And then there was Bill Clinton:
Mr. Clinton began by saying, "I'm honored to be here with my president and my former presidents." Then he paused briefly and gestured toward Mrs. Clinton, his unspoken words seeming to suggest that he wanted to say future president, too. When the crowd began cheering, Mr. Clinton laughed and said, "No, no, no."It's most effective by far to just tastefully gesture at politics. No one can prove that he meant to do that, but, of course, he meant to do that. Smoothly played!
पोस्ट्स
३९ टिप्पण्या:
Althouse asks us to "let it go."
Good advice. However, I was less offended by the references to Iraq then the implied blame these so- called civil rights leaders put on "conservatives" in the country for the poverty and status of African Americans. It's always the white-man's fault.
Imagine the outrage if at a public funeral for the dead firefighters of 9/11, for example, speaker after speaker hinted that the Democrats in attendance were weak on defense, thus implying that the deaths of the firefighters were the fault of the Democrats....would it be true?
Ann,
Not to get into a contest of who is more political but you couldn't expect W to not attend this funeral, could you? And how many political points do you think he scored with the opposition by attending? I'd say zilch. No, the best he could do is attend and quietly take the slings and arrows that surprisingly came his way. In my view, it was unseemly to use the occasion to attack Bush and his policies. (And, my what a selective memory we have: Carter and his nod to illegal wiretapping that was authorized by Robert F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson. Johnson, by the way, couldn't see fit to attend MLK's funeral, but then maybe he wasn't playing politics and just didn't want to go.)
That being said, I wonder how many points the Democrats scored with their opposition after this show? About as many as Bush. So it's standoff, but I can't help but think the Democrats look even worse after such a showing.
Anyone remember Senator Wellstone's memorial service?
I hate political funerals, and the King one was one of the worst.
I had to live through one at a state level last Sat. It was for a long time friend of our family from church who was probably the preeminent educator in CO over the last 30 years, and the politicians were there in abundance. The tone was set when former Gov. Lamm started off the eulegies from the audience. It turned a 45 minute service into an hour and 45 minutes, and the reception line afterwords was another hour (which I thankfully missed).
We debated the funeral ad nauseum yesterday at polipundit.com, with many bemoaning the politics and debating the specifics of the life of Mrs. King's husband (and, to a certain extent hers).
Dr. King has been dead long enough that he has become an icon. Most of us have long forgotten his blemishes: his adulteries, his opposition to the war in Vietnam, and his socialism. What we remember is his brave stand on racism and segregation.
I suggested that in 50 years, schoolchildren will still be reading his "Dream" speech in class, with really no knowledge of his weaknesses. His legacy is really that dream of a color blind society so well articulated in that speech.
But no surprise that those at the funeral speaking politically tried to hitch their political causes to his wife, and, thus, to him. Now, he is much bigger than he was in life, and they were merely trying to advance their causes by leveraging off that.
It's not surprising that some of the eulogizing went political at the funeral for Coretta Scott King. It would have been better to pretend that President Bush's attendance at this 6-hour event was not itself political. But, of course, it was. So the Rev. Joseph Lowery said a little something about Iraq? Let it go.
It's offensive that you would let it go. It's patronizing and condescending. And it diminishes a man who as fought a great deal more than you for civil rights, for understanding between races and against war.
When you write that It's not surprising that some of the eulogizing went political would you clarify your statement? Are you saying that it's not surprising because speaking about a friend's desires, hopes, goals, and interests for the world are a natural part of a memorial? Or are you joining the partisan bigotted white conservative view of tsk, tsking?
Shame on you for letting this go. What you should be doing is listening and trying to understand his words.
Don't enable these thugs with your words, "let it go." And in your own echo chamber, please explain to your readers how you wish to be remembered at your memorial (many years in the future.) With kind but bland and inoffensive words, or with words that cut to who you were and what you stood for and what you would want to see happen?
Do not go gentle into that good night
I realize Bush didn't have much choice, but that is because he WAS making a political decision. The political choice was clear.
