Finally, an "emperor has no clothes" moment.

Bush seemed somewhat uncomfortable, did he somehow sense he was being given the "finger" from within the box? Thank-you, and R.I.P., Mrs. King.

The good Reverend King would have approved.

"And no, I don't think Bush is a racist. But the real problem is that he doesn't seem to care if he and his administration look like they are."

Really? I guess that's why 2 black people have held one of the highest offices in the country - Secretary of State. You cannot possibly imagine how silly your statement is.

I loved Jimmy Carter's reference to wiretapping considering it was a Democrat who authorized the wiretaps on Martin Luther King.

Bottom line, what we had today was gracious remarks by President Bush and to a certain extent President Clinton as opposed to classless remarks made for political purposes by Jimmy Carter and the Reverend. It's really dispicable to use a funeral as a forum for attacking your opponet.

"The good Reverend King would have approved."

I seriously doubt it. He had class.

Dumbya's shitting his drawers and First Librarian Lady can smell it. Fuck the both of them.

Having already heard all the typical reactionary chirps from this David's crowd, I wonder what his real point is. Tokenism doesn't erase a lack of interest or awareness. "Black people" are in positions of power in this administration, right? So what are they exactly complaining about? That's what David people just don't get.

I seriously doubt David's people have any idea what Mlk. Jr. might have thought.

Tell me Steven, You don't read Drudge do you? Cuz' that photo came right off his site....

Oh and as to your "belief" that Bush is not a racist.... wow, I mean now I feel good about him.

and finally, we the right wing are not angry over the funeral. Angry is not the right word, I'd say its disdain, or disbelief, or just plain tired of not being surprised of the depths that you ignorant looneys will go to get it "off your chests".

Coretta King and Paul Wellstone are now and forever will be memorialized, not by what they said and did, but by what ignorant liberals felt they had to say while the spot light was on their mug for the one brief second....

We aren't angry so much as we are amazed at how very stupid and ignorant you guys really are...

Have you no shame at dishonoring her memory nor pride in what she accomplished but chose to ignore for a cheap political shot?

No wonder I can never win an argument on this website. I'm arguing with the "politically ill".

Oh and remember Steven, "keep on Scrollin' past the trollin'".

"This is what happens when you step outside of your bubble and away from the carefully screened Stepford crowds...."

No, actually, this is what happens when the Democrats decide that the dead body of Ms. King is an appropriate venue to engage in political rhetoric to energize the leftist base. ( And , as an aside, displays the absolute lack of dignity and class on the part of leftists.)

I recall the Wellstone funeral. That worked out well for you folks (in that particular election), did'nt it?

The ringwingers who are so quick to condemn Rev. Lowery's statements clearly have no understanding of who Coretta Scott King was. She would have been the first one to get up and cheer for Lowrey. Stop pretending you care so deepy, trolls, we know you don't give a shit, you're just using this as an opportunity to politicize King's death to take a swipe at the Dems.

Liberal manners? Check out Slumpy, representing the US. BTW, Slumpy is the one sitting next to Botox Snit-Fit.

Amid all the right-wing rhetoric about how inappropriate it is to politicize the dead, I could very easily remind everyone that the current administration did everything except hang pink neon at Ground Zero.

But I won't.

"Coretta King and Paul Wellstone are now and forever will be memorialized, not by what they said and did, but by what ignorant liberals felt they had to say while the spot light was on their mug for the one brief second...."

Good point. It's a shame.

===========================================

"I seriously doubt David's people have any idea what Mlk. Jr. might have thought."

Cute. I've read enough of MLK to know that he would not have made such partisan remarks had HE been speaking today. As far as judging someone based on their character not the color of their skin, the liberals are sorely lacking in any kind of character.

"Having already heard all the typical reactionary chirps from this David's crowd, I wonder what his real point is. Tokenism doesn't erase a lack of interest or awareness. "Black people" are in positions of power in this administration, right? So what are they exactly complaining about? That's what David people just don't get."

Not sure what point you're trying to make. My comment was in response to Steve's statement that Bush didn't appear to care if people viewed him as racist which I sai was silly considering he appoints blacks to high positions in his cabinet. Get it now?

