What do George Costanza and Ted Cruz have in common?

Responding to the Big Apple uproar over his denigration of “New York values,” Ted Cruz offered what must be regarded as the epitome of a non-apology apology, except that since he used the apology to make it clear that he believes that he had nothing to apologize for. He also used his masterpiece to extract the New Yorkers who he felt were victimized by “New York values,” thus refining his original attack.

Heeeeere’s Ted:

So, today, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton and Governor Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City all demanded I apologize….Who am I say to no? I will apologize. I apologize to the millions of New Yorkers who have been abandoned for years by liberal politicians. I apologize to all the hard-working men and women in New York who like to have jobs, but Governor Cuomo banned fracking, so they don’t get the jobs the people of Pennsylvania have. I apologize to all the New Yorkers who are pro-life, pro-marriage and pro-Second Amendment, who were told by their governor — Governor Cuomo — that there is no place for them in state of New York because that’s not what New Yorkers believe. I apologize to all the small businesses that are fleeing New York City because of the crushing taxes and regulations that are making it impossible to survive. I apologize to all African American and Hispanic school children that Mayor de Blasio tried to throw out of their charter schools that were giving them a lifeline and a chance at the American dream. And I apologize to all the cops and all the firefighters and all the 9/11 heroes who were forced to stand up and turn their backs on Mayor de Blasio because over and over again, he sides with the looters and criminals instead of the brave men and women.

Now I hope that was the apology they were looking for.

This kind of “apology”—the sarcastic apology—isn’t covered by the Ethics Alarms Apology Scale, because it neither apologizes nor pretends to apologize. It is in the same category as the apology-as-attack that answers the protest, “You called me stupid! I demand an apology!” with “OK, if you insist: I’m sorry you’re stupid.” That, of course, is just a limerick to Cruz’s sonnet.

Unlike the true non-apology apology, there’s nothing unethical about Cruz’s rhetorical jiu-jitsu. He’s owning his insult. His original comment was really about culture, which includes values, and as several pundits have noted, New York has long celebrated its culture as unique, and it is. What was upsetting about Cruz’s original comment was that it implied New York values were inferior, whereas New York, like most places, including Cruz’s Texas, thinks of its values as superior.

This clarification by Cruz is ethically preferable to his original, wink-wink, nudge-nudge response to critiques of the New York values attack, in which he shrugged and said, in essence, “Hey, each to his own! I’m not saying your values are wrong, their just not my values [or those of any decent, God-fearing, moral Americans, you sick bastards!], that’s all. No offense!” In fact, this non-non-apology apology  is Cruz’s admission that he blew it during the debate. If he had been able to produce it in response to Donald Trumps neatly played 9-11 card–and note, Hillary fans, how much more deftly he played it than she did, when she tried to use the terrorist attacks to explain her Wall Street ties—he would have won that exchange. Instead, he let The Donald trump him.

For me (and “Seinfeld’s” George Costanza: remember “Oh yeah? Well, the jerk store called: they’re out of you!”), it is comforting that even Ted Cruz sometimes walks away from an argument thinking, “Arggh! THAT’S what I should have said!” It happens to me all the time.