Love your enemy/hate your enemy — What did Trump really say at the Charlie Kirk memorial?

I see the headline in the NYT, framing Trump's statement in the conventional anti-Trump manner: "'I Hate My Opponent': Trump’s Remarks at Kirk Memorial Distill His Politics/President Trump has been fueled by grievance and animosity over the course of his political and public life."

Is Trump a hater? I'm not going to sift through everything he's done "over the course of his political and public life," but I will read the transcript of his speech — which I listened to live — and zero in on the part about hating his adversaries, which is getting attention from his adversaries, as I presume he knew it would:

"We cannot change what has happened. But we can take responsibility. Therefore, on behalf of Denmark, I would like to say sorry."

Said Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, quoted in "Denmark Apologizes After Birth Control Scandal in Greenland/For years, Danish doctors inserted intrauterine devices in Greenlandic girls and women without their consent, part of a painful legacy of mistreatment" (NYT).

The practice went on for decades and many patients were never told what had been placed inside them. Some learned only years later when they had health complications. Some women were left infertile for life.... Denmark colonized Greenland more than three centuries ago.... The campaign started in the 1960s and affected thousands of Greenlandic women and girls but was brought to light only a few years ago. Danish doctors, who were running Greenland’s health care system at the time, inserted IUDs in women and girls with the intent of preventing pregnancies and controlling Greenland’s birth rate....

"Transgender swimming champion Lia Thomas will be stripped of University of Pennsylvania swimming titles after the Ivy League school bowed to pressure from the Trump administration."

"The university will also issue formal apologies to every biological female competitor who lost out to a transgender competitor following an investigation by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR). The probe found UPenn violated Title IX by 'allowing a male to compete in female athletic programs and occupy female-only intimate facilities.' 'Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action...' Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement...."

From "Trans UPenn swimmer Lia Thomas will be stripped of her titles after university bends the knee to Trump admin" (NY Post).

"Civilizations age and die. It’s acknowledged in one of the most beloved charades of wokeism: apologies to (selected) preliterate civilizations..."

"... that once were based in the area now inhabited by the apologists. What, however, would the enlightened have happen? Their fantasy casts them as champions of the Stone Age folks who once enjoyed the real estate we currently inhabit. But stone axes and buffalo hunting could have continued only as behaviors protected by a civilization not only technologically superior but of sufficient surplus of goods and Christianity to still the westward American migration in service of an ideal. The fantasy, in effect, of a historical reenactment or theme park. The fantasy was attempted in 1870 when the U.S. Department of the Interior put the Quakers in charge of various Indian reservations for the maintenance and order and the distribution of government welfare. The results were malfeasance and theft greater than the previous administration’s crony capitalism, since the peaceful Quakers were laissez-faire fools. Do homo sapiens seek out descendants of Neanderthals and apologize?"

Writes David Mamet, in "The Disenlightenment: Politics, Horror, and Entertainment" (p. 230)(commission earned).

Grok explains Musk's regret.

"Some." 

Joni Ernst serves up death, apology, sarcasm, and Jesus.

Against all odds, Joni Ernst has made it worse pic.twitter.com/aElIudNmZG

— Keith Edwards (@keithedwards) May 31, 2025

I had to go back to this after reading about it because I had clicked it off in disgust thinking it was an genuine effort to make a "sincere" apology.

For background: "Joni Ernst posts sarcastic apology video following comments that 'we all are going to die'" (Des Moines Register): "The Iowa Republican's original comments came at a town hall in Parkersburg on Friday, May 30, while she was answering a question about cuts to Medicaid in President Donald Trump's tax package that the Senate is poised to consider. During Ernst's answer, someone in the audience interrupted her to shout, 'people will die!' Ernst replied by saying, 'People are not — well, we all are going to die. For heaven’s sakes, folks.'"

"This guy from the counter yells at me and tells me, 'You’re not going to make this flight. Give it to somebody. Get rid of it.'"

"I said, 'No way, I’m not going to get rid of my baby.'"

Said Maria Fraterrigo, 81, quoted in "Grandmother Is Stranded When Her Parrot ‘Plucky’ Can’t Board Flight/Plucky, an African gray parrot, accompanied its owner on a Frontier Airlines flight to Puerto Rico in January. But a gate agent would not let it on board the return flight" (NYT).

Once they let her fly out with the animal, it was unfair not to allow her to return with it. It's one thing to say "Give it to somebody, get rid of it" about a newt or a gecko, but this was a parrot. Those things have some individuality and personality, especially from the viewpoint of the owner. They talk. And they live a long time. Plucky is 24.

And whether you support the "emotional support animal" loophole or not, the airline owed her consistency within a single round trip. 