I just love it. When Reagan died, after such a very long morning period, the lies and partisanship were never ending . . . weeks of it. Places closed because an actor who was recruited to read flashcards was elected by a gullible fraction of the electorate to hold the office for a couple of terms. Wait, nothing anyone said then was inappropriate at all, right? Sucked in like all the others.

This carpediem would be laughable if his delusion weren't so very sad.

Crooks and Liars has a nice clip collection.

nthr rprs f wht Dms ply th blck pwns lk fddl.

I'm not sure you can say Bush isn't a racist. He depersonifies Arabs, and if he has done anything to keep the war on racism alive, I don't see it. His homophobia and general contempt for non-supporters is legend.

I'm afraid that most students of prejudice would disagree with you on that point. He's the quiet kind...

"Amid all the right-wing rhetoric about how inappropriate it is to politicize the dead, I could very easily remind everyone that the current administration did everything except hang pink neon at Ground Zero.

But I won't."

======================================

Really? What political partisan comments did Bush or anyone in his administration make at these events? All their comments were about HONORING the dead.

I know you are a liberal and have difficulty with this concept but please try.

=====================================

"She would have been the first one to get up and cheer for Lowrey."

So Mrs. King would have cheered partisan swipes at a funeral? Please. Your statement is siller's than Steve's.

So Mrs. King would have cheered partisan swipes at a funeral?

She would have cheered these comments by Rev Lowery because they are the truth that no one dares speak in the presence of King George:

But Coretta knew and we know 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.

"I just love it. When Reagan died, after such a very long morning period, the lies and partisanship were never ending . . . weeks of it. Places closed because an actor who was recruited to read flashcards was elected by a gullible fraction of the electorate to hold the office for a couple of terms. Wait, nothing anyone said then was inappropriate at all, right? Sucked in like all the others."

First of all, back up you accusations with examples. There was NO ONE in the administration who made partisan attacks against Democrats during Reagan's death. I hate to tell you this, but just saying something doesn't make it true.

I love you comment about a "fraction" of the electorate voted for Reagan!!! You must live in Minnestoa, the ONLY state he lost in 1984. A fraction?? LOL!!!!!!!!!

You really need to get out more often.

"She would have been the first one to get up and cheer for Lowrey."

Obviously, you have a deep and intimate understanding of Ms. King's opinions and thoughts.

"... politicize King's death to take a swipe at the Dems."

Huh? Representative from which end of the political spectrum used this funeral as an opportunity to attack the present administration?

"Slumpy." "Botox Snit-Fit." Proves my point, I do believe.

"I could very easily remind everyone that the current administration did everything except hang pink neon at Ground Zero."

Ground zero was an attack on the country where 3000 people were killed not as the result of a natural aging, but Islamic terrorism. But then again, I do suppose that you subsribe to a previous post where Paradox concluded that [the attack] "...only took 3,000 of us." Hardly concerning to you folks....and the distiction between the death of Ms.King and those 3000 souls is abosolute: the latter is an attack on the country that is a political action an an anathema to the freedoms that you enjoy.

"When Reagan died....was elected by a gullible fraction of the electorate..."

A pretty large fraction, I do believe. Clearly you have no understanding regarding the election of Ronald Reagan 9or his legacy): if you do, please do tell, how many states did he win?

Welcome Linda.
Actually its kind of funny.

When Reagan passed, (I named one of my daughters after him) (oh, Happy B'day Mr. President, yesterday was your 95th)
....when Reagan passed I gave my entire staff of 8 employees off. (some were democrats too.)

Our Community held a candlelight vigil and I was honored to speak with other saddened citiznes. We quoted his speeches from 40 plus years ago to honor the man, Reagan.

We then held a fundraiser on November 3rd of 2005 commerating his 25th anniversary election over Jimmah. We had speakers from Washington come and people that knew him talk about his generosities and kindness.

All the while, we talked about what a wonderful, kind, and selfless man Reagan was. We didn't bemoan his enemies, we instead championed his accomplishments, for which there were many.

I don't recall anyone speaking at Reagan's funeral who attempted to politicize it, except maybe for his son Ron, who is a ignorant liberal too ashamed that he will never amount to half the man that his father was.

