The ambivalence in readings of political apologies as being ‘pure’ or being ‘strategic’ calls for close rhetorical scrutiny. Yet, it is remarkable how the recent ‘rhetorical turn’ in apology studies has given sparse attention to textual analysis at the levels of the actual apology texts and the accompanying political debates.

In this chapter I offer a close rhetorical reading of an open hearing in the Danish Parliament’s Commission on Social Affairs concerning the Minister of Social Affair’s refusal to apologize in response to a report documenting mistreatment of children in state-supervised orphanages. The minister uses the familiar strategy of expressing regret instead of apologizing. Expressions of regret are often seen as being more at the ‘strategic’ end of the sincerity spectrum. My analysis aims at discussing the meaningfulness of this strategy of ‘regretful acknowledgement’ and to challenge the dichotomous thinking on sincerity versus purity that runs as an undercurrent in much literature on the topic.