King funeral turns political....
 

More proof that some people just do not understand the meaning of class, dignity, and respect.

NCB (see current avatar) = pot calling kettle black

glass houses.... glass houses...

:shakes head:

and nice to use someone's memorial for their own personal swipes and gain.

Not happy about this avatar either, eh Charlatan?

:lol: ;)

Just don't threaten to cut his head off or anything, or perhaps burn down a embassy.

The democrats pulled the same type of shit at the Welstone memorial, didn't work well for them there either. The current democratic leadership may have no class, but the American public still does in some circles. I can only hope the democrats keep it up.

Ironicly if Carter would have had a set of stones back when he was president, much of this would have been avoided.

And I suppose no one mentioned that Mrs. King remained dedicated, dignified, and devoted even in the wake of published reports concerning her husband's infidelity. Sort of like one former president's wife who spoke at the funeral... :confused:

That's an interesting assertion. What do you mean by that?

As you say, some don't know the meaning of dignity and respect... just because you can doesn't mean you should.

I dare you to be more vague....


I am against posturing at events that are meant to be somber and a time for reflection. The King funeral should be about the incredible effect the good doctor had on American society, not about partison posturing. I'd love to see another Dr. King type of social progressive with a clear message. Until one comes along, I'll remember Dr. King and all he did.

Actually, the Wellstone story has since been discredited. As for the funeral, beautiful, wish I could have been there. I bet Mrs. King was smiling somewhere.

i feel, this should have been a time to reflect on her life and personal accomplishments.

however, it's safe to say, politics cannot be checked at the door and rarely is restraint ever used when it should be.

sweetpea

lemme get this straight.

a known progressive has a funeral. progressive/lefty things are said at this memorial. people are surprised.

Hunh?

As for carter's remarks...that King was targeted by secret wiretaps is a matter of record. We can't forget that the memory we claim to honor now was of a movement deeply targeted by our government from the highest levels as subversive.

The only thing i can't figure is why a fragile political figure would want to be at an iconoclast's funeral.

Like hell. Had Republicans done this sort of thing at the Reagan funeral I would have been livid. Just because you have a microphone in front of your face doesn't mean you need to grandstand.

It was a complete lack of class.

The Republicans are the kings of grandstanding. Look at where they held their RNC and not only that, every other word out of their mouths was terrorism, freedom, and 9/11 add infinitum.

Isn't it pretty sad though that the only place real opposition to Bush has to take place at a funeral? He's been such a reclusive president and when he does appear in public it's at venues where everything is already coreagraphed. I applaud the speakers who got their jabs in even though I don't agree with everything they said..

Whatever. How's Sharia law treating you guys up North?

It's not. The Ontario government decided not to pursue the matter.

and what message would this person bear?

i don't think many are surprised, but that doesn't make it any less vile.

there is no carcass those vultures wouldn't pick clean.

What Wellstone story? You mean the one where his funeral turned into a democrat pep rally? Where the state govenor walked out? As a Minnesotan I remember it, it was pretty messed up.

Umm I SAW it for gods sake. Discredited? How by a re-education camp?

Win for Paul, win for Paul!

And the boos when a Republican spoke were full of class and the warmth of human kindness.

nothing to say

I was there...and i'd like to know which republican spoke and was boo'd.

Let's see, who are the people complaining about this? The Republicans. Who are the people who tried to stand in MLK's way over 40 years ago? The Republicans (of course, many of them were Southern Democrats at the time). Who are the people who have employed a Southern Strategy to win almost every national election since then (when they weren't facing a Southern Democrat)? The Republicans.
As far as the complaints about it not being appropriate for a funeral, you need to understand that not every funeral has to be exactly the same. Funerals are often planned in order to celebrate the life of the person who died and thus reflect the way that person lived their life. I have no doubt that if Coretta Scott King and Martin Luther King Jr. happened to look down at this funeral from heaven, they would have been cheering on Jimmy Carter and Joseph Lowery with the rest of us.

Why do all of your posts in politics stink of us vs them rhetoric? Do you really think this way? Republicans vs democrats is the only way to view things? Do you have these types of conversations in real life? I'm not being sarcastic; I really want to know. Why is it so easy for you to view such a huge part of the population as a simple sterotype? Does how people vote say everything you need to know about them?

I honestly couldn't tell you until the person comes along.

Much ado about nothing.

