BTW - I had a friend who became increasingly offensive at an increasing frequency, and his hollow apologies became intolerable. So we worked out a deal - in addition to a heartfelt, groveling apology - which I wasn’t required to accept until I was entirely satisfied - we would bargain to determine what cash penance he would have to pay me for each offense (generaqlly 20 bucks and up). Of course his behavior didn’t really improve for very long, but the arrangement oddly empowered me and underlined for me exactly how often he was a jerk, so our friendship didn’t last much longer. Hey - whatever it takes to get out of a bad relationship…

Guaranteed Effective All-Occasion Non-Slanderous Political Smear Speech
By Bill Garvin
MAD #139, December 1970

My fellow citizens, it is an honor and a pleasure to be here today. My opponent has openly admitted he feels an affinity toward your city, but I happen to like this area. It might be a salubrious place to him, but to me it is one of the nation’s most delightful garden spots.

When I embarked upon this political campaign I hoped that it could be conducted on a high level and that my opponent would be willing to stick to the issues. Unfortunately, he has decided to be tractable instead — to indulge in unequivocal language, to eschew the use of outright lies in his speeches, and even to make repeated veracious statements about me.

At first, I tried to ignore these scrupulous, unvarnished fidelities. Now I do so no longer. If my opponent wants a fight, he’s going to get one!

It might be instructive to start with his background. My friends, have you ever accidentally dislodged a rock on the ground and seen what was underneath? Well, exploring my opponent’s background is dissimilar. All the slime and filth and corruption you could possibly imagine, even in your wildest dreams, are glaringly nonexistent in this man’s life. And even during his childhood!

Let us take a very quick look at that childhood: It is a known fact that, on a number of occasions, he emulated older boys at a certain playground. It is also known that his parents not only permitted him to masticate excessively in their presence, but even urged him to do so. Most explicable of all, this man who poses as a paragon of virtue exacerbated his own sister while they were both teenagers!

I ask you, my fellow Americans: is this the kind of person we want in public office to set an example for our youth? Of course, it’s not surprising that he should have such a typically pristine background — no, not when you consider the other members of his family:

* His female relatives put on a constant pose of purity and innocence, and claim they are inscrutable, yet every one of them has taken part in hortatory activities
* The men in the family are likewise completely amenable to moral suasion
* My opponent’s second cousin is a Mormon
* His uncle was a flagrant heterosexual
* His sister, who has always been obsessed by sects, once worked as a proselyte outside a church
* His father was secretly chagrined at least a dozen times by matters of a pecuniary nature
* His youngest brother wrote an essay extolling the virtues of being a homo sapien
* His great-aunt expired from a degenerative disease
* His nephew subscribes to a phonographic magazine
* His wife was a thespian before their marriage and even performed the act in front of paying customers
* And his own mother had to resign from a women’s organization in her later years because she was an admitted sexagenarian

Now what shall we say of the man himself?

I can tell you in solemn truth that he is the very antithesis of political radicalism, economic irresponsibility, and personal depravity. His own record proves that he has frequently discountenanced treasonable, un-American philosophies and has perpetrated many overt acts as well.

* He perambulated his infant son on the street
* He practiced nepotism with his uncle and first cousin
* He attempted to interest a 13-year-old girl in philately
* He participated in a seance at a private residence where, among other odd goings-on, there was incense
* He has declared himself in favor of more homogeneity on college campuses
* He has advocated social intercourse in mixed company — and has taken part in such gatherings himself
* He has been deliberately averse to crime in our streets
* He has urged our Protestant and Jewish citizens to develop more catholic tastes
* Last summer he committed a piscatorial act on a boat that was flying the American flag
* Finally, at a time when we must be on our guard against all foreign “isms”, he has coolly announced his belief in altruism — and his fervent hope that some day this entire nation will be altruistic!

I beg you, my friends, to oppose this man whose life and work and ideas are so openly and avowedly compatible with our American way of life. A vote for him would be a vote for the perpetuation of everything we hold dear.

The facts are clear; the record speaks for itself.

Do your duty.

“I think another difference between Wright and Hagee is that Obama renounced Wright after the controversial beliefs became public”

And Wright has NOT apologized. Obama has denounced Wright. Has his family left that church?

And that’ the SECOND time Wright’s “controversial beliefs” made the news. The first time Obama just lied about never hearing them and tried to change the subject.

I think Hagee first apology should be to Muslims and homosexuals, for claiming that all Muslims are out to kill Christians and Jews, and that New Orleans was destroyed because there was going to be a gay parade in New Orleans. But I suppose Catholics are an important voting bloc for Republicans, and Muslims and homosexuals aren’t.

Here is the letter: [http://www.catholicleague.org/images/upload/image_200805130112.Donohue051208.pdf]

Here’s another perspective on the racist thing:
Who is more to be lauded for avoiding racist speech - an actual racist, or someone who is genuinely ‘colorblind’ ?

It’s rather like: who has more right to be proud of his sobriety - a recovering alcoholic, or someone who retches at the taste of alcohol?

I DO believe that there are people who cannot entirely shut off a visceral reaction of fear or distrust towards other racial or religious groups. Yet, many of them know intellectually that this reaction is irrational, and they strive to AVOID letting it affect their behavior. I’d say such an effort is to be applauded - surely, we should not encourage people to indulge their prejudices and try to live in isolation from (or even open hostility with) other racial or religious groups.

Sadly, John Hagee appears to be a dogmatic religious guy who is convinced that only his doctrine is correct. (At least, that’s the way he preaches…) Maybe he’s apologizing because he’s realized the hurt his comments have caused, and has truly changed his mind about the interpretation of that Scripture. But he’s probably just practicing damage control.

I am deeply, truly and sincerely sorry that my opponent is such a bigot and adulterer.

I hope he will accept this apology so that we can move on, because I’ve got some more things to say about him.

I agree that I would never get so mad or drunk that I would ever use the N word or spout any anti-Jewish nonsense. But that’s thanks to the environment I was raised in. I can’t expect the same from Haggee.

In this specific instance, by the way, I tend to agree that his apology may not be sincere- that he honestly does hold those old opinions about Catholics. But I can’t say, across the board, that nobody ever makes comments they don’t really mean deep in their heart.