Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

King eulogists jab Bush at funeral (merged)


Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin

Recommended Posts

LINK

Wellstone syndrome strikes again. And as I've read some already say, bashing a Republican President for wiretapping at MLK's funeral is supreme irony. I don't typically get involved anymore in these Bush-centric debates (i find them tedious) but there's no call for this, esp for a former Pres who admitted doing something similar himself.

King eulogists jab Bush at funeral

By Karen Jacobs and Tabassum Zakaria 27 minutes ago

Speakers took a rare opportunity to criticize U.S. President George W. Bush's policies to his face at the funeral on Tuesday of Coretta Scott King, widow of slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.

Civil-rights leader the Rev. Joseph Lowery and former President Jimmy Carter cited Mrs. King's legacy as a leader in her own right and advocate of nonviolence as they launched barbs over the Iraq war, government social policies and Bush's domestic eavesdropping program.

Bush sat watching the long service before an audience of 10,000 including politicians, civil rights leaders and entertainers at the New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Lithonia, and a national cable television audience.

Lowery, former head of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, which King helped found in 1957, gave a playful reading of a poem in eulogy of Mrs. King.

"She extended Martin's message against poverty, racism and war / She deplored the terror inflicted by our smart bombs on missions way afar," he said.

"We know now there were no weapons of mass destruction over there / But Coretta knew and we knew that there are weapons of misdirection right down here / Millions without health insurance. Poverty abounds. For war billions more but no more for the poor."

The mourners gave a standing ovation. Bush's reaction could not be seen on the television coverage, but after Lowery finished speaking, the president shook his hand and laughed.

Mrs. King, seen by many as the "first lady" of the American civil rights movement, died last week in a Mexican alternative health clinic at the age of 78, after complications from ovarian cancer and a recent stroke and heart attack.

Bush, speaking before his critics, said, "By going forward with a strong and forgiving heart, Coretta Scott King not only secured her husband's legacy, she built her own."

With Washington debating the legality of Bush's domestic eavesdropping on Americans suspected of al Qaeda ties, Carter also drew applause with pointed comments on federal efforts to spy on the Kings.

"It was difficult for them personally with the civil liberties of both husband and wife violated, and they became the targets of secret government wiretapping and other surveillance," he said.

Speaking later, Bush's father, former President George Bush, broke any tension by recalling his own meetings as president with Lowery and gave a score: "Lowery 21, Bush 3, it wasn't a fair fight."

Former President Bill Clinton, a favorite among mainstream civil rights leaders, was able to offer a teasing hint of the possible presidential candidacy of his wife, New York Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised people still bring up the Wellstone funeral. The guy was a hard leftist and right wingers demanded that his memory not inculde any of his ideology. They declared it wrong to stand up for the mans beliefs and thought that his voice should have been silenced because they wanted to have a good time at his funeral. Maybe I had a different take on it then others did but I always found it wildly offensive that people that openly and bitterly opposed everything the man stood for had the nerve to complain about the tone of his funeral.

Just my take on it.

Concerning this issue I think that weapons not being there was a bit of a cheap shot. The billions for war but none for the poor is a common theme, and frankly I don't know if she believed that. If she did then it most certainly did have a place at her funeral. If she didn't then it was 100% wrong to put words in a dead womans mouth for political gain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AWKWARD!!!!! lol

(But if you thought that there would be no politics in remembering the widow of one of the most influential political leaders in the history of the nation- THE most influential civil rights leader in the history of the nation- you were probably being a tad naive.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(But if you thought that there would be no politics in remembering the widow of one of the most influential political leaders in the history of the nation- THE most influential civil rights leader in the history of the nation- you were probably being a tad naive.)

Yes, one could touch on certain things political without the specific references.

However, it was under a Democratic President that MLK was tapped (Malcolm X too) and to directly refer to one of the guests is lacking in taste (at best.)

BTW, that little poem thing was totally lame and evidence of the lack of even elementary understanding of real world moral and social issues (and evinces a socialist-pacifist belief.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised people still bring up the Wellstone funeral. The guy was a hard leftist and right wingers demanded that his memory not inculde any of his ideology. They declared it wrong to stand up for the mans beliefs and thought that his voice should have been silenced because they wanted to have a good time at his funeral. Maybe I had a different take on it then others did but I always found it wildly offensive that people that openly and bitterly opposed everything the man stood for had the nerve to complain about the tone of his funeral.

Just my take on it.

Concerning this issue I think that weapons not being there was a bit of a cheap shot. The billions for war but none for the poor is a common theme, and frankly I don't know if she believed that. If she did then it most certainly did have a place at her funeral. If she didn't then it was 100% wrong to put words in a dead womans mouth for political gain.

Destino the Wellstone funeral was roundly and pretty much unviersally condemned as a political sham by just about everyone that saw it no matter what their politics. It was an embarrassment and it killed the Democrats in Minnesota.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is nothing sacred anymore?

Way to be classy, people.

I love how people can't put aside their political agendas anymore. Some things transcend politics, this being one of them. Sad.

Whats funny is this thread will now turn into a political debate about the 'sacredness' of certain events. And would this have been appropriate if it was a conservative saying this stuff about a lib. :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Destino the Wellstone funeral was roundly and pretty much unviersally condemned as a political sham by just about everyone that saw it no matter what their politics. It was an embarrassment and it killed the Democrats in Minnesota.
I'm sure most will disagree with me here but in my experience it really wasn't universally condemned. People that I spoke to that actually SAW IT and backed what Wellstone was all about were outraged at what they felt was incorrect information spreading like wild fire through the media. Most of the people condemning the event, didn't know anything about Wellstone, were his political opposition, or didn't actually see the funeral.

In fact let me ask, could someone that admired Wellstone and agreed with what he stood for, that actually watched most of his funeral please stand up and tell me what parts of it outraged you the most? I'd like to know because like I said it runs contrary to my experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats funny is this thread will now turn into a political debate about the 'sacredness' of certain events. And would this have been appropriate if it was a conservative saying this stuff about a lib. :doh:
Turn into? I thought that was what is was about from the start. Maybe I misread the first post but I got the impression that was exactly the topic here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats funny is this thread will now turn into a political debate about the 'sacredness' of certain events. And would this have been appropriate if it was a conservative saying this stuff about a lib. :doh:

That wasn't my intention.

It's just there are certain times/places where politics shouldn't be brought up. Just so sad that one person had to go soil her funeral because he's so adament about his beliefs.

and no, it wouldn't be appropriate if conservative was saying this stuff about a lib...but thats not the point here.

My point is that some people have no tact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those of you on the right here need to stop trying to speak for Corretta Scott King. This is her funeral and these are her friends speaking at it. They are speaking about things she cared deeply about. She was anti-war and if she had the President's ear, as her friends did today, she would have delivered the anti-war message as well.

The outspoken Rev. Joseph Lowery, co-founder of Southern Christian Leadership Conference, ripped into President Bush during his short speech, ostensibly about the wife of Martin Luther King Jr.

"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," Lowery said.

The mostly black crowd applauded, then rose to its feet and cheered in a two-minute-long standing ovation.

A closed-circuit television in the mega-church outside Atlanta showed the president smiling uncomfortably.

"But Coretta knew, and we know," Lowery continued, "That there are weapons of misdirection right down here," he said, nodding his head toward the row of presidents past and present. "For war, billions more, but no more for the poor!" The crowd again cheered wildly.

Seems like all of her friends supported the words of the speakers with two minute standing ovations. Seems like she was not a big fan of GWB, so why are you guys so upset that her point of view was spoken? I think she would have wanted it this way. Such is the life of an ACTIVIST.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That wasn't my intention.

It's just there are certain times/places where politics shouldn't be brought up. Just so sad that one person had to go soil her funeral because he's so adament about his beliefs.

and no, it wouldn't be appropriate if conservative was saying this stuff about a lib...but thats not the point here.

My point is that some people have no tact.

I was agreeing with you. I was just trying to point out the irony. Sorry if it come off different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And would this have been appropriate if it was a conservative saying this stuff about a lib.

Conservatives wouldn't be this classless in the first place. We didn't use the death of Ronald Reagan or Pope John Paul II to blast our ideological enemies. We paid our respects quietly with no regard to an ulterior agenda. Dems probably can't WAIT for Jimmy Carter to croak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those of you on the right here need to stop trying to speak for Corretta Scott King. This is her funeral and these are her friends speaking at it. They are speaking about things she cared deeply about. She was anti-war and if she had the President's ear, as her friends did today, she would have delivered the anti-war message as well.

Seems like all of her friends supported the words of the speakers with two minute standing ovations. Seems like she was not a big fan of GWB, so why are you guys so upset that her point of view was spoken? I think she would have wanted it this way. Such is the life of an ACTIVIST.

Well, since you knew Mrs. King so well, continue to tell us how else she felt and how she wanted to be represented. I'm all ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turn into? I thought that was what is was about from the start. Maybe I misread the first post but I got the impression that was exactly the topic here.

Do you mean the first post - which was just the story; or the second post (the first response)? I believe Spiff was pointing out the lack of tact in the comments - i was trying to point out the irony in the fact that people will argue about that tact/lack of tact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...