Ah but the Supreme Commander of this Board (aka Nan) has taken the opposite view (as have many others on the prior thread.)
You and msf are referring to
my post here.
Nan disagreed, in a post upon which you now seize as akin to a Supreme Court ruling, and I responded to her response
here.
Following which the Chief Justice was
appropriately conciliatory if not in a state of abject concession.
Your comment at the time, which I'll now address, was as follows:
Agree generally, except that it doesn't address the "Geno knows what he did", Pat's BP comment, and the "doing things the right way line of crap" that regularly ladled out by the school.
You're right that I sloughed off the question of an apology for Pat's behavior as follows:
3. As far as the innuendo, it was wrong and it's still being carried out by certain of PHS's minions and acolytes. But they aren't official, and as far as PHS herself, well, that was what it was.
"It was what it was" may have been overly delicate, so allow me to supplement that remark. I see no possibility whatsoever that official TN will apologize for Pat Summitt's infuriating innuendoes. Certainly her colleagues can't do it, and the notion of her doing it herself is absurd.
That's why you and others have suggested some skillfully worded general statements of regret that would skirt the personal behavior. Of course, they won't do that either if they really believe Ms. Summitt was onto something. In which case "they," to be honorable, should substantiate or STFU.
And "official" TN has done the latter, far as I know. If anyone knows of Ms. Warlick, for example, pushing the "she did things the right way" line of insinuatory crap, I'd be interested to see it in context. That's the work of Ms. Cornelius and her cretinous crew, for which "official" TN can't apologize.
As a final note on the subject of Ms. Summitt's personal behavior, particularly "Geno knows," etc., I was struck by
the comment of Diggerfoot, who as an
Alzheimer's activist knows whereof he speaks, that such evasions and deflections are typical of Alzheimer's patients. That rings true to me.
So, bottom line, I still don't see apology as necessary or feasible, though I don't doubt that some kind of face-saving language could be devised if both parties were willing. Which, far as I can see now, is a project doomed to languish.
I hope the myriad of links in this post work. I never tire of linking myself, which sometimes threatens to be the biggest source of attention my thoughts get.