The woman's ordeal made the news and politicians, including Chuck Schumer, got into the game and pressured the airline. A Frontier spokesperson said "Parrots do not qualify as emotional support animals under our policies nor those of any other U.S. airline that we are aware of," but "We are pleased to have enabled Plucky’s return to New York," and "We apologize for any confusion that may have occurred with respect to our policies.”

As long as I'm talking about apologies...

"George Stephanopoulos and ABC apologize to Trump, are forced to pay $15 million to settle defamation suit/ABC News will pay $15 million as a charitable contribution to a Trump presidential foundation and museum" (Fox News).

The defamation had to do with the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit. Stephanopoulos incorrectly asserted "Donald Trump has been found liable for rape by a jury."

"This is unacceptable and disturbing. The DMV is taking swift action to recall these shocking plates..."

"We sincerely apologize that these personalized plates were not properly rejected during our review process. The use of hateful language is not only a clear violation of our policies but also a violation of our core values to proudly serve the public."

Wrote the California Department of Motor Vehicles, quoted in "Family that owns Tesla Cybertruck with ‘LOLOCT7’ plate says its meaning was misconstrued" (Washington Times).

"It is very unlike me to make a public statement about anything. I don’t think of myself as an actor-vist. I’m not that person."

Said Rebecca Hall, in "Rebecca Hall: I regret apologising for working with Woody Allen/The British film star issued a statement after accusations were made against the director but now says ‘I don’t think it’s the responsibility of his actors to speak to that situation’/‘I’ve had a wild, chaotic, beautiful life’: Rebecca Hall on race, regrets and learning to be herself" (The Guardian).

"I don’t regret working with him. He gave me a great job opportunity and he was kind to me.” Hall added that she did not talk to Allen any more, “but I don’t think that we should be the ones who are doing judge and jury on this.” Her policy now, she said, “is to be an artist. I don’t think that makes me apathetic or not engaged. I just think it’s my job.”

Heinz apologized for this ad. What did it do wrong?

Good luck finding anything wrong there. You have to first guess at how it could be misread, then see why that could be understood as a problem.

At X, you can see the misreading and the consequent outrage in motion.

For an overview of the path to apology, read "Heinz apologises after ad featuring black family sparks anger online/Firm accused of stereotyping in advert spotted at Vauxhall and Manor House tube stations in London" (The Guardian).

Here's the apology, which resists blaming the viewer for the misunderstanding: "We always appreciate members of the public’s perspective on our campaigns. We understand how this ad could have unintentionally perpetuated negative stereotypes. We extend our deepest apologies and will continue to listen, learn and improve to avoid this happening again in the future."

They can't say hey, idiots, the bride's dad is the man on the left. 

Ironically, it's the white groom who doesn't have a dad in the picture. I think Heinz got into trouble by trying too hard to display a correct vision of diversity.

"My son has all but cut connections with me.... A year or so ago when I was visiting, I had a DNA test swab with me..."

"... and asked [my granddaughter] to supply the saliva. The good news is, it turns out she is indeed my granddaughter, although unlike all the other grandkids, she looks nothing like any of the families on my side. She looks like a clone of her mother and a lot like her half brother from a different father. The results of this test leaked out via another family member, and there was a lot of anger by the mother that I doubted her faithfulness. I did apologize, although I really wanted to know the results. My apology was not accepted as good enough...."

From "Carolyn Hax: She doubted her grandkid’s paternity. So she picked up a DNA test. A letter writer insists on the truth of a grandchild’s paternity, and wonders if it must come at a cost with the child’s family" (WaPo).

That goes into The Annals of Unaccepted Apologies.

I wonder:

1. How often does it happen that someone secretly acquires a DNA sample from another person and gets it tested? It's always wrong, so there would not usually be confessions.

2. What tempted the grandmother to give in, not only to her unseemly curiosity, but to telling someone else what she did? Did she not realize how wrong she was? Did this other person participate in gossip about the child's paternity, motivating the grandmother to whip out her proof?

3. How often has it happened, across the great span of human existence, that family members have gazed upon the face of an innocent child and formed ideas about who, really, is the father? What evils, great and small, have they committed in the name of their suspicions?

4. Did Jesus Christ look "like a clone of [his] mother"? (I know: different sex. But still.)("With the facts in place, there is only one conclusion: Jesus was trans, as he would have been born as a genetic copy of Mary, but transitioned to male at some point.")

"I walked around this place, paranoid of my fellow legislators, racking my brain trying to think, 'What could I have possibly said or done?'"

Said Jim Carroll, quoted in "Vermont Republican secretly poured water into colleague’s bag over months/Mary Morrissey apologizes after being filmed dumping liquid into backpack of Democratic legislator Jim Carroll" (The Guardian).

Both Carroll and Morrissey represent the city of Bennington.

It's not enough to apologize for doing this. The people who depend on this legislator need an explanation for why she repeatedly did something so bizarre. You can apologize for being out of your mind, but you don't really need to. I feel sorry for Morrissey, but she needs to resign. It's interesting that she made Carroll feel that he was insane. Was Morrissey gaslighting Carroll?

"We made a mistake. Our ads referencing celibacy were an attempt to lean into a community frustrated by modern dating..."

"... and instead of bringing joy and humor, we unintentionally did the opposite. Some of the perspectives we heard were: from those who shared that celibacy is the only answer when reproductive rights are continuously restricted; from others for whom celibacy is a choice, one that we respect; and from the asexual community, for whom celibacy can have a particular meaning and importance, which should not be diminished. We are also aware that for many, celibacy may be brought on by harm or trauma."

Said the dating app company Bumble, apologizing for its ad campaign with the slogan "A vow of celibacy is not the answer/Introducing the new Bumble."

I'm reading about this in "Bumble to Users: You Need Sex. Users to Bumble: Get Lost. A new advertising campaign from the dating app set off a firestorm of criticism, prompting the company to apologize" (NYT).  From the article, which is by Gina Cherelus, who says, "Framing celibacy and abstinence from sex as a negative isn’t all that different from framing promiscuity and sexual freedom as shameful."

"Sonny and Cher sing 'All I Ever Need is You' as the device destroys some of the most beautiful objects a creative person could ever hope to have, or see..."

"... a trumpet, camera lenses, an upright piano, paints, a metronome, a clay maquette, a wooden anatomical reference model, vinyl albums, a framed photo, and most disturbingly (because they suggest destructive violence against children's toys, and against the child in all of us) a ceramic Angry Birds figure and a stack of rubber emoji balls" (from rogerebert.com):

 

The NYT reports on the backlash and Apple's caving to (hydraulic) pressure: "Apple Says Destructive iPad Ad ‘Missed the Mark’/People in the creative world widely panned a commercial showing a giant hydraulic press squishing objects ranging from paint cans to a piano":

"Just found out i’m not hot. Please give me and my family space to grieve privately and uglily at this time."

Said Sarah Sherman, quoted in "'SNL' star Sarah Sherman has hilarious response to TikToker who said the show has never hired a ‘hot woman'" (CNN).

The quote became quotable by Althouse blog standards with the use of the word "uglily." I note that it is difficult to say, it draws attention to itself — if you ever happen to say it — and it contains — in defiance of ugliness — a word that expresses loveliness, "lily."

Here's the TikTok Sherman is responding to. It's a lot meatier than the headline makes it sound:

"One of the weird things about Christie’s mea culpa is that he apparently thinks someone who has 'the wrong policies' is as equally dangerous as someone who 'will sell the soul of this country'..."

"... who he has called a 'dictator,' and who he said last week would 'burn America to the ground.'... The other weird thing is that you might come away from the clip thinking that the former governor realized the error of his ways shortly after 2016, or at least just after Trump became president—when, in fact, he was still supporting the guy in 2020 and did debate prep for the campaign that, as of a year later, he was saying he didn’t regret."

Writes Bess Levin, in "Chris Christie Apologizes for Previously Backing Trump, Who He Now Believes Will 'Burn America to the Ground'" (Vanity Fair).

She's talking about this new ad from Christie, which seems like a last-ditch effort by Christie to save himself:

New: Christie up w/ a new NH digital ad about his “mistake” endorsing Trump in 2016

"I did it because he was winning, and I did it because I thought I could make him a better candidate and a better president. I was wrong. I made a mistake." pic.twitter.com/gTPjW61LZP

— Alex Thompson (@AlexThomp) January 4, 2024

"I was one of those people that caused the state to be weakened, that harmed people. I created a split, I created a rift, and I created tension. And this tension brought weakness. And this weakness, in many ways, brought massacre."

Said Galit Distel Atbaryan, a lawmaker from Netanyahu’s Likud Party,  quoted in "In rare apology, Israeli minister says she ‘sinned’ for her role in reforms that tore country apart/Distel Atbaryan appeared to accept the argument that the internal divisions created perceptions of weakness that encouraged Hamas to attack" (Politico).

ADDED: Atbaryan seems to be relying on the proposition those who criticize the government are aiding the enemy.

"Petitioners visiting the Executive Office learned to keep talking, because the President usually had an open book on his desk, and was quite capable of snatching it up when the conversation flagged."

I'm reading page 108 of "Theodore Rex (Theodore Roosevelt Series Book 2)," by Edmund Morris (Amazon link, commission earned).

Also, on page 126:

"This phrasing was a terrible mistake, as it implies that until recently Jews have been strangers to persecution...."

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Susan Sarandon (@susansarandon)