Leaving politics aside for the moment, does it bother anybody else that one of the musical performers at the funeral was Michael Bolton? Does this mean the Dream is dead?
terry, I'm sure you realize that Michael Bolton has worked tirelessly to bridge the gap between the races. So, no it does not bother me at all nor should it. Michael Bolton is an American hero, and one day presidents will be attending his funeral.
Without dwelling on the issue, using a funeral as a political bash-fest is rude. The moderate majority did not like it with Wellstone, and they won't like it this time.
Frankly, I suspect Clinton's little intentional slip likely did more damage than good. But we'll see.
Best post I've seen on this topic.
"I'd be more impressed if you had linkled to a non-partisan web site when discussing Wellstone's funeral."
It was his memorial service, I don't know what his funeral was like. I linked to a partisan site because only a partisan would make the points Barnes made about why the memorial service was distasteful to many people. It was a partisan service and therefore required a partisan response.
I find it ironic that Martin Luther King and his wife achieved fame by rebelling against laws written and enforced by Democrats.
And I find it ironic that the "secret government surveillance" was done by the Kennedy and Johnson administrations.
What, that Byrd was a Kleagle in the Ku Klux Klan? It's not a talking point, it's a fact, an embarrassing one.
Polly want a cracker. A big, old ex-Kleagle cracker.
The jerk:
What party refuses to give police protection to minorities in our major urban areas? What party gives minorities terrible schools and fights any hint of school reform in those cities.
What party refuses to give adequate city services to minority neighbor hoods? What party attacks anyone who tries to help black people realize their dreams of a better life especially if the person speaking out is black.
The answer to all of those questions is the Democrat Party.
So far we've discussed the Republicans accusing the Dems of playing politics with the King funeral and the Wellstone Memorial service. And somehow the burden is on me to concede that both parties do the same thing? I don't get it.
Well evidently you seem to have forgotten the part where Rick Kahn, Jimmy Carter, and Joseph Lowry were secretly under the influence of the Karl Rove Mind Control Satellite™.
Other than that, exploiting funerals as an opportunity to score cheap political points on the other party seems to be pretty much an exclusively Democratic thing.
Palladian:
I certainly do remember Paul Wellstone's crudely politicised memorial service, but I also remember that Wellstone was also (as far as I'm aware) the only Democratic senator who attended the funeral of Barry Goldwater and was scrupulous in not using it as an occasion to score partisan points back in D.C.
And, sorry, Professor Althouse I don't buy your attempt at equvalence here. There are times when the President of the United States has to act as a national leader, not a party figurehead with one eye on the news wires and the other on the next polling cycle. If President Bush had used Mrs. King's funeral as an opportunity to hit the talking points de jour, he would have been roundly criticised by Democrats and (IMO) deservedly so. I know we live in an age of the permanent campaign and the O Fortuna! news cycle, but I don't think I'm the only who thinks politics should stop at the edge of an open grave.
I for one kept waiting for Fritz Mondale to appear and hobble up to the podium too. I'm surprised he wasn't put up for show again at another wake/funeral. "Say! Where am I? Who is that dead woman? Why isn't Billy here, Jimmy?" Some more DNC sleaze couldn't have hurt, that's for sure.
I find it ironic that Jake appears to be unaware of the Southern Strategy and thinks the parties' respective positions on racial issues are the same as they were in the Jim Crow era.
Well let’s see, Republicans were the party that was originally opposed to government discriminating against citizens on the basis of race (when it was called Jim Crow) and are still the party opposed to government discriminating on the basis of race (when it is called affirmative action).
Democrats were the party that supported governmental discrimination on the basis of race (when it was called Jim Crow) and remain the party that supports governmental discrimination on the basis of race (when it is called affirmative action).
Looks like the parties have pretty much kept their respective positions on racial issues.
It saddens me, a bit, to see the comments starting to slide into sharpness and a bit of name calling.
May I quote Coretta Scott King:
"The greatness of a community is most accurately measured by the compassionate actions of its members, ... a heart of grace and a soul generated by love."
