Posted on 02/13/2006 4:11:10 PM PST by SJackson
Just as they did following the memorial service for Sen. Paul Wellstone in 2002, Republican operatives and their acolytes in the media are now claiming that there was something inappropriate about the manner of how those who best knew Coretta Scott King mourned her passing.
So great is the determination to protect George Bush from even the mildest expressions of dissent that commentators rushed to television studios Tuesday even before the service for King was over to denounce former President Jimmy Carter, the Rev. Joseph Lowery and Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin for expressing sentiments not usually heard by this president.
But don't think that anything untoward actually took place in the Atlanta suburb where thousands gathered to celebrate the life, the work and the politics of Coretta King. The service provided the president with a healthy - if all too rare - dose of reality. Bush's policies are not popular, particularly with the African-American community, and the president needed a gentle reminder of that fact. Indeed, the president was far more graceful in the receipt of the dissenting messages uttered at the memorial than were those who rushed to condemn his critics.
What got the Republican spin machine humming Wednesday?
They were furious that several speakers used their brief portions of the service for the widow of the late Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. to pointedly echo the anti-war, anti-poverty and anti-racist themes that were so central to Coretta King's life and work. The event featured no direct attacks on President Bush, who seated himself prominently on the stage of the vast New Birth Missionary Baptist Church. Instead, there were the sort of knowing, sometimes serious, sometimes lighthearted, prods that often are heard at memorial services of this kind.
Atlanta Mayor Franklin made reference to Coretta King's criticism of "the senselessness of war." That did not sit well with those who believe the president shouldn't hear dissent with regard to the quagmire in Iraq.
Even more unsettling to the critics were the words of the Rev. Joseph Lowery, a co-founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference who worked for decades with the Kings. Of Coretta King, Lowery recalled, "She extended Martin's message against poverty, racism and war. She deplored the terror inflicted by our smart bombs on missions way afar. We know now that there were no weapons of mass destruction over there. But Coretta knew, and we know, that there are weapons of misdirection right down here." As the crowd cheered, Lowery boomed: "Millions without health insurance. Poverty abounds. For war, billions more, but no more for the poor."
Ultimately, however, it was not Lowery but Carter who took the hardest hits for daring to dissent. Noting the slow and inept response to Hurricane Katrina, Carter pointed out, "We only have to recall the color of the faces of those in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi who are most devastated by Katrina to know that there are not yet equal opportunities for all Americans."
For this comment, and for recalling the historical fact that the Kings were victims of "secret government wiretapping and surveillance" - a sore point for a president who is under fire for ordering warrantless wiretaps - Carter was denounced as "shameless" by the New York Post and ridiculed by Republican commentators.
To his credit, Bush seemed to take the criticism is stride, even shaking hands with and embracing Lowery, Carter and other speakers. And that may be the most important point that can be made about this rare moment in which the president heard actual dissent - as opposed to the manufactured applause that usually accompanies his stage-managed public appearances.
As someone who covered Bush long before he took office in 2001, I have always believed him to be a more gracious and thoughtful man than his presidency has made him out to be. Bush and his presidency suffer from having been placed in the bubble to which his neoconservative handlers have consigned him. Indeed, despite the ranting and raving of the spin doctors who would have us believe that it was wrong to honor King by echoing the dissents she made during her lifetime, both Bush and the American discourse surely benefited from a real moment in these surreal times.
John Nichols is associate editor of The Capital Times, Wisconsin's progressive daily news source. E-mail: jnichols@madison.com
The liberalism of hate is a mental disorder.
I didn't hear anybody complaining about Shirley Franklin's remarks at all. But the two people singled out--Rev. Lowery and Jimmy Carter--were deliberately baiting President Bush. They were trying to be rude.
Uh, no. It's called appropriateness. Class. Dignity.
Little things like that. Things the Democrats obviously don't even have a passing relationship with.
MSM still in damage control mode.
Insulting someone, or someone's politics, while at a funeral for someone else is out of line.
Leftists refuse to accept this cultural norm for a variety of reasons, however:
1. they're all cads,
2. they don't remember the social graces that they rejected in their drug-induced college years,
3. they know only to criticize their opposition,
4. they exist only for today...remembering someone's past (especially the deceased at a funeral) is beyond their capacity,
etc.
(Rhetorical, of course).
Who is this reporter and what rock did he slither out from under?
Um... no.
proof positive that demonrats never chlorinate the gene pool.
"Bush and his presidency suffer from having been placed in the bubble to which his neoconservative handlers have consigned him."
Karl Rove is a neocon? He made the citizens of Minnesota revile the Wellstone "Memorial" and show it by turning against Mondale?
The only two people there who understood what funerals are supposed to be about were George W. Bush and his father.
Apparently in Madison if you find it distasteful and inappropriate to turn a funeral into a political rally you're an "acolyte" of Bush. If that's a liberal euphemism for "decent human being" then I plead guilty.
The people who need a "dose of reality" are the dims who were disgraceful and disrespectful to a sitting President.
Shame on them .. and I believe the Kings would join in that sentiment.
It's a shame that libs can't tell the difference between a funeral and a political rally. I just hope that they keep committing political suicide. Rational people are appalled by their actions so 2006 should be another Republican victory.
Exactly. Somehow we managed to have President Reagan's funeral without partisan political comments. A president's funeral. Surely it was possible to have Coretta Scott King's funeral without partisan comments.
Imagine if the president was like the Rats. He could have easily said to the King children:
"On behalf of a nation, we apologize that a Democratic president, John F. Kenney's administration, wiretapped your father and mother.
The Republicans tried to pass the Civil Rights Act faster, but it was blocked repeatedly by Democrats.
And I'm sure it warmed your mother's heart to see so many white folks open their wallets and homes and hearts to help black people after Katrina hit New Orleans."
Now, I ask you, how is that more partisan than what the Democrats said?
As usual, they don't get it. It was rudeness to GWB, but downright disrespect to C. S. King. Like suicide bombers, liberals see nothing but their distorted agenda.
And your bringing up Reagan's funeral is appropos. There was no partisan attacking going on there........just honoring the great man who was before them.
The more leftists like this buffoon of a writer make excuses for this behavior, the worse they look............and that's getting pretty hard to do.
Yes, but they were even more disrespectful of Mrs. King.
Every time we think they couldn't get lower...
It's a shame this twit has no clue about propriety and appropriate behavior. No one was trying to protect the President from hearing criticism, they were trying to maintain the sanctity and decorum appropriate for a funeral.
Jaw-droppingly arrogant and ignorant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.