 27, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

When will Park Police issue an arrest warrant for this vicious Gestapo assault on petite female reporter, Emily Miller? http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2010/10/petite-conserva.html

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | October 27, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

"Making a huge scene" is part of political discourse. Even if it had not been a public place (which it was) or a public forum (which it arguably was), making a scene is not a physical attack or an assault or battery.

Taking people down, physically, and standing on any part of them, let alone their heads, is assault and battery.

Get the difference? It's the difference between "rude" and "violent." "Rude" does not excuse "violent."

"Rude" would excuse the campaign worker for wanting her to shut up, for wishing she'd fall on her ass spontaneously, or for calling to cops to see if there was a legal basis for escorting her away.

Mind you, I doubt the police would find cause--the Republicorp schtick is to hold up signs saying things like, "Go buy your own congressman, we already bought this one--Republicorp." Not exactly an incitement to violence. Except say, to random sociopaths who believe they have a right to a Democrat-free world, even if they have to make it that way, one stomp at a time.

Finally, this act has been used 20 or 30 times nationwide, by local MoveOn members and groups, and it's gotten some press. Republican campaigns should probably be aware of that. Also, instead of drinking their own kool-aid, Republican staffers should also know that membership in MoveOn passed the 3.5 million person mark in 2008, making it very definitely not a dangerous and violent fringe movement.

Posted by: JFS_in_PA | October 27, 2010 4:47 PM | Report abuse

"Making a huge scene" is part of political discourse. Even if it had not been a public place (which it was) or a public forum (which it arguably was), making a scene is not a physical attack or an assault or battery.

Taking people down, physically, and standing on any part of them, let alone their heads, is assault and battery.

Get the difference? It's the difference between "rude" and "violent." "Rude" does not excuse "violent."

"Rude" would excuse the campaign worker for wanting her to shut up, for wishing she'd fall on her ass spontaneously, or for calling to cops to see if there was a legal basis for escorting her away.

Mind you, I doubt the police would find cause--the Republicorp schtick is to hold up signs saying things like, "Go buy your own congressman, we already bought this one--Republicorp." Not exactly an incitement to violence. Except say, to random sociopaths who believe they have a right to a Democrat-free world, even if they have to make it that way, one stomp at a time.

Finally, the Republicorp has been used 20 or 30 times nationwide, by local MoveOn members and groups, and it's gotten some press. Republican campaigns should probably be aware of that. Also, instead of drinking their own kool-aid, Republican staffers should know that membership in MoveOn passed the 3.5 million person mark in 2008, making it very definitely not a dangerous and violent fringe movement.

Posted by: JFS_in_PA | October 27, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

josh,

Dude, I watched your video. I didn't see anything that justified a head stomping (my bar might be higher for that sort of thing).

I did notice that if a crowd chants Rand Paul over and over it starts sounding like seig heil after a while.

Posted by: dilburt | October 27, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

So, you get your head stomped for "causing a scene"? You folks are always screaming about your First Amendment rights and free speech. Nobody can even interrupt your Precious Princess Palin or ask her an unrehearsed question without an accusation of bullying. But when someone from the other side dares to say a word, you assume carte blanche to beat them senseless.

Posted by: lurkittyfb | October 27, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

The SA (German Sturmabteilung, popularly known as the "Brownshirts" or "storm troopers") was a violent paramilitary organization--BASICALLY A BUNCH OF STREET THUGS (caps mine)--who aided in Hitler's rise to power in 1930s Germany by getting into street brawls and intimidating the opponents of the Nazi Party.

Posted by: m_richert | October 27, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Point being, the shoulder stomp is not justified. I would have wrote that if I was an idiot.

To compare the crowd to Nazis it ridiculous.

Rand Paul was exiting his vehicle and this girl was running around like an idiot shoving signs in his car window and trying to get all in his face. She needed to be restrained. Did she need to be hurt? No. I don't approve. That's silly folks.

Posted by: joshlowry | October 27, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

I suppose "Real Americans" who love the Constitution and Freedom beat up girls who carry signs at political rallies.

Let's give these folks real guns and bombs and let 'em loose on the world. After a few bogus wars they can always blame the other side for starting it. Or maybe not.

Posted by: thebobbob | October 27, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

There is ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE for this behavior. SHAME on everyone who is excusing assault and battery.

The Republicans have been inciting violence in their rhetoric for a long time. You are bullies. Face it and don't go crying for apologies from your victims. I am absolutely DISGUSTED.

Posted by: Liberty77 | October 27, 2010 6:35 PM | Report abuse

JOSH, look at the video. The guy didn't just stomp on the lady's shoulder. He pushed down hard on her head and neck. He could have injured a neck artery or caused other vascular injury other than the brain concussion that he caused. He should actually go to jail.

Posted by: Liberty77 | October 27, 2010 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Let's recap:
We are the party In Favor Of Restoring the Constitution.
THEREFORE, wearing guns to political rallies demonstrates our committment to the First Amendment. Anyone who is offended by our bringing guns to political rallies is a commie pinko nutcase and unAmerican.

HOWEVER, when someone brings a sign to a political rally, and attempts to perform political theater, we will forcibly restrain and assault them, because they are clearly unAmerican.

How's that again?????

The mentality of these folks is downright scary: be glad they didn't pull a gun on the poor woman: Kentucky has a very gun-oriented culture.

Posted by: WarriorGrrl | October 28, 2010 1:55 AM | Report abuse

Here's a tip for Profitt and Paul apologists(no pun intended): Before you go all over the airwaves ranting about how it was the victim's fault...you should wait to see whether she has any sequelae. I heard one guy say yesterday: He didn't stomp on her head, only her shoulder! And you know, it looked dang close to the spine to me.
And her neck. Ever hear of whiplash? There's a world of lawsuits in what Profitt did, and he ought to play nice, just to be on the safe side.

Posted by: martymar123 | October 28, 2010 6:40 AM | Report abuse

YOU HEAR ALL THIS DEMONIZING RAND PAUL AND HIS SUPPORTERS, BUT YOU DON'T HEAR A SINGLE WORD ABOUT HIS APPONENT,AND HIS BROTHER BEING WRAPPED UP IN A DRUG BUST SCANDAL.
GIVE ME A BREAK, WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!
THE ONES THAT THEY ARE DEMONIZING ARE THE ONES YOU NEED TO BE VOTING FOR!!!!!

Posted by: jw3112000 | October 28, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse

Putting a sign up to the window of the car is hardly "a huge scene". She didn't do anything violent and Profitt stomped on her. A large man stomping on a small woman is outrageous. Profitt is a coward, bully and beater of women. He should be arrested.

Posted by: DanNH | October 28, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Not only did the man stomp on the woman's head, he believes that she should apologize to him.

What kind of an apology is he expecting? "I am sorry that I did not notice three things: 1. You are larger than I am and willing to use force, 2. You only believe civil rights belong to those you agree with, 3. You are so easily provoked."

Not only do tea party supporters defend this man's actions, they persist in trying to explain how the woman's behavior justified these actions.

Posted by: FemaleVoter | October 28, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Tim Proffitt needs to be prosecuted for felony assault. He not only put his foot on her head/neck but the film shows him thrusting his foot with more force. This could have broken her neck. A low life like Proffitt needs to be behind bars.

Posted by: Havalina39 | October 28, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company