If the worst "partisan" thing said at the funeral was what Carter said, and the GOP are all up in arms and crying foul..... then they need to get lives.

As said above: A left winged activist, who was very vocal against what she deemed wre wrongs in society and government, has people saying left winged ideals and speaking out against the President....... OMG that is a fucking outrage how dare people speak out. How dare people criticize the president at the funeral of an activist who spoke out against the president while she was alive.... Send them all to prison camps, they must be terrorist sympathizers also, obviously they are unpatriotic, using that pesky 1st Amendment at a funeral.

And I love these people who are crying foul here, let's see, since I have been on this board, I have been called:
rich white trash who knows nothing of prejudice, (yet they know nothing of my past)
I have been attacked with the author using my addiction, (VERY CLASS ACT THERE)
I have been told that someone would cut copy and paste a post (cutting and pasting only what they wanted to put out) onto another board with my e-mail addy,
I have had my intelligence questioned, my sanity questioned, my life threatened once,
Called a martyr because I spoke out about a personal health issue, where I said I wanted to do the right thing but was told it would be easier to quit my job to have my bills paid, (Class act again..... attack someone's health)
I have recieved hate e mails from people,
and I have someone on ignore that from some of his quotes in others posts, still feels the urge to attack me, sooo my opinion on that is he is seeking my attention,
and I have been called all kinds of nice classy things......
by those right, always polite never personally attacking Neo-Cons on this very board simply because I expressed my opinions..... some of whom are acting so upset about what was said at the funeral.

And yes, the outrage is an act to hopefully gain sympathy from the neutral voters. "Look how mean those Dems are."

Anyone know what Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Coulter or so on has been saying about Mrs. King? Has it all been positive? Just a question. I would be curious to see how kind and the great things they've been saying about her.

So, I would say one needs to think how they treat others before they talk about how others treat and talk about other people.

What happened to "if you can't say something nice don't say it" or trying to be above the attacks and debating facts?

I'm no angel, in fact I will probably have to change this as it is a bit on the mean spirited side. But I'm tired of the hypocrasy and the BS and being attacked in the above fashions.

It is my and every single American citizens right to say whatever they want about the president and his policies. But to come in here and single people out and attack them using things they have talked about because they believe they have friends here, is bullshit and hitting below the belt.

Yes, I have attacked back, and no I am no angel, but I have been working hard to not attack others. I work hard trying to applaud and show me deep respect for those I have debated and we have been civil to each other and I truly learnt from them.

Aw well........ to the Righties that want to .... keep crying over how people talked about Bush at the funeral, then come on here and bully people, insult them, attack them, and play that you are above it all....... when everyone knows you're not.

Much ado about nothing.. unless a Republican did it.

I too saw the Wellstone memorial and it was nothing short of repulsive. Funerals/memorials are solemn events to remember the people who have passed, nothing more. Using it for political gain by turning it into a pep rally or putting words in their cold dead mouths is disgusting and should infuriate anyone of any political affiliation that has any sense of morality. The responses here clearly show another case of people looking the other way when someone of their political leaning does something this obscene.

I watched the Reagan funeral and heard much talk of America being a "shining city on a hill" which is something Reagan said on several occasions. Never did I see anyone claiming that X policy was right or that Reagan would have approved of Y or Z. A figure that is being memorialized should be powerful enough without having to stuff words in the mouth of a corpse to justify or rebuke current events.

BTW, what was said at the funeral is minor compared to what Limbaugh did HOURS after the London bombings last year.

He took the tragedy and went for 3 hours about how it was the Left's fault. NEVER once offering sincere or heartfelt sympathy for the loss of life and the injuries sustained.

I remember writing a post about it and how cheap Limbaugh was..... and amazingly, some of the people shocked and playing the hate card on what was said at the funeral, defended Limbaugh and argued he was right in doing what he did.....

Sad what this country has become, and even the best of us have fallen prey to the hatreds and partisanship and name calling. I know I have, and as much as I try not to, it comes out anyway.

What's sad is that in the hate, the partisanship, the "I'm right all the time and I will make no concessions" mentality and atmosphere that permeates and spreads like wildfire affecting even the meekest people in this country, is the fact that we are destroying not only ourselves, but our great country, our futures and our children.

Maybe we'll realize how far the hate has entered our lives and how dark we have become as a nation and turn back before we can't. I hope so, but I fear the divide is too great and the hatred, prejudices and attitudes are too deeply ingrained in ALL of us.

I don't see a parallel. Discussing an event -- no matter how ignorant, slanted, or flat-out-wrong a discussion -- in a place where that discussion is common-place, like a radio station or newspaper or television news show, is not the same as bringing that sort of speech into a funeral or memorial.

Using your logic, any discussion of any event of the Iraq war would be inappropriate.

That said, the country is indeed becoming a sad place. Though, I would say it is united in its division. :p

Wrong. This is the biggest error I think most people are making here.
What you've presented is just your idea of what a funeral should be. However, it is not the only definition. Quite often, when a man or woman has died after living a long and accomplished life, their loved ones choose to honor them with a joyous celebration of their life rather than a solemn memorial. Similarly, when someone has dedicated their life to improving the world we live in through political action, their loved ones will often choose to honor them by reminding everyone of what they accomplished and what remains to be accomplished.

The bottom line is that this is not our funeral. This was a funeral for Coretta Scott King and her loved ones. They chose to honor her this way and I respect their wishes. They knew her better than any of us did.

First as for the difference of a funeral very vocal activist and a medium..... is not as great as you may say.

Both are avenues to speak out, both are public forums.

Mrs. King, much like her husband, fought and spoke out for what she believed in. I may not agree with the staging nor may I agree with what was said, BUT, perhaps respect for an activist at their funeral is not to calmly sit by and just remember her. But to stand up and carry on her beliefs and to speak out as she had on issues that she spoke out on.

There's a difference, at least to me. I don't speak out on the war and ignore the tragedies, nor dismiss them. It is one thing to speak out recognizing tragedy, it is another to use a forum to blame and ignore the tragedies.

And yes, there are those on BOTH sides that do this.



How are we united in our division? I don't see it, I see a nation torn apart and the divide becoming more and more harmful to all.

Now this reminded me of something, besides a lack of class the democrats have these days at funerals.

Many years ago I heard someone say that for the hard core leftist, their politics has replaced the traditional place in their lives religion holds for some people. She apparently wasn't a Christian but a 'known progressive' and as such this should not be used to celebrate her life but to advance others political agendas because they are also 'progressives'.

http://unixdude.blogspot.com/images/billhill.jpg At least in the Reagan funeral they just slept and kep their mouths shut :lol:

I'm sorry if I came off as complaining. After the disgust has worn off, I'm actually quite happy this happened. It was akin to the Wellstone memorial where America saw the Dems for what they were. Chalk this moment up as another reason(The eavesdropping on terrrorists is another biggie) why the Dems will lose this coming Nov

No matter what side of the political fence you may be on, had this happened at one of MY family members funerals, there'd be a serious beatdown coming. This was in the top 5 of the most disrespectful things I've ever seen the democrats do. Hell, you idiots made George Bush a shining example of courtesy, respect, and decency by acting like idiots when he was very solemn and respectful. Way to go there.

i wonder if this thread should be in the humor forum.
any time conservatives set themselves up as the taste police, it is bound to be funny.
this is no exception.
but i suppose folk on the right find it immensely gratifying to (1) be sanctimonious when they are in no position to do so (the reagan funeral was not political? what planet are you on?) particularly when (2) they get to indulge their old favorite, the clinton fixation.

and you know, folks, there are types of therapy that you could engage with that would help you with the clinton thing.
it is kinda pathological.

that last part can be said for anyone that is fixated on a particular subject, person, or event, like 9/11, GWB, or even Karl Rove.

But therapy is for fancy-pants libs...don't you know that? :lol:

you're right, stevo.

i'd have put one of the emoticons here, but i just cant quite make myself use them.

Hey, Ustwo: you've been asked twice in this thread to expand on the "If Carter had had stones when he was president" comment. I was glad to see that I'm not the only one who doesn't know what the hell you were referring to.

You've either not noticed those requests, or you've ignored them. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that the Carter comment wasn't just a hit-and-run cheap shot. So, could you say more about what you meant?

I would imagine that he is referring to Carters non-intervention in Iran during the throwover and US hostage taking.

Iran, hostages, you recall?

I don't think that situation was about balls. As a matter of fact, Carter did quite a bit. President Carter applied economic pressure by halting oil imports from Iran and freezing Iranian assets in the United States. At the same time, he began several diplomatic initiatives to free the hostages, all of which proved fruitless. On Apr. 24, 1980, the United States attempted a rescue mission that failed. After three of eight helicopters were damaged in a sandstorm, the operation was aborted; eight persons were killed during the evacuation. Carter did a hell of a lot to try and get the hostages freed. The reason that Reagen was able to succed was the Iran-Iraq War. This made the Iranians more receptive to resolving the hostage crisis. In the United States, failure to resolve the crisis contributed to Ronald Reagan's defeat of Carter in the presidential election (posslby what you are refering to as the publics thinking Carter didn't have balls). After the election, with the assistance of Algerian intermediaries, successful negotiations began. On Jan. 20, 1981, the day of President Reagan's inauguration, the United States released almost $8 billion in Iranian assets and the hostages were freed after 444 days in Iranian detention; the agreement gave Iran immunity from lawsuits arising from the incident. (info from www.infoplease.com)

Reagen caved to the terrorists. He gave them their frozen assets, immunity, and weapons.

/end threadjack

Really?

Carter does nothing effectual, Reagan wins, and the Iranians were scared shitless that he would invade and handed them over.

Now we get to deal with a nuclear Iranian wack job of a government, a government that would not exsist if, Carter had the stones then.

Carter sent in troops, halted oil imports from Iran, and froze Iranian assets in the United States. Reagan gave them their money back, bought their oil again, and sent them weapons. Who has the balls?

Do you really want to get into this?

If Eisenhower and Churchill handn't overthrown the elected government of Mohammed Mossadegh and then propped up the Shah's subsequent brutal regime (all so they could keep oil money flowing into US and UK companies), there wouldn't have been eventual overthrow of the Shah by fundamentalist forces. Fundamentalist forces that took the US Embassy by strom and lead to the spread of fundamentalism, in general, in throughout the region.

American policy has and continues to exacerbate the whole "issue of the Middle East". To quibble over who did what seems rather pointless.

Pretty much the whole history of American involvment in the Middle East has been one giant fuck up.

well, it only took til the second page before the disrespect at a funeral turned to political partisanship and blame laying.

And you are surprised by this?

As I stated before, the psuedo outrage by the Neo-cons was and is nothing more than grandstanding and an act at trying to play that they are better and have more class.

As shown above, they attack anyone who dares hjave an opinion different than them and they will use someone's faults (addictions, illnesses, and so on) to try to bully, harrass and silence, because they can't win on issues. But I guess seeing how people aren't outraged that they use those forms of attacks it's ok to hurt people, but heaven forbid activists speak out at the funeral of an activist against the President.

Yet, when it comes down to it, the only thing that truly bothered them at the funeral was that people spoke the truth against Bush.

Again, I am waiting to hear how nonpartisan and how glowingly Coulter, Limbaugh, O'Reilly and so on spoke of Mrs. King the past few days.

I'm sure they in no way shape or form used her death to make partisan grandstandings.

Again, she was a political activist who spoke out, and as such perhaps people spoke out the way they believed she would have wanted them to.

Come on Pan, do you really believe this? Name one issue that will give the dems any sort of power at the polls in november. just one.

As related to a Muslim terrorist cartoon?

Man, Osama bin Laden is like Mastercard, but opposite. Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran... he's everywhere you DON'T want to be.

I'm curious why I'm seeing statements like, "the deomcrats disgusted me..." "This is one of the worst things the democrats have done..."

Which democrats? Reverend Lowery? Which senator is he?

Meanwhile, I can't help notice that the fact that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton were conciously NOT invited to the dais for this service seems to be ignored here by those up in arms about that democratic standard bearer and house minority whip, Rev. Lowery.

So that excuses the personal attacks?

If the GOP is so secure that they can win on issues, then why lower themselves to the above personal attacks?

Of course, issue wise there is the fact that in the budget wher the talk about median income it has fallen each year Bush has been president. But that's gotta be wrong doesn't it? I mean our economy is booming and there's the tax cuts that are making everyone's lives better, right? I mean just because the sales taxes, property taxes and other taxes have gone up making it more expensive on the poor, that's a non-issue the Dems couldn't possibly capitalize on?

I believe the LA Times gives a more complete description of the funeral as a whole. No mention of shaking heads on the part of 41 and 43. Rather, I think father and son were very gracious. There was also more pageantry than solemnity present. I agree with those that said this is much ado about nothing. Some folks just need to be angry.


TruthOut Link

Thank you for getting us back on track. :thumbsup:

Another successful thread jack, wasn't it? :)

Yeah, Lott didn't speak. He wasn't invited, and if he'd had any sense...wouldn't have shown his face.

We celebrated his life...and he was a politician. A damn good one, and a passionate one. Why the people who never respected him in life showed up for his memorial is beyond me.

I'm surprised by the amount of trolling in this thread.

Does that mean you've figured out which men were president ("highest levels")from 1961 to MLK's death in 1968, during which time they did nothing to stop the wiretaps?

You know this is why liberals make bad company at parties. If you can't put away your political differences at a funeral, you have deep issues. You may not agree with someone you respect, and even like.

I guess this thought isn't allowed in the 'group think' that dominates the left these days.

I'm surprised they didn't charge admission.

Link

I don't have a problem with what went on at her funeral. True, it wasn't the standard eulogy, but she wasn't a standard person.

The only reason this is a problem is because G.W. Bush and his Dad was there. If the same things had been said, and they weren't sitting 20 feet away, nobody would have had a problem.

There is a thing called free speech, you might not always agree with what is being said, but censorship is much worse.

Just because it is allowed, doesn't make it right.

See the general discussion thread on Fred Phelps.

Are you trying to compare what Phelps does to people who were actually invited to speak at funeral? Is that really a legitimate comparison?

Again proof that the GOP is using the funeral to just crucify the free speech and outspokenness from the funeral.

The Right on this board are talking about how tasteless and without class the funeral was held, and yet they go out of their way to tarnish the image.

If it wasn't about hatred and trying to get pity from the independants, and it was truly about class and taste and respect...... the above referenced post would have been started in a new thread.

Again, I ask how have the right talking heads talked about the deceased this past week? Did they show her respect and talk about her with due dignity, or have they slammed her and the family legacy as shown above?

It wasn't "a" funeral.

It was a memorial for a politician, one that we cared deeply about...it was about his public legacy, a poltical one. Why the hell should we have to "put away" the convictions of the deceased so that you feel welcome at a place you're clearly not invited to?

I'm sorry, but it would be clearly asinine for me to think that i'd feel politically comfortable at the memorial of a staunch conservative. These are such crocodile tears.

I don't know much about Fred Phelps, but isn't he the one who says "God hates fags?"

If the political discussion at the memorial is fine with you, then you should have no objection to Phelps spouting that mantra at the funeral of a prominent gay person.

As was said earlier, because you CAN say it doesn't mean you SHOULD.

P.S. Bush couldn't win either way. Either he gets criticized for being at the funeral, or criticized for staying away.

Uhhh...has Phelps been invited by a single family to speak?

This is not random polical speech! This is material and ideas being delivered by the loved ones of the passed, ideas that bear direct relevance to the memory of the departed. Do we really beleive in the sudden separation of political and politicians/social activists as soon as they shuffle loose the mortal coil?

These comparisons are silly at best.

I agree...he was in a no-win situation. That doesn't change anything...life is tough all over.

I disagree, but I'll use another example. When Ronald Reagan died, I don't recall any speakers holding forth about what an asshole Bill Clinton is.

And please--ease off on the exaggeration. No one is trying to eliminate free speech. You act like we're asking for a permanent ban on expressing these ideas, when all that's being said is that reasonable standards of behavior/decency would be a good thing.

It seems that with the Democrats, "reasonable" is too much to ask.

Is it safe to say you oppose THIS law on 1st Amendment grounds?

Link

First and foremost there is a huge difference between people saying something at a funeral while paying their respects and someone throwing crap on a hearse or casket as it goes by.

That said, if the law prevents people from peacefully demonstrating on public grounds and prohibiting speech, then yes, I am against it.

In this particular case, they ban the protesters to 500 feet.... but do not ban the speech or demonstration..... but it is a very slippery slope and sets a nasty precedence.

Regardless of how crass or IMHO wrong the demonstration or speech is, it is a person's right to say it. I served in the Navy to protect a person's right to say what he/she wants, regardless of how I feel about it.

I look at it this way, you prohibit people protesting at funerals because someone is offended by WORDS. Then you prohibit people at schools, on the radio, in books, on television, in newspapers the right to speak out, because someone maybe offended, then you have to prohibit people from speaking out at all public places because someone maybe offended, and eventually, you get to the point where when a kid says something, he heard his parents say in the privacy of their own home, the thought police, the political correctness police, the school, childrens services and the government as a whole is investigating what was said in the privacy of one's home.

Oh wait....... we already do all those things to some degree.