Locked Thread on Clinton/Bush/C. King Funeral Question....

[HardWorkingDem]

Earlier I posted a thread about the C. S. King funeral and asked how would Du'er's feel if Clinton was lambasted while at the funeral of an opponent. It was locked by a moderator for being "flame-bait" and someone accused me of "posting and running". It was neither, but a a question asked to try and contrast things and see how others would feel if a similar thing would ever happen to someone like Clinton. And I didn't follow up because I went to bed.

Let me make this clear: I detest the present Bush and his entire presidency. I am also a lifelong LIBERAL democrat, however, I am not afraid to criticize our party or our candidates when we deserve it. Every day when I get up it seems like there is something else that I can't believe the Bush Adminstration is getting away with and get more disgusted every day.

But even with all of these, sometimes I think we can go over the top a bit.

When reading about the comments made at this funeral directed at a sitting president, I felt they were not done in the best of taste or the best of times. How would people have felt if Bush had gotten up and tried to defend his actions?

And from what I have read, and to be honest, I really can't offer a truly knowledgeable answer to this, I don't know if a woman of Coretta S. King's stature and poise would have thought what was said would have been appropriate either. Only her family can answer that for us.

But back to my original point: Bush was criticized for Iraq by Carter and that is fine, but I don't agree with the particular forum. But imagine if later the same thing would happen to Clinton in such a forum when it comes to Rwanda. Clinton could have done more about Rwanda and HAS repeatedly apologized for it - regardless of how he feels, 800,000 people are dead when it could have been very easily stopped (read any of the several books on this topic, especially this one, "We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will be Killed With Our Families: Stories from Rwanda").

Or imagine if someone brought up Clinton's morality at say a future Billy Graham funeral. My point is, there is such a thing called a pyrrhic victory and we have to keep that in mind and it just seems to me that if things were reversed a lot of us would be singing a different tune. And to me, this is what separates us from them - especially - hopefully - the ability to talk about disputes like this as adults.

[mattclearing]

1. No one would do it, because Clinton would rhetorically bitchslap them.

Personally.

I am certain Mrs. King was smiling down from heaven yesterday, with MLK by her side.

[Spazito]

2. Unless you are a family member or friend of Mrs. King, you have

no place in criticizing anything about the service and they had NO problem with it, indeed, gave the speakers and the speeches STANDING OVATIONS. Since when is it the place for those who have no standing with the family to decide whether how the family celebrates the life of their loved one is appropriate or not??? Probably since bush was installed.

[understandinglife]

12. Ditto. Thank you.

Peace.

[HardWorkingDem]

14. Did I not put that in my post?

Go back and read it - I admitted that I do not have knowledge how she would have wanted it done - but do you either? Her family will have to answer that if they choose to.

But look at it this way: with her funeral, we had probably the most recognized woman involving civil rights being celebrated. Regardless of party affiliation, such a funeral demands a sitting president attend. Heck, Bush should have attended Rosa Parks' funeral, however, in the future, why should any American president of the opposing party ever attend the funeral of an equally important American if something like this is to be expected?

[Spazito]

24. Hmmm, if you have no knowledge of what she would have wanted

why do you feel you have the right to critique it none the less.

"Her family have to ANSWER that if they choose to"? I think the family ANSWERED that quite clearly by the STANDING OVATIONS given to the speakers and the speeches.

If you will note, I have neither praised nor condemned the service as it is not my place to do so. The family has the sole right to determine the best way to celebrate their loved one's passing and Mrs. King's family did just that.

[G_j]

34. they clearly thought the remarks were right on

and showed their agreement with overwhelming applause.
That should be enough for one to judge if they were appropriate or not. This funeral did not belong to the jerks pontificating about it or the Bush clan. The people there obviously found the Bush criticisms appropriate.

that should be enough

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. If someone thinks a president is doing the wrong thing,

it is their right to talk about it. The mere fact that the MSM is owned by the right wingers makes it impossible for liberals to have a public forum where their views can be presented. The fact that Carter and Clinton and the minister who talked against Bush got huge ovations tells you that the audience were with them. Remember, most of those there have been active in the Civil Rights movement. They remember when they were told their tactics weren't right, that they should be quiet, etc, etc.