I can't wait for Jimmy's little funeral...and Bill and Hillary's too. I wonder who will even come to those.

There is alot that can be said about the character of the people and how they bury their dead. Paul Wellstone and Coretta's funeral says a hellava lot about you people, and its not good.

But keep it up, it helps the American people see the differences in the parties. And this is a clear distinction.

Lowery should have turned around and told Dimwit to his face that he's a war criminal who enjoys killing people and that, in the words of Kanye West, "he doesn't give a damn about black people."

Enough is enough with pussyfooting around the facts about this criminal gang, funeral or no funeral. Where else can C-Plus Augustus be forced to listen to people his handlers make sure he never sees or hears?

I wanna hurl when I think about Reagan's funeral and all the adoration heaped on that jerk. He started our slide down the neo-con wetdream path that the trolls think is so great. They GOTTA be gettin' paid to write such ignorant stuff. Or maybe they are that stupid.

Sharon,

Sad that you feel so very bad that Reagan actually made an impact on the lives of so many Americans.

I know of no one currenlty living, whose funeral will consume America like Reagans. He lead a storybook life and America, yes America was proud of him.....

Sadly you have not the capacity nor understanding to even come close to the greatness that was Ronald Wilson Reagan.

My Daughter's birth coincides with Reagans'. And she shares his name.

Ironic that a blog from the left coast, where Reagan championed the American Dream is now honoring him over years after his passing.

I suspect this blog will continue to honor him in years to come, as long as us trolls have any freedom of speech....

Ann,

"For war billions more but no more for the poor."

Since Lyndon Johnson declared his "war on poverty," we -- the United States taxpayer -- has provided "the poor" with over one-trillion dollars in direct assistance? The poor, while a significantly lesser number than the early 1960's -- are still here. Are you not willing to entertain the thought that some people are poor because they are structurally unable to be anything but poor? And for these people, how much more should be provided? If this much more should be provided, let it be provided by private organizations -- usually, the church-based organizations that you Lefties hate so much -- and let these organizations provide based upon YOUR donations. Ok? My donations are substantial enough.

Really? What political partisan comments did Bush or anyone in his administration make at these events? All their comments were about HONORING the dead.

I know you are a liberal and have difficulty with this concept but please try.

Posted by David at February 7, 2006 08:17 PM

##################################

Ooooohh, my liberal mind is trying, trying really hard ... Let's see. Yes, I've got it:

"It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States." -- Dick Cheney, Sept. 8, 2004.

I said policizing the DEAD, not a CEREMONY. And in 2004, the administration did it -- repeatedly.

It's a fairly simple concept, really.

Oh and one more thing.

In my Rec Room is a signed/autographed photo of Reagan. Not to me, unfortunately, I never met him personally, but I knew many that had that honor.
I won that photo at an Auction honoring him. It only cost me the pleasure of paying $1850. He proudly hangs in my home for all to see. A treasure that I will bequeath down to my children and my children's children.

Oh and I have a half smoked cuban cigar sitting in an ashtray that honors Clinton. But thats another story.

Carpe,

Oh yeah, that fuck Reagan cut my Social Security that I was supposed to get since my father was dead and couldn't help me with my college expenses....and Reagan went further and cut my financial aid to boot. I was too young to vote in 1980, but not too young for him to screw me over. What a guy. Empty fucking Republican suit. No wonder you admire him.

" know of no one currenlty living, whose funeral will consume America like Reagans. He lead a storybook life and America, yes America was proud of him....."

carp, that is exactly what drives liberals CRAZY about Reagan. You can see it in Sharon's post. And in the one above about a "fraction" of the electorate voted for him. They either go crazy or try to minimize his victory.

It makes their head explode to think that he won 49 states!!!!

I think whenever Bush' time on earth is done you will see close to a similar outpouring (which will drive 'em crazy again).

David, you missed my point. When Reagan died there were no partisan comments because the same party was in power. Had there been a Democratic President in office, there would have been no partisan attacks either. The list of speakers was exclusionary and only those partisans and kiss-ups were allowed out of fear of dissent. Fairly typical. W had to go into enemy territory and was uncomfortable. Pobrecito. All of you wingers go nuts.

