How about this? We can bill it as a 2 hour "infomercial" and then 20 minutes into it we'll throw away the Juice-O-Matic and have that pep rally.
Basically, I'm respecting your right to an opinion in this. However, the only people's opinions I really care about in this case is Wellstone's family. If they don't have a problem with this, I don't either. Same if it was a Republican. At least they weren't blaming Wellstone's death on a Republican.
I'm all for the Republicans getting equal time, if that's what they want. However, I'm guessing they're secretly happy with what happened due to all the bad press it's getting.
I don't really have an opinion on it either way. I'm not one of Paul Wellstone's sons. Until I hear that they feel the thing was out of line, I don't feel it's my place to comment on a relative stranger's memorial service.
Usually I really like your posts. We agree on very little...but you seem even tempered about it. That being said...what you've said here is a cop out. Usually I'd agree with you that whatever the family feels like having done at a memorial service is their business. But then again...most memorial services aren't on national TV a week before an election. There is a responsibility that the Dems clearly forgot about. That of being dignified in their celebration of their colleague's life. Trent Lott was BOOED for Christ's sake!!!!! The Dems claim to be the party of morality and inclusion...then they turn around and boo a man who showed up merely to pay his respects to a longtime colleague. I guess what they say is right, in times like these people reveal their true character.
I'm not saying that is right, and I honestly don't think it is. But at least Trent Lott didn't die in a plane crash. But I'm not going to disrespect people who just lost three members of their family by criticizing this. I think it's in just as bad taste as booing someone who comes to pay his respects. If they wanted a Democratic pep rally because that's what they feel their father would've wanted, then that's their right. The television stations could've just as easily made the decision to cut away when they realized what it had become. Again, I guarantee the Republicans are much happier about what happened at the memorial service than they are upset. They couldn't have asked for more bad press at a time like this.
Here is an article from today's St. Paul Pioneer Press that reflects the feelings of the 3 major news anchors from the Twin Cities with respect to the Wellstone memorial. http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/entertainment/columnists/brian_lambert/4408091.htm
Again , it wasnt a funeral. The funeral was held privately on MONDAY . I think booing Trent Lott was wrong, but lets get the facts right.
What I find astounding in this topic is many who tolerate and excuse the actions undertaken by the liberals haven't spoken from personal experience. I mean is this the way you handle memorials? Surely you all have attended a memorial? I have attended several including that of my great grandmother a few years ago and I couldn't imagine bringing myself to booing or cheering on anyone. I always found it of the upmost respect to remain silent, and intake the stories and events that made that person so wonderful. No one in my family would ever forgive me or anyone else if something like this happened. At this point an election is INSIGNIFCANT. I couldn't imagine bringing this to a memorial. Perhaps I am one of the few that feel this way. Or maybe I expect too much from the morally corrupt liberals.
You want personal experience, all morally perfect one<B>(edit: the derogatory term removed)</B>? The only memorial service I've ever been to was for a friend of mine who died senior year in high school. She was wildly popular and everyone was shocked and saddened by her unexpected passing. At our memorial service, we laughed, cried, cheered, screamed and pretty much went through every emotion possible. While no booing took place (which this morally corrupt liberal already criticized), I can understand how a memorial service could turn into something more than a solemn reserved event...which is normally called a funeral. Tell that to the morally superior than all liberals Newt Gingrich.
Yes, and I agree. When I said "morally corrupt liberals" I meant in the context of the politicians. Next time I will elaborate.
So this makes them morally untouchable? How long do they get a free pass? And I suppose the fact that it was televised nationally was just a coincidence? That's not the way the broadcasting industry works. Reference the article posted by bobrek. Unless there is something that could cause FCC action...decisions to pull the plug on advertised programming happen slowly and require higher levels of approval.
Mr. Gingrich is no jewel but did he not confess and take his fine on the chin while in the process almost losing his speakers position? While Mr. Clinton, however, blames his sins on his enemies, who "left him no choice but to pursue that path. " Come on. Neither is in the right totally but forgiveness comes with repentance. Any good man knows this.
An honest celebration of this man's life would have to have a political flavour because much of his life was about politics. In the same way, you would expect a memorial for another person to address issues on which that person focussed their life -- whether they were teachers, community activists, business people or otherwise. If this results in 'free air time' for his beliefs, then so be it. As a politician, much of his life was centred on the pursuit of certain goals, and to acknowledge this at his memorial is not only appropriate, but unavoidable. Booing his Republican colleagues was, however, very distasteful. Lott did not attend for political gain, but instead out of respect for a colleague. It was very disappointing that some in attendance changed the focus of the celebration from the man, to partisan politics. One would hope that at a person’s memorial, the individual would take precedence over the party, and we could suspend the partisan jibberish for the night I guess kids will be kids.
I think it's actually more true that in times of grieving people may behave emotionally and maybe even irrationally. Let's try and distinguish cynicism from arguably out of control emotional response. As much as the writer of the above editorial would like to dismiss passion in politics as some sort of naive (and even dangerous) character flaw, it was Wellstone's passion for the causes and the people he fought for which made people so doggedly loyal to him and so personally hurt by his passing. If they, at his memorial service, reacted in an outsized manner, feeling (appropriate or not -- I really find this moralizing about "appropriate" response to the loss of a loved one, well, inappropriate) that this was the way to honor him, to champion his causes by winning an election, I really think it would be nice this one time to give them a by. Wellstone wasn't MLK or Ghandi. His passion was reflected in his belief that he must win elections in order to serve the underserved. It is no surprise to me that his followers felt the same way. Booing Lott and Ventura was rude. Asking Republicans to lay down arms and support Mondale was irrational. But none of it was morally reprehensible, unless it was cynically concocted. The suggestion that Wellstone's closest friends, his family or his true believing supports were opportunistic in this instance is a cynical leap which is as at least as rude, heartless and "inappropriate" in the face of their loss as the event itself. Reporters, conservatives, Democrats who always felt Wellstone was too radical or whatever have the benefit of objectivity in this case. Wellstone's son (who began the "rally" with his chant), his best friend and his supporters did not. They reacted emotionally. They did what they felt would honor him and would help them along in their grieving process -- continuing the fight he started, appropriateness be damned. I'm not interested in winning this debate though. Every argument one way or another makes me sick to my stomach. Want to say RM95's copping out for not joining the outraged? I'm copping out too. This is one case where I don't care what's "right," and I'm not ashamed to be "wrong." I'll be wrong and I'll even be dangerously, irrationally naive in echoing the passion Wellstone inspired, even if I (like both the critics and the criticized) am unable to echo his tremendous grace in a time of grieving.
no one is saying that his closest friends, his family or his true supporters were opportunistic...we're saying the democratic party seized the opportunity. that's what's being said.
It seems to me that very little of the criticism has been layed at the feet of Wellstone's family. This is a misleading criticism. I was at my own father's Memorial Service on July 3, 2001. There was plenty of smiling and laughing for a much-loved, now departed man. I didn't shed a tear at that occasion. My tears were shed at his death and periodically thereafter. At the Service I did a lot of smiling and laughing as people shared their own favorite stories about my fathers' life. A Memorial Service is meant to be a celebration of the departed's life as I understand it. They can have many tones and tenors, but under these circumstances what happened was wrong. It never should have been on television. No one should have been booed. That is ridiculous and opportunistic.
