King Funeral Becomes Partisan Rally

You have to admire George W. Bush's pluck for being willing to subject himself to this kind of crap:

The funeral took on political overtones as former President Carter said of the Kings: "It was difficult for them then personally with the civil liberties of both husband and wife violated as they became the target of secret government wiretaps." Later, he said that Hurricane Katrina showed that all are not yet equal in America.

Earth to Jimmy Carter: You didn't get smarter with age, and your constant moral preening makes you no more of a leader now than it did when you sat hectoring us in your Mr. Rogers sweater and your freezing cold seat in the White House.

And both Bush and his father winced as they sat behind the pulpit and heard the Rev. Joseph Lowery, who co-founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference with Martin Luther King Jr., take several jabs at foreign and domestic policies.

"We know there were no weapons of mass destruction over there, but Coretta knew and we knew there are weapons of misdirection right down here," Lowery said, complaining that were far too many in the U.S. are living in poverty and without health care insurance.

"For war, billions more, but no more for the poor," Lowery continued, a take-off of a lyric from the song "A Time to Love" which drew a roaring standing ovation.

And this:

The audience showed where its allegiance lay when former President Clinton and his wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, came to the podium to wild cheers and a long standing ovation. He opened by saying that he was honored to be with the other former presidents. Someone in the crowd yelled out, "Future president!" in reference to his wife's possible 2008 bid.

Yeah, that'll be a cold day in Hell.  But keep dreaming.

This is really too bad.  I can safely say that the vast majority of Americans treasure the Kings' legacy (although I can think of a Democrat relative or two who didn't like Dr. King at all in his day), and it is rather appalling that most of the attendees of this funeral were willing to turn it into a partisan circus.

UPDATE:  I had to close comments on this post due to it getting repeatedly hit by a spambot.  Sorry.

Comments

[Rick]

Not that Martin and Coretta would have been right there cheering with everyone else.

Yeah, Bush should stick to his partisan town hall meetings. That way he doesn't hear what the majority of Americans are thinking these days.

.

[SWLiP]

Rick:

That's precisely the point -- partisan meetings have their place. This wasn't one of them. To turn King's funeral into one was despicable.

The suggestion that Bush otherwise never hears criticisms of his policies is rather silly.

One of these days, the Democrats are going to wake up and realize that jumping up and down and whining all the time is not a particularly effective way of showing that they have better ideas.

[Rick]

SWLiP,

It was a 4-hour memorial punctuated by a couple statements that struck home with the overwhelmingly partisan progressive audience.

The Kings were peace activists. For there not be one word on what may be the most pro-war administration in their lifetimes let alone the history of this nation, would be to ignore everything they were about.

I'm sure conservatives will somehow be able to reach deep down, suck it up, and move on. They seem to be real good at that.

.

[Barb]

Since it was a profoundly *bad* idea to use the funeral memorials as a time to poke the administration with blunt objects, I'd say they demonstrated that they Do Not have 'better ideas' to offer. And just who was being referred to by the concept of the Kings ever being wire-tapped? Let's recall who was President before Rev. King was killed ... lesse - that would be Lyndon Johnson, IIRC.

SWLiP - I just found your blog via Consul-at-Arms. I'll be back :-)

[SWLiP]

Rick:

Perhaps I haven't been clear: Bush attended the funeral to bestow the honor of the Office of the President of the United States at the funeral. In that regard, he was there to represent all Americans in paying his respects. Indeed, he would have been vilified at least as much had he failed to attend. That is why turning the service into a partisan rally was, imo, inappropriate.

Barb:

Thanks for visiting! It's always nice to have new readers. I hope that I can find time to blog more than I have been, lately.

[SWLiP]

You know, I guess maybe I'm a little old-fashioned. Perhaps its my anachronistic, Southern manners that make me wonder why one it is no longer allowed to honor a worthy adversary with the dignity and grace that befits the moment.

[SWLiP]

Rick:

the most pro-war administration in their lifetimes let alone the history of this nation

Jesus, are you out of your mind? Do you have any idea what war was being launched by a Democratic administration while King was marching for civil rights? Do you have any idea what war continued to rage, under successive administrations (both Dem and Republican) for years after King's death?

And let's not forget that it took the most brutal and costly war in American history, one in which over half a million Americans died, to end the slavery that made the Civil Rights movement possible. Was Lincoln more or less "pro-war" than the Bush administration? Does the question even make sense?

Question, Rick: What did the North Africa campaign in 1942 have to do with Pearl Harbor?

[Rick]

The whole sentence, which you conveniently truncated, was "For there not be one word on what may be the most pro-war administration in their lifetimes let alone the history of this nation, would be to ignore everything they were about."

Bush probably isn't done yet, as you know and many wingers hope. History will judge this president on that issue as well as many others but the Bush Doctrine of preemptive war has been unmatched by any other previous administration. Maybe you point out to me when we've invaded a sovereign country that posed no immediate threat to us?

We've gone off on a tangent here. You don't think a memorial service to a progressive activist should have included one word of criticism for a president who is the antithesis of what most of the progressives in attendance hope for in a president. Fine. And I wouldn't expect a partisan conservative commentator to deviate from the party line.

It's what the presidency of George W. Bush has produced in this country.

[SWLiP]

It's what the presidency of George W. Bush has produced in this country.

Yeah, I've noticed. It's sometimes called "Bush Derangement Syndrome," or "BDS." Liberals who suffer from it can't seem to help themselves.

But anyway, you are correct that the conversation has strayed afield. My intent was to object to the hectoring of the man who attended to represent the Office of the POTUS, on behalf of all Americans. What you and Jimmy Carter seem to be saying is that a President should never bother to attend the funeral of an estimable political adversary.

How very sad for the country.

Btw, I "deviate from the party line" aplenty. I don't consider the topic of this post to be a particularly partisan issue, and would have been just as upset if conservatives had used such an occasion to hector Bill Clinton.

But read this to see why Jimmy Carter is being a hypocrite.