Reagan won a majority of approximately 25% who voted his first time around. Prove me wrong I look stupid for a minute. Prove me right, you look stupid for as long as you comment on this blog.

carp, that is exactly what drives liberals CRAZY about Reagan.

No, actually it was that whole Iran-Contra scandal.

Linda,

Reagan won 49 states in 1984. You are the one who looks silly arguing this point.

David, I know how presidential elections work. everyone else does now, too. It's up to you to prove that more than 25% of the elegible voters actually voted for anyone in that election.

"It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States." -- Dick Cheney, Sept. 8, 2004."

Was this a statement made at a funeral over the body of the deceased?

"... that fuck Reagan cut my Social Security that I was supposed to get since my father was dead..."

Umm, it does seem that it was your father's social security (my condolences). What part of his social security did you contribute: what dollar value?

"...and Reagan went further and cut my financial aid to boot."

It seems to me that you feel that entitlements should determine your income.

"No, actually it was that whole Iran-Contra scandal."

Yeah, but the Soviet Union is gone is it not? And Poland, The Slovak Republic, The Czech Republic, the Esotanians, the Bulgarians, and all the rest are no loger under the Soviet yoke......right?

Consider: Ronald Reagan (died 2004); survived by 50 million Easter Europeans freed from the yoke of Communist domination.

Oh and I forgot, carpediem, about that personal info -- mmm don't care, not relevant, and just a little too squishy. Are you not a man? Why get so limp next to "The Great Communicator" urrr actor?

was a Democrat who authorized the wiretaps on Martin Luther King

Huh. Could have fooled me. I thought it was J. Edgar Hoover who started it at the same time he was collecting information on the Kennedys. Oh damn! It was! God, that just proves you're stupid...sorry. Fucking stupid.

an anathema to the freedoms that you enjoy.

That's "used to enjoy." Use the correct tense, please.

Oh and I have a half smoked cuban cigar sitting in an ashtray that honors Clinton. But thats another story.

Say, did you ever tell your kids about Newtie? You're a peach, indeed!

Oh and one more thing. In my Rec Room is a signed/autographed photo of Reagan.

What a fucking dork. In my fridge I have a case of Tecate and some nice Cubans in the humidor. I know who's having more fun. Did you ever hear about Reagan's gay trists back in his Hollywood days? It's common knowledge...like Newtie and his trists...on his office desk...with his secretary...after you got your kids to campaign for him...dork.

David, if memory serves me at all, it was paranoid Hoover in the 60's that was spying on King, and everyone feared Hoover (including Presidents).

"That's "used to enjoy." Use the correct tense, please."

If you "used to enjoy it," why can you still post whatever you wish to say here at the LeftCoaster? Curious?

"It's common knowledge..."

If such common knowledge, please provide references. Legitimate references.

the one I always remember is when Reagan didn't even recognize his son in the reception line -- great man and all that.

"the one I always remember is when Reagan didn't even recognize his son in the reception line..."

The on I remember is not knowing the meaning of the word "is."

I really enjoy the Reagan defenses. They are always so, umm, personal.

Bagley go find your own refernces. Where do you think you are, China or something?

Bush is one of the biggest racists to ever hold the office of the President. If we are bottom feeders, can you imagine what he thinks of African Americans.

If such common knowledge, please provide references. Legitimate references.

You lie and blather on and expect me to provide references? Load Google on your machine, type in "Reagan Gay" as search terms and have a field day. Otherwise, you can fuck yourself for all I care.

can you imagine what he thinks of African Americans.

Yeah. Who else is going to clean up the office after the meetings?

Yeah, but the Soviet Union is gone is it not? And Poland, The Slovak Republic, The Czech Republic, the Esotanians, the Bulgarians, and all the rest are no loger under the Soviet yoke......right?

That has nothing to do with the Iran-Contra affair.

Oh, yeah and there was that fictional story about the "welfare queen." That one kind of turned me off Reagan as well.

"Bagley go find your own refernces."

Wait a second! Hold the presses!

Do you mean that the Soviet Union still exists! HOLY S**T! How did I miss that?

