Thursday, October 24, 2013

And things were said and tears were shed, people.



The above video is of Rep. Pete Sessions of TX, who was supposedly the person who said he could not stand to look at President Obama at some point in a White House meeting. And I don't even know if it is true. I won't pretend I know. Let's just call him the Schroedinger's Racist, and posit that unless the White House meeting in question was actually recorded, we simply can not infer from the available data whether he actually expressed the opinion that he could not stand the President and will not know until that event can be observed.

Some people might allege that based upon a priori data, we can reasonably speculate that Pete Sessions is in fact just the sort of person who might have made a disrespectful remark regarding the President. Others might state that the authoritative denial of the White House spokespeople negates the likelihood that he said that thing--but reasonable people might also weigh the possibility that the remark exists as an inadmissible anecdote--not on the record, but having been heard by someone, just not in a fashion readily reproducible.

In other words, he may have said it, and have had it been officially unsaid. In fact, it may have been very necessary to do so, because in order for the aforementioned White House meeting to have been in effect, the actual authority of the holder of the office that the White House represents would have to be validated. The failure to recognize that authority would tend to corrupt the resulting exchange of the conversation.

And we have no particular reason to believe that the conversation was corrupted, do we?

I leave that logical exercise for the reader to determine on his/her/their own.

2 comments:

Grung_e_Gene said...

Fortunately, for Pete he turned 18 one week after US Combat forces left Vietnam so his chicken hawk ass didn't need to say too many minorities took all the spots in the military so he couldn't join.

Yastreblyansky said...

Grung_e_Gene: Ouch!

Vixen: "Inadmissible anecdote" is just right. I would use this as an example of how the White House press secretary really does have to lie sometimes--not to cause anybody to believe a falsehood but just to preserve decorum. I'm utterly convinced the story is true and utterly unconcerned by the denial.