"Hate is too great a burden to bear. It injures the hater more than it injures the hated."
"Every King holiday has been a national "teach-in" on the values of nonviolence, including unconditional love, tolerance, forgiveness and reconciliation, which are so desperately needed to unify America. It is a day of intensive education and training in Martin’s philosophy and methods of nonviolent social change and conflict-reconciliation. The Holiday provides a unique opportunity to teach young people to fight evil, not people, to get in the habit of asking themselves, "what is the most loving way I can resolve this conflict?"
Interesting how Coretta Scott King herself is getting lost in the debate over Clinton vs. Bush antics.
More Inappropriate Funeral Behavior -- These people are shocking. Politics, at Martin Luther King's funeral!It is now for us, all the millions of the living who care, to take up his torch of love. It is for us to finish his work, to end the awful destruction in Vietnam, to root out every trace of race prejudice from our lives, to bring the massive powers of this nation to aid the oppressed and to heal the hate-scarred world.
Craig Ranapia said..."And, sorry, Professor Althouse I don't buy your attempt at equvalence here."
Please quote something I wrote that you disagree with. I honestly can't understand what you're talking about. I don't like that the funeral was politicized. I'm just not surprised that it was, and I'm not going to get upset about it.
Ann,
I thought I would help you out. I am not sure what you think art is for, or lawyering is for, or professoring, or memorializing is for, but since we know you don't like politics, I thought you might appreciate reading the Newt/Orwell/PC Gopac memo in the original
This is the document that formed the language and the arguments that you find most persuasive.most swayed by.
See ya in Room 101, we'll recognize you, you'll be holding the rats.
Not to belabor the point, but even Kerry thought the Dems flubbed on Wellstone.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,388903,00.html
As was said above: politics should stop at an open grave. This should have been an event to celebrate HER life, not play political games.
It's over and done now, so I agree - let it drop.
ChrisO:
Um, I actually watched CNN's coverage (that well known GOP spin machine) where the Senate Majority leader - who was paying his respects to a colleague - was hissed at, and even Wellstone's own son is on the record as saying some of the orations were - in retrospect - inappropriately partisan for a public memorial service as opposed to a Mondale campaign rally. Hard as this might be for hyper-partisans of either camp to believe, I admired Paul Wellstone the man without agreeing with his politics and thought someone who was deeply, and genuinely, respected across the political spectrum deserved better.
As I said above, it's not how Wellstone himself treated the death of his Senate colleague - and liberal bogeyman - Barry Goldwater. And all credit to him. It's called decency and civility, and it's rare enough that I'll take it - and praise it - wherever I can find it.
And Professor Althouse, I can quote you: "It would have been better to pretend that President Bush's attendance at this 6-hour event was not itself political. But, of course, it was. So the Rev. Joseph Lowery said a little something about Iraq? Let it go."
Obviously we have to agree to disagree on this, but if President Bush had asserted a right of reply to "say a little something about Iraq" - or the response to Hurricane Katrina or challenge Kanye West to a duel on the West Lawn - I'd have found it euqally worthy of criticism.
Perhaps I'm a little naive to believe that there are occasions where when the party politics get put to one side for a couple of hours, and standing beside open graves are among them. But that's a form of naivete I'm very comfortable with.
ChrisO:
Whatever - I'm just calling it as I see - and saw - it, and if you're not inclined to accept I'm putting forward my POV in good faith (as opposed to reciting the talking points Karl Rove is transmitting into my fillings) there's really little point in talking past each other.
And contrary to your assertion, folks can stare down the barrell of a live camera and say whatever the hell they like. Just spare me the faux outrage when they get called on it.
In George Bush's America, Coretta Scott King's funeral would have been shunned. At least Barbara Bush was man enough not to show up.
In George Bush's America, speaking for Mrs. King would have been Rush Limbaugh, recipient of an ACLU defense; Alberto Gonzales, defender of illegal wiretapping; and George Bush, victims one and all.