Or do you mean that that Reagan was having homosexual trysts? Does that mean that you have no references? Or are your references simply te fevered rants of Leftists?

"Where do you think you are, China or something?"

What has China got to do with this?

The on I remember

That's two. Bedtime for Bagley.

Coretta Scott King was a great woman who took a stand in a time when her own country wanted to killed and did kill people from the like her. That David and Carpediem and Bagley are so easily drawn away the original post and the originl argument tells me two things. First, they are partisans who only care about the argument at hand. Second, that their concern is superficial and therefore lacking in thought or conviction.

"You lie and blather on and expect me to provide references? Load Google on your machine, type in "Reagan Gay" as search terms and have a field day. Otherwise, you can fuck yourself for all I care."

Actually, Google is not something that is "loaded" on a computer, it is a website that is accessed by an appropriate web browser. That being said....

If you Google (this is the proper vernacular) "alien invasion" 1,980,000 hits will be returned: go ahead, have a field day!

As to f**king myself, this I do think is a physical impossibility. (I have never tried.) However, if you are able to have carnal relations with yourself....I. Am. In. Awe!

"That has nothing to do with the Iran-Contra affair."

But it is a part of his legacy that you Lefties seem to overlook.

"... fictional story about the "welfare queen."

I am afraid that the "welfare queen" did exist and still more dissapointed that she still does.

Or are your references simply te

Make that three.

He lead a storybook life and America, yes America was proud of him.....

Well, not everyone was proud of him, so stop making it sound like they did, because that is not true. "Storybook"? Yes, that's a good definition for his life, storybook, a piece of fiction if I every read one.

"That's two. Bedtime for Bagley."

Are we now going down the road of referencing typos. Linda, I thought that you had abandoned this method of discrediting posters. Oh well, I do suppose that it is all teh yuohve fift.

"...all teh yuohve fift."

Sorry, that should be

...all you have left.

Where did carpe go? Come out and play, carpe. Newtie can't effect you that much, can he? It wasn't your fault that you whored your children for the man. It's not too late to crawl into the light. It'll burn the slime from off your tainted hide.

Do you mean that the Soviet Union still exists!

Hurry! Tell us how we'll have egg on our faces February 17th, and we'll need towels and the like. That's impressive! Scare me.

Did you Google Reagan Gay? Tons of fun stuff there. Better yet, Google Bush Gay. That's an eye opener. Think there is any truth to that gay reorientation training? Damn! Those dates are about right...and verifiable!

The Google seach bar is an application. Check and see.

Okay, let's just stay with the Reagan lies :) First off, Bagley, your lack of lingo doesn't help -- web pages load when you click a browser direction. That dig just doesn't work on a language level.

But back to Reagan. Did you even live here when he was president, and if you did, did you vote for him? And if you couldn't, would you have? Knowing that he authorized selling drugs?

just asking

"The Google seach bar is an application. Check and see."

I know that the Google search bar is an application, but it is not required to emply the Google search engine. Sheesh!

"...web pages load when you click a browser direction."

Huh. What is a browser "direction?"

" Did you even live here when he was president, and if you did, did you vote for him? And if you couldn't, would you have?"

Yes, I lived here and voted for President Reagan.

"..would you have? Knowing that he authorized selling drugs?"

I assume that you are addressing the second election: well, probably not. I do believe that Mr. Mondale would have been a good president and probably would have voted for him. But that was back before the extreme left wing took over the Democratic party.

Carpe is snuggling with his Ronnie pic . . . roused that paternal feeling again.

There must be a song that describes it, but I can't htink of it now.

Maybe not.

In an attempt to get back to topic and decency....Why are you conservatives so upset? Ted, Bill, Hillary, and most of the others speaking made no political comments during the proceedings. President Carter made a good point about wiretapping, and even if it was under Robert Kennedy, it doesnt matter, it was wrong then its wrong now. As far as the rest of the political comments...I cannot speak for Mrs. King. She was a lifetime activist for civil rights, so I can assume based on audience response as well as those close enough to her to speak at her funeral that these are at least in line with her beliefs. So, political her whole life, and political after her death doesnt seem like such a stretch for me.
To some of the posts Ive seen in this forum. Man, I usually just post in right wing forums, trying to convince minds that maybe theyre following the wrong ideals. But all of us need to take the high road, honestly. I loves using the f bomb, but not when describing a recently dead president, no matter what I feel about him. I agree with Steve, President Bush is not a racist. And that label should only be put on people who truly deserve it.

