Various right wing sorts are complaining about various remarks at Coretta Scott King's funeral, including those critical of President Bush -- who was at the service. As usual, by the way, Clinton rose to the rhetorical occasion, speaking about the "person" inside the coffin, the two most important days of her life (accepting her faith / day after her husband was killed) and so forth. Words only go so far, but I do admire those with rhetoric skill, especially when you actually take them seriously. And, partly shown by the work done after he left office, his actions show he really is not fully of shit.
Anyway, back to the criticism. In particular, people are upset about remarks about WMDs, War in Iraq, and eavesdropping. Basically, the critics are upset that a few people at the service had the (I guess) bad taste to note that President Bush's actions rejects many things Mrs. King (okay, that sounds too much like an old television show with Kate Jackson) stood for. Crooked domestic wiretapping and spying of civil rights leaders including Martin Luther King Jr. is a big reason for the limits that the administration decided were no longer feasible. King was a pacifist, strongly against the Vietnam War, and the killing of other people of color for corrupt reasons. And, so forth. He -- and also his wife -- likewise was known for being blunt about criticism of the limitations of our leaders.
But, it is so much easier to promote a rosy eyed view of our past heroes, not suggesting the controversial nature of their message. We should just celebrate his birthday (oh wait ... Cheney voted against making it a national holiday) and use him as a vanilla (a bit ironically) symbol of equality. Heck, even affirmative action can be said to be against his vision! Of course, it is not like the funeral service was one long anti-Bush exercise. Complexity, however, is not the forte of some of these critics. And, yes, one point of funerals is to promote the ideals of those who died and those still living. Consider the Gettysburg Address or Pericles' funeral oration. A true path here would surely call to task our current leadership.
Some reference also was made to Sen. Wellstone's funeral in '02. [Actually, it was a separate memorial service ... the funeral was a smaller family affair. Key point.] That still rankles on my front too. Someone raised the point to me personally on a message board that it was crude for people to boo Trent Lott and politicize the whole thing. That they should apologize. I cried BS and still do. Of the twenty thousand or so there, a small number booed a bit when certain people popped in that went against the ideals of those the cruelly killed (soon leading the Senate to go to the Republicans) a few days before.
This simply is not worthy of much note -- Al Franken (a friend of the Wellstone family and there unlike most of the critics) wrote this in his book on the Liars of the Right and actually has the sound in the audio book. The sound barely picks up any booing. In other words, it was trivial, a tiny part of hours of memorial for those slain. Anyway, should those there apologize for being human? For showing a bit of distaste, in a time of grief, at a memorial service of their liberal hero? And, in the process, bow down and beg forgiveness from the Right? The exaggerated and sanctimonious b.s. criticism is what truly was disgusting. But, all too often that is what they are.
Anyway, sorry if it came out that the current leadership goes against much of what the King Family stands for, and their supporters sometimes are a bit uncomfortably honest about stating the facts. I know that throws the current powers that be and all those who have to be "concerned" about their actions. Poor babies.