The way I read it was that those that felt the remarks were offensive were wrong in thier interpertation of "my remarks" and for that he was sorry. Not for the the Left that agreed with his remarks.

Of course its not that he was lazy and foolish in the way he tried to organize his argument, its that the listeners interpretted it wrong. Thanks Dick, how brazenly arrogant of you.
The silly thing is that Durbin had the tools to make a pretty good case, with or without resorting to Reichperboly. Durbin stupidly chose a pretty mild FBI report to cite when he could have used some much more inflamatory evidence. If he was smart he would have used the 'toss the crap against the wall and hope nobody looks at any one turd too closely' strategy, as Durbin's defenders like Sullivan do. But for some reason Durbin specifically pointed to that one report to invoke his Nazi comparisons. It does give us a pretty good look into how Durbins mind works. He obviously believes what he said. Durbins apology is phony because he is apologizing for the wrong thing. He should be apologizing for making a vapid argument, but that is one thing he will never do. Better to be thought an extremist demagogue than a man who cant string a coherant thought together.

a·pol·o·gize intr.v. a·pol·o·gized, a·pol·o·giz·ing, a·pol·o·giz·es

1 To make excuse for or regretful acknowledgment of a fault or offense.
2 To make a formal defense or justification in speech or writing.

Seems he was apologizing... in the 'make excuse' sense of the first definition. His earlier justifications were definitely definition 2.

I'd say Durbin's apology is close enough for government work. Friday's apology was more non-apology than yesterday's (though it repeated some of Friday's). The Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot stuff was always fingernails on the blackboard stuff to me anyway. I can understand people in the military or people with more direct experience with totalitarian horros might not be satisfied.

Strike the analogy and the more pressing question are:

• Will the Democrats continue to try and politicize prison abuse issues? The modus operandi is to find an investigative report and blame the President (or his cabinet). In my view investigative reports are a good thing; the system is working. I am not going to be concerned unless someone shows me an investigation that is being burried. The My Lai blueprint of blaming distant authority figures first is morally troubling.

• Can the Democrats be critical supports of war? Or are they caught in the death spiral of dependency on an anti-war base?

Just out of curiosity, does anyone else think it bizarre that he chose to bring up this up during debate over the energy bill?

Does anyone think it's bizarre that it occurs after 15 Republican Senators will not vote for a bill apologizing for lynchings in this country?
There is a very good chance the GWOT is going to be lost by the political posturing on both sides. Does Durbin's statement make Mike Rentar anymore safe than the actions of soidiers at Abu Gharib and at Gitmo? Both as are used to recruit people to kill our soldiers

I think Sullivan analyzes this best, although I'm having trouble linking to it. I'd copy the whole thing, but go to sections -

"Durbin Said Nothing Wrong"

and "Durbin Again".

You should be able to search with that (Do a find on his site).

Joe, are you starting to lose it? You really seem to have no perspective anymore.

Senator Dick Durbin and his stupid comments and subsequent non-apology reminds me of Jane Fonda.

Having served in-country Vietnam during my 20+ years U.S. Navy career, Mike Rentner's comment from Anbar Province struck a raw nerve with me. Rentner wrote "You may think it's all just political posturing, but I'm over here in Al Anbar Province, Iraq and every stupid statement like this from such a high level of our government is a direct threat to my life. Statements like this are used to recruit people to kill me. I take it very personally."

Dick Durbin has adopted the Jane Fonda defense for treason, Fonda used the non-apology, dressed as an apology with the adoring collaboration of mainstream media.

Since her two visits to Vietnam in 1972 and 1974 giving aid and comfort to the Soviet Union and communist North Vietnam, Jane Fonda has used a variety of red herrings to distract from her subversion and treason during the Vietnam War, with the most common red herring tossed around by Fonda's media supporters being "the apology". In Fonda's several so called "apologies" she has repeatedly demonstrated that she is sorry she got caught, and that is what she apologizes for, not because she thinks subversion and aid and comfort to the enemy is wrong.

Look at it from Dick Durbin's viewpoint. Use Jane Fonda's methods, Fonda's way worked.

JC, Sullivan doesn't analyse anything, its a silly defense of Durbin.

And in support of crimes against humanity, while pointing the accusing finger.

Evil, pure evil.

JC, your last dont paint a nice picture of youself. but at least you didnt find a mass grave of kids to stand on. But thats because you have already shrugged past them, long ago.

Since it's Andrew Sullivan's job to defend Dick Durbin these days, let him demand that Kos apologize for telling Durbin to "go f--k himself".

Robert M wrote:

Does anyone think it's bizarre that it occurs after 15 Republican Senators will not vote for a bill apologizing for lynchings in this country?

So how did the bill pass unanimously then?

Personally I thought it was a stupid bill and we should dock the pay of the members of Congress who wasted our time with this crap.

Re: Dick Durbin

Apparently this is the second time Senator Durbin has read the account from the same email on the floor of the Senate. He read it before back in February during the Gonzales nomination hearings when it might have actually been Germaine but managed to do it then without slurring Americans by comparing them to Nazis, Soviets, and the Khmer Rouge in the process.

One irony in all this is that its long been a screed in certain sections of the anti-Israel community that Durbin rose to power as the result of some Jewish conspiracy. I'm not up on the literature, so I don't know how Durbin's vote against the Iraq war squares with this, but for those of you who didn't know, Durbin got his start in Congress back in the mid-80s by defeating Republican Paul Findley, friend of Arafat and various terrorists and tyrants, author of They Dare to Speak Out : People and Institutions Confront Israel's Lobby, and someone that declared September 11 would not have occurred if the US government had refused to help Israel humiliate and destroy Palestinian society. Findley is sort of a heroic figure in some circles, so Durbin's contrary views on Israel, the PA and Arab tyranies, get him only grief.