Yes, Bush appears very uncomfortable. He had to sit and listen to the truth. He was there because he had to be there, not because he gave a rat's ass about Mrs. King or anything she stood for. In fact, he hates what she stood for. His presence was a mockery of everything she and Martin Luther King believed in and struggled to achieve. In reality, he had no right to be there.

But that was back before the extreme left wing took over the Democratic party.

Hey, what's it like with the extreme right wing controlling the republi-cons? Not even Goldwater would have tolerated this administration.

So, back to the topic. Do you think the King family was bothered by the statements? I think not, and they will be the final arbitors of the situation.

Fuck Reagan.

I must admit I was in grade school and junior high during the Reagan years, so I can't necessarily remember the wonderful cuts in education and school loans he made, nor can I necessarily remember Reagan's wonderful deficit that eventually caught up to us all in '91 long after his term was done but unfortunately his VP felt the brunt, nor can I remember all those lovely deals he made with the Contras even though he supposedly steadfastly refused to deal with terrorists, nor can I remember those terrorists turning around and utilizing that money to start a wonderful crack cocaine epidemic still felt to this day, nor can I remember how Reagan's anti-Communist policies though noble in intent did wonders to numerous Latin American dictators as they brutalized their dissenters and opposition much in the similar fashion as Saddam once did, nor can I remember Reagan and especially Rummy looking the other way as Saddam gassed over 5,000 of his own people while Reagan merely handslapped Saddam because he wanted to do some pipeline business with the eeeeevil dictator, nor do I remember Reagan's anti-Communist policy that actually financed, trained, and armed Osama bin Laden and created our current worst enemy at present.

But I do remember being told that those ketchup packets on my plate are considered a vegetable serving, so I always rested easy whenever I ate my fries, cheeseburger, and corn dog.

eh, alright. Just sayin.

As MLK, and his wife, were political agitators of the highest order (i.e. "uppity niggers" to reactionaries aka "conservatives"), I seriously doubt they would rue their funerals being used as platforms for the propogation of their advocacies of equality and political enfranchisement. In fact, I'd bet they'd be pissed if the leader of a fucking racist Republikkkan political party were allowed to romp around the stage unscathed. THAT would be an insult.

Oh, I know, reactionaries...you've got your Condisleeza and Lexington Steele or whatever the fuck his name is and your Lynn Swann (Stallworth was better) and your Ken "don't give them fucking niggers voting machines!" Blackwell and your Scalia lapdog Clarence Thomas. Yeah, you've got that group who got theirs and said "fuck off" to their own people, pimping for a party and an asshole who actively disenfranchises black voters and refuses to speak to the NAACP. Real cause for pride there.

Frankly, you reactionary scum would be demonizing MLK were he alive today, and you know it. In fact you'll demonize any black leader unless he/she is willing to sell out his/her own people. That's just how you fuckers are: You want an America with rich white people being waited on by poor dark people. You'll deny it and piss and moan and call me a race-baiter, but deep in your trollish, reactionary hearts, you fucking shitstain cretins are six decades and one martyred MLK removed from running around in sheets with ropes in your hands looking for some 'coons to lynch.

Yeah, assholes, I know what's in your putrid little souls. Now get the fuck out of here before I actually get pissed.

But all of us need to take the high road, honestly. I loves using the f bomb, but not when describing a recently dead president, no matter what I feel about him.

That's fairly easy to say, but if that man's policies have affected your life in a detremental way, one might feel otherwise. In my mind Reagan is the primary reason we are where we are as a country.

Coretta Scott King did nothing to put us here, but Reagan and both of the Bushes did. Why must our nation have to endure a father-son duel? At least Coretta Scott King continued her mission in life and continued to promote nonviolence.

Reagan was all about violence, whether it be drugs for weapons or supressing and deamonising "others."

Youre right. I just hate when I see any of us look and talk...like...them.

AWC,

A very reasoned post. It will not be appreciated here.

Judith,

"In fact, he hates what she stood for."

In that you know him, will you please introduce me to President Bush. Please....pretty please!

"In reality, he had no right to be there."

Ummm, he was invited.

"...extreme right wing controlling the republi-cons?"

Not exactly, I am a registered Independent and I have had several opportunities to speak with my representative on the telephone. He is a Republican and I do believe, based upon his votes in the Congress, that he does take my views -- and the views of other like me -- into account.

MisterOpus1,

"But I do remember being told that those ketchup packets on my plate are considered a vegetable serving, so I always rested easy whenever I ate my fries, cheeseburger, and corn dog."

Good, very good. In the back and forth on the forum, MisterOpus1, one of the best posts that I have read.

But, in that [you] "... can't necessarily remember... ," then I must assume that you depend on the things that others have told you. Given your political tendencies -- as I read your other posts, this is necessarily an assumption on my part -- could it not be that you are prejudiced against Reagan?

The first US president to not speak before the NAACP since Herbert Hoover! Remember, those who believe in White supremacy hate blacks.

Last year, Charles W. Pickering Sr. was appointed as an federal appeals court judge. Pickering has had ties to the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission, a neo-Nazi organization. People for the American Way recounts many of his anti-civil rights records. By-the-way, that was a recess appointment by Bush.

I introduced the Reagan topic on purpose. Sorry if it offended anyone. I was attempting to cut off the attacks. I find it telling that if you read through the comments, it was the wingnutters who were asking for references . . .

Sorry for calling them wingnutters. Maybe I should call them trolls. Or maybe . . . I'll stop.

Night :)

Judith,

"In fact, he hates what she stood for."

In that you know him, will you please introduce me to President Bush. Please....pretty please!

"In reality, he had no right to be there."

Ummm, he was invited.
__________________________________________________

Bagley, his record speaks for itself. I can only go by what a person does, not what he says. Again, he hates what she stood for.

Well, it would be pretty difficult to invite former Presidents without asking the current pResident, if he was invited at all. I don't have the guest list, and neither do you.

Sorry for calling them wingnutters. Maybe I should call them trolls. Or maybe . . . I'll stop.

Night :)
Posted by linda at February 7, 2006 10:07 PM

*****

Just call em what they are: Apologists for racist bastards.

See, I can always count on the trolls to come out with their talking points to drive up the site's traffic, especially when they get called out on race.

So defensive, and yet so predictable.

Thanks guys.

"The first US president to not speak before the NAACP since Herbert Hoover!"

Given the advertisements that they ran against him in the general election, I support his decision. The NAACP has becomea despicable organization. Well past its time to go away.

"who were asking for references . . ."

Nice! No references. All falsehoods. How do you say: liar! Well, you are a lefty.

SnarkySnark,

I am leaving now. You can come out. God of War is here to stroke your ego. (Why do I keep thinking that GOW and SnarkySnark are the same people...curious.)

African-Americans are left to wonder where the compassionate part went in Bush's conservative agenda. Like the banner proclaiming “Mission Accomplished”, Bush (or Rove) is good at crafting images, but not so good at providing the substance behind them. Katrina was his waterloo.

I can think of more names: shameless, short-sighted, greedy, reactionist, harsh (so very), dim, evil.

One of them is gonna cut 'n paste that somewheres and discredit mes. Aw shucks -- done it agin.

Steve, Steve, I helped!

"Given the advertisements that they ran against him in the general election, I support his decision.

Bagley, and just why was the NAACP against him? Hm, I wonder why.

i think i understand the bushit posture in this photo. he is cutting the cheese.

i wonder if it was an sbd or audible?

ANOTHER FUCKING HIJACKED COMMENT SECTION BROUGHT TO YOU BY TRAITORS OF TRUTH.

Bagley opines:

"But, in that [you] "... can't necessarily remember... ," then I must assume that you depend on the things that others have told you. Given your political tendencies -- as I read your other posts, this is necessarily an assumption on my part -- could it not be that you are prejudiced against Reagan?"

Now you'll have to forgive me, Bagley, because I may be getting my Bush apologists mixed up here, but was it you the other day that accused me of not picking up on a particular note of satire?

As for Reagan himself and my knowledge of the man, I guess I'm wondering exactly what your point is. I had a history teacher in high school that was considered one of the most prominent historians in the region on Native Americans. If memory serves, his specialty was on the Navajo (sp?), but I could be wrong.

I don't recall him being that old really. I also don't recall him being a Navajo, a very old one at. He was just an interested historian that did some incredible work on their culture.

I'm also a bit of an evolutionary biology junkie myself. It is a past hobby of mine while I go through school in an unrelated field.

I don't recall being around for the past coupla hundred or so million years, nor do I recall some of my mentors in the field being around that long either. Yet we do seem to have a pretty descent grasp of events that have occurred, given the evidence shown to date.

So I guess my point is, whatever knowledge I have of Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, or any other president preceeding them is certainly and not always bent on my personal knowledge of "being there." It is of reading texts, reading and listening to speakers who are knowledgable on the content, and then decifering myself on what kind of Presidents they are given the current evidence at hand.

It is, perhaps, a strange concept to you, decifering on your own rather than listening and nodding in approval or shaking your head in disgust simply because someone in your party simply tells you to do so. But rest assured, it's not alien to me.

As for Reagan himself, I don't believe "prejudiced" is the correct word as it implies a bias of sorts on my part. He did some great things which I believe were mentioned here. Conversely, he did some not-so-great-things, which I and others had pointed out. Taken as a whole I tend to believe the negatives somewhat outweigh the positives, esp. when examining the consequences of his foreign policies and the consequences of his voodoo economics and huge deficit which eventually caught up to us all. Was he the worst of them all? Certainly not, but I think he was definitely a bit short-sighted on a number of important issues at hand.

I also disagreed with his beliefs of creationism, throwing out thousands of mentally ill patients from hospitals and institutions into the streets and then essentially stating it's their fault for being homeless and desperate, and a slew of other programs and philosophies.

Did I help clear matters with you on my stance? If not, I'll try and be more concise tomorrow.

It's absurd to characterize the President's presence and words at Mrs. King's funeral today as anything less than eminently necessary, dignified, and courageous.

I have no problem with how wellstone it got this afternoon. That was the prerogative of the occasion, but Bush walked into it willingly.

Why can't you give him credit for that? What's wrong that you have no charity; no sense of what it must be to any man to go into a place to pay his respects and knowing the hatred that attends him? That is courageous and nothing you would say in response me could vitiate that.

Y'all are small, small people ---so small that you don't even have the strength to resist Hillary's coronation. Did you see that? Black America would love nothing more than to do old Bill a good turn by putting his woman in the White House. And y'all are going to have to eat all your words against her.

Enjoy, you graceless wads.

Why can't you give him credit for that? What's wrong that you have no charity; no sense of what it must be to any man to go into a place to pay his respects and knowing the hatred that attends him? That is courageous and nothing you would say in response me could vitiate that.

Y'all are small, small people
Posted by Toby Petzold at February 7, 2006 10:56 PM

I do give him credit for going, I would have been furious if he wasnt there. I dont know if it was courage or obligation though...
Why am i small?
Why am I a wad?
What's a wad?

Steve, I've lurked on this blog for a long time because I like your style and insight. But I have always wondered why the troll count per capita is so much higher than on other sites, and why you seem to encourage them. Is it merely to drive up traffic? Do what you must, but it is rather inconvenient to have to scroll up from the bottom so that I don't have to be subjected to noxious hate and stupidity before reading the name and realizing it's one of your troll regulars.

Real Tough Cookie, the trolls come here because they can't find any intelligent posters on their own sites.

Hey, did Jimmah Carter mention just who the president was at wire tapped MLK?

This whole affair is a repise of the Wellstone memorial. It will backfire big time.

"David, I know how presidential elections work. everyone else does now, too. It's up to you to prove that more than 25% of the elegible voters actually voted for anyone in that election."

That has to be the weakest argument I have ever heard on this site. So if 50% of the voters went to the polls, Mondale would have won?

LOL!!!!! LOL!!!!!

"The first US president to not speak before the NAACP since Herbert Hoover! Remