First off this was not going to be my first post after almost a month of inactivity, but the loss of common sense and the increase of stupidity are some of the few things that can piss me off enough to speak out. In recent days we have heard two major stories the first is Patricia Dunn, the now ex-Chairman of HP’s board and her spying campaign to track down the source of some leaks. The second story is the one that just broke recently featuring the now ex-Representative Mark Foley and the advances he made to underage male pages. Both acts, although reprehensible, are not my focus. Instead I think it is more important focus on the one thing that is never focused on and never remembered: the inability/refusal to accept responsibility for one’s own actions.
In Dunn’s case, just recently this Reuter’s article has her lawyer saying:
“These charges are being brought against the wrong person at the wrong time and for the wrong reasons…. They are the culmination of a well-financed and highly orchestrated disinformation campaign.”
And then later in the article, it’s reported that
Dunn has said she regrets the way the probe was handled, but does not take personal responsibility for any deceptive methods used.
Now did I miss something or didn’t Dunn order the investigation and guide its progress? You can’t order something to be done, be briefed on methods, guide other parts of the investigation, and then claim no responsibility.
Now Mark Foley on the other hand, so far as I have read, hasn’t actually denied sending his messages. Instead he has relied upon making excuses for what actually caused his behavior. So far, he has blamed alcohol and being abused when he was a kid. I can’t speak for his being abused as kid, but it was still his conscious choice(s) to do what he did. Alcohol on the other hand doesn’t have the ability to change a type of behavior, usually alcohol will only release/lessen the inhibitions of a person.
Unfortunately I am not a mind-reader and I cannot tell you why both of these people have made the decisions they have. Though one of my theories and, i think a plausible one, is that because both of these people are high-profile and more susceptible to lawsuits, they’re being cautious in denying responsibility. After all, anything that is said publicly or privately can come back to haunt them in a lawsuit. If they deny everything and provide excuses, then those words can’t later come back as evidence against them in some future lawsuit or campaign.
The only problem with this argument is that it falls flat on its back when applied the general public. Although there is still a possibility of a lawsuit, but it is far more remote. Sadly the reasons that the everyday Joe Schmoe won’t accept responsibility are far more simple. It’s easier to blame someone else for your own problems rather than accepting responsibility for your actions and their consequences.