[Lena inRI]

16. You nailed it with . . . .

"The mere fact that the MSM is owned by the right wingers makes it impossible for liberals to have a public forum where their views can be presented.

Since the front door is off-limits in Bushworld, we will come through the back door. . .something black America and King's descendants FULLY understand.

Reverend Dr. Joseph Lowery and Mr. Jimmy Carter were unforgettably stupendous. . .many heartfelt thanks for your words and inspiration!
:loveya: :loveya:

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

32. for all my brothers and sisters

we must stand in solidarity and get the word out any way we can, just as the brave Civil Rights workers did.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

4. that is totally crazy. 10,000 people there loved it. If, someone

trashes Clinton at a funeral, show me 10,000 people who would get up and cheer for 10 friggin minutes.

ON EDIT: 9,998 PEOPLE

[karynnj]

18. Actually a previous poster's analogy using Billy Graham

works. Both were religious leaders, whose beliefs made them political. It would have been likely that someone bashing Clinton could get a very long ovation there. (Clinton went to Nixon's funeral, but I don't know if he spoke.)

It raises the interesting question of what a President should do in these circumstances. To not go and to put out a gracious statement, would be seen by many as not adequately honoring the person. But, if you go, the overtly polical nature of the person and her life will lead to statements like that.

[Life Long Dem]

5. When was the last time in the media we heard a Democrat speak?

It couldn't have been Al Gore? I feel the only time the media gives Democrats any attention is in situations like this where they want to criticize the Democrats and they don't care if they have to do this at someone's funeral or not.

[bettyellen]

6. so, you truly didn't notice the family was fine with it? and you're

fine judging them too?
i'm not worried about clinton going anywhere, he'll handle it just fine.
i think your concerns are seriously misplaced.

[AspenRose]

7. Free speech and dissent are so chilled in this country...

Saying what needed to be said at the memorial service sort of made it 'safe,' and there was a worldwide audience to hear.

We've become a nation of photo ops and staged events where opposing points of view aren't allowed or tolerated.

President Carter, et.al., took the opportunity to strike while the iron was hot.

[mzteris]

8. Hmmmmmm....

*** I don't know if a woman of Coretta S. King's stature and poise would have thought what was said would have been appropriate either.***

She's been a lifelong activist and hates EVERYTHING bushco stands for. I'd say she'd LOVE the fact that they were put in their place. (And would probably have hated the fact that he was even AT her funeral except maybe that possibly as a "symbol" of her importance to American society.)

[Greyhound]

9. I never hesitated to criticize Clinton (and still don't) and I feel that

since the shrub is usually hiding, like the craven little coward he is, and can't be called to task for his fuck-ups in any public forum, not only is it appropriate for us to challenge him, we have a duty to do it. Every Chance, Every Forum, Every Time.

[BooScout]

10. Mrs King's entire life was about politics....

To be precise....Liberal politics. I see nothing wrong with what was said at her funeral. I can't speak for her family, but I can speak as a native Atlantan about what I think her life was about. It was about carrying on her husband's dream of peaceful equality for all.

Frankly Bush only went to the funeral to politicize it himself. If Mrs King had been my mother, I would have told him to keep his sorry ass away. But her children chose to let him attend in the spirit of Unity. I have no such spirit. Bush is not a man of Peace. MLK was. If Bush wanted to try and impress the country with his attendance then he should have been prepared to accept the criticism of how he has divided the US. Fuck him and his pals who have got their panties in a wad over comments directed towards him at the funeral. His hypocritcal ass should have never gone in the first place.

[Individualist]

11. Your hypothetical circumstance is irrelevant

The service was for and about Coretta Scott King. IT WAS NOT FOR OR ABOUT YOU OR ANY DAMN REPUBLICANS!

[HardWorkingDem]

15. It was for ALL AMERICANS as well....

sheesh....

[Individualist]

26. What part of

"It was for and about Coretta Scott King" do you not understand? SHEESH!

[alcibiades_mystery]

27. As long as ALL AMERICANS are intent on ignoring the real work of the Kings

And content to make their struggle into a feel-good exercise of "how far we've come," then all Americans gvet to feel shitty when the real substance of that work is laid bare for all Americans to see. You don't get to pick and choose your version of a person's life that makes you feel special or happy. You must celebrate their life's project at their memorial, or the very notion of a memorial is meaningless. Poor taste? Whatever. The King's were ultimately concerned with POLICY, and how policy affects real people. I see no problem with such questions being raised at Mrs. King's memorial service. The initial category error you make is in thinking that these commenyts were ONLY "political" (in the narrowest, most pathetic sense) "aimed at" Mr. Bush. Wrong. They were a tribute to an ethical life, and an exhortation for others to live ethically. If that means turning words into deeds for the current President, so be it. He is the one with the power to improve the ethical state of the nation (which is why your analogy to Clinton fails utterly - lambasting Clinton for past deeds is totally different than exhorting the current power to goodness, as should be obvious enough).

[Spazito]

29. No, quite wrong

The family graciously allowed the world to watch THEIR celebration of her life. They could have made it private with no cameras but they chose to share THEIR celebration with the world.

Amazing, you think Americans owned Mrs. King and have any right to determine whether her family's choices are correct or not. Wow.

[Roho]

it wasn't for all americans at all

it was for the family and friends of mrs king. period.

[havocmom]

13. Disagree all you want. You have that right. And proclaim what you will

I will believe what I see. Especially when I see it over and over.

Isn't freedom a lovely double edges sword?

[HardWorkingDem]

21. Yes it is, but...

sometimes I feel that a lot of people do not appreciate what it means to think of what is true free speech.

Here we have nasty replies, threads locked, people accused of being republicans because they see things differently and so on...

[havocmom]

31. THIS is not the U.S. This is a private establishment which has rules

for members. If that gets in the way of whatever it is you are trying to advance, there are other forums.

I get annoyed about some locked threads too. But I remember I am a guest here, not an enfranchised citizen. When I want to say something which is at odds with DU rules, I go to other places to say it. It isn't hard at all.

And while one of the rules forbids me from calling everything as I see it, sometimes folks around here make some valid points about their observations. If you find that uncomfortable, may I suggest a break from DU is helpful for many of us from time to time.

Summation: Neither you nor I are the boss of everybody else. We are both guests here. This is a privately owned/publically viewed forum, not a streetcorner in the middle of America.

[Inland]

17. Bring it on! "Rev Graham hated adultery" and watch the pubbies squirm. n

[radio4progressives]

19. The People Who Ordered the Assassination of Her Husband Was Sitting There

The very people involved in the very system conspiring the plot to assassinate Martin Luther King is occupying the white house and the pentagon today.

Your deference to a "head of state" that is a murdering terrorist and a thug is telling considering the deliberate dismantling of our government oversight over these thugs and killers, of our nation's treasury to profit these murderers and thugs.

As a white person, I am disgusted and sickened by the depth of delusion and ignorance by the white privileged class who still do not possess a modicum of comprehension as to why it was perfectly appropriate for everything that was said, indeed more c/should have been said in my view.

To join the chorus of the white racists media whores who are obviously as clueless as to the fact that as Mike Malloy put it last night, was a Home Going Celebration - that was what yesterday's event was about. and everything about what the King family's life was dedicated to doing needed to be honored in just the way it was done, which also means acknowledging how they were DISHONORED by the very system, and heads of state you are demanding respect and deference to.

I say Hell No! Let them HEAR IT ALL!

Last night i posted a transcript of Coretta Scott King's reading of her husband's notes read three weeks after his assassination in New York City, April of 1968 - it's short, it's called The Ten Commandments of Viet Nam.

Replace the word Viet Nam with Iraq, and maybe you'll understand why the Nixon Administration needed assassinate Martin Luther King.

here's the link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=355176

[MADem]

20. Coretta stood, her entire life, for peace, justice and the real AMERICAN

WAY. The Chimp has aggressively cut aid to the poor, ignored Katrina victims, sent poor and minority children off to die and be maimed, yet he wanted to turn up at that funeral to get a little positive "see, ah lahk negroes" TV exposure. If you walk into a lion's den, expecting to find a kitten, you are both full to overload with hubris AND a damn fool.

You also need to remember that Mrs. King was anti-war BEFORE it was fashionable, so Carter's remarks were right up her alley. Mrs. King lived the peacemaker's life, so it is appropriate in death that someone stand up and remind us of her life-long mindset.

As for Billy Graham's funeral, if Clinton attended, and someone brought up Monica, that only opens the door to discussion about old Billy's "n-word and JEEEEEEWS" conversations with Tricky Dick. Let he who is without sin, and all that.

The Monkey King had a choice: he could have sent Laura, with deepest, profound condolences, and been "busy" (and no one would have noticed, really, so long as a suitable rep was present) but instead he chose to turn up and hope that everyone would be so a-skeered of him that they would not have delivered a few well-deserved lumps.

Once again, like everything he has done thus far, he guessed wrong. Especially given the important fact that the Kings were the victims of an overreaching government who wiretapped them, tried to destroy their marriage, and marginalize the Reverend.

Nothing said at that event was a lie. Everything was the sad, sick, tired, exhausting, frightening truth. And hey, if he can't handle the truth, he needs to find himself another line of work. And that would be just fine with me...!

[HardWorkingDem]

23. And if he had not went...

our left would be hammering him for that.

Part of your post shows exactly what I mean about looking at this from other angles. If something like this happened to someone like Clinton at someone like Graham's funeral, what you posted is exactly what we would be saying.

[leftstreet]

22. The whole thing was disgusting

I taped it and watched later.

A room full of wealthy people, black and white, congratulating themselves on their civil rights stand, while IGNORING that what Coretta stood for has been LOST when thousands of Katrina victims still have no place to turn, no support, no power, in the year 2006.

The Clinton campaigning for 08 was particularly puke-worthy.

[Inland]

25. So you don't think it was political enough, or the wrong politics.

YOu and the freepers agree. I'm not sure what you taped, though. It might have been a rerun of the RNC from 2000.

[leftstreet]

30. It's about WEALTH, not "politics."

I don't care what they did/didn't say.

Rich people gathering together to celebrate the life and work of a person dedicated to freedom and civil rights, while thousands of POOR people apparently still don't have any "rights" - is sick.

[Spazito]

33. Damn, it's too bad YOU didn't have responsibility for the invitations

to her service instead of her FAMILY, I am sure you knew her better.

:sarcasm:

[cali]

28. I think you've written a truly thoughtful post.

I don't agree with you, but I sure do dislike seeing you slammed for raising a sincere question. I found yesterday's service moving. And in the face of the administrations use of unchecked power, I was heartened by the powerful voices speaking out. To your point about Clinton: If, when Clinton was president, something similar had happened, and repubs had taken him to task for Rwanda, I would have been furious. This makes me a hypocrite. I'll freely admit it. Of course, I didn't see Clinton as a threat to the nation. E.M. Forester had this to say about hypocricy: "Only hypocrites cannot forgive hypocricy." In other words, we're all hypocritical at some point. So, thanks for posting this. I only wish that more folks could douse the self-righteous outrage and discuss the matter in a more rational way.

[maddezmom]

35. locking

Please do not post to continue an argument from a
locked thread.

If you have questions about why the thread was locked, please contact DU administration here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/contact.html