ChrisO:
"...are you really saying that because some in the crowd hissed when Lott entered, it was an outrage?"
Whatever the original commenter was saying, I'll say this.
Hissing at a funeral is an outrage.
Isn't that an "of course"? Or are we just giving up on any sort of standards of behavior?
There's "no crying in baseball" and there's "no hissing at funerals." One, five, or half of a crowd of people, it doesn't matter. Same principle.
A funeral is "The Threepenny Opera." You don't get to audibly hiss at even the villains. (You can cold-shoulder and ignore with dignity, however.)
A funeral is NOT Threepenny Opera.
Of course, I think it would be more classy and gracious to omit the cold-shouldering, as well.
Then again, I think it would more classy and gracious to comment, even heatedly, without name-calling (especially by using the same old boring terms) or cutely re-working names/screen names.
What the heck do I know?
Just a few points:
Mrs. King was a political figure. Her political views will be part of the memorial. This wasn't Reagan's funeral, but King's, so you have to expect there may be a few sharp elbows thrown around. But if any comments were questionable, I think they were Carter's.
Reader is right. No matter what you believe, hissing a political opponent at a funeral is way out of the bounds of decency.
ChrisO - Long before Reagan's funeral (at least since 1989, in fact), many people counted, "Tear down this wall" as a great Presidential quote.
Reader - good clarification! (I hate it when I do that, too)
There is a right and wrong way to behave at every funeral. We Irish get drunk and fight at weddings but always act respectful and behave at funerals.
It's not about the attendee; unfortunately self-centered people forget that. Hence the Wellstone debacle and yesterday's uncalled for remarks by a minister and an ex-president.
I suspect MLK and his wife would have been extremely proud of what their own kids and many other black children have achieved IN THIS COUNTRY!
At the risk of irritating everyone on this board, I did not think that Coretta Scott King was all that significant enough to merit an entourage and resulting brouhaha--EXCEPT for what she symbolized.
Agreed except that I think it should read ”EXCEPT for what her husband symbolized.”
Geoduck2:
The hissing, in the original comment, the referencing comment, and my response to the latter, was referring to Wellstone's funeral, specifically with regard to Trent Lott's appearance.
I didn't see (well, hear) any hissing at King's funeral.
Sorry for my lack of clarity.
Geoduck2 and others: My bad! Thanks for the enlightenment. Now (and appropriate enough) I'm going to feel honor-bound to bone up on geoducks.
So I'll withdraw the screen-name twisting part of the relevant comment, with a very sincere apology.
But not the other part.
geoduck2 wrote:
It's funny, isn't it, how people who are not friends or family of Mrs. King think that they have a right to plan her memorial service.
I reply:
Isn't it funny when you have some people set up ridiculous and offensive straw men when they don't want to engage with what people actually wrote? Well, no it isn't...
I was criticising the tone and substance of PUBLIC remarks some individuals chose to make - unless you expect me to believe nobody noticed the large media contingent - which I sincerely believe was inappropriate for the occasion.
Please quote where I directly or implicitly criticised Mrs King's family - which would have been a crass thing to do under the circumstances.
Just after I'm convinced by all the talk on the right side of the blogoshere of the awfulness of the King funeral, I read the always brilliant
Peggy Noonan's WSJ
editorial.
Gracious as usual, Peggy loved the enthusiasm, reveled in the politics, saw free speech in action.
Susan:
Well, I like Peggy Noonan too, but all I can say (in the spirit of free speech and all)is that she really needs a good smack around the ears with a copy of Emily Post. :) Call me a prissy missy, but I don't use funerals as an occasion to "pointedly insult" fellow mourners. (And damn it, there's been times I've been tempted to turn a family funeral into something out of the wilder reaches of classical Greek lit.) That's what a well-lubricated wake, followed by years of private family dinners, is for.
And, yes, Mrs Noonan thanks for the ever so patronising reminder that there was SO MUCH abour Mrs King's funeral that was full of grace, light and love. What a shame a very few couldn't rise to the occasion.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा