He recognizes sarcasm about as well as you recognize a rhetorical question.
You well know Carmine that I've been ignoring you for more than 10 years now, since when in a different forum you maintained that the great alto saxophone player Charlie Parker was in fact a tenor saxophone player, which assertion you attempted to prove by posting a picture of Charlie Parker holding an alto saxophone, which alto saxophone you maintained was a tenor saxophone in the face of assurance by a professional saxophone player - that professional saxophone player would be me - that it was not; later in that conversation you claimed to sing opera as well as Renee Fleming. Wow, I thought, this guy is exquisitely stupid, even for a mo
ron, and put you on my never mind list where you have stayed since.
In the interest of
comity comedy I'll take you off briefly, only because you've presented me with the opportunity to make you look like an illiterate imbecile. Viz.:
Your statement
"Will the public apology to Mullin ... come in the form of a formal press release ... or consist of individual admissions of guilt from our disloyal fan base"
does comprise a rhetorical question. Good on you. That the question is rhetorical though, that doesn't make it meaningless; only an idiot would think otherwise. In fact, the form of your rhetorical has a name: it's called epiplexis. That's a rhetorical question that implies an answer containing a rebuke. For example, in the Bible, Job, much afflicted by boils and pestilence and whatnot asks of Yahweh:
"Why did I not perish at birth, and die as I came from the womb? Why were there knees to receive me and breasts that I might be nursed? Why was I not hidden in the ground like a stillborn child, like an infant who never saw the light of day?"
Job's questions aren't meaningless because they're rhetorical. Quite the opposite: they have deep meaning and their answers contain a rebuke. Why did I now perish at birth
because I should have. Why was I not hidden in the ground like a stillborn child
because I should have been. Dear God, Job is saying, why was I born at all if my only reward is suffering.
See? It's like if I were to ask rhetorically: "Why are Carmine's posts invariably stupid, dreary and boring?" The answer is implied and has import: Carmine's posts invariably stupid, dreary and boring
because Carmine is stupid, dreary and boring.
Thus endeth the theology lesson. See you in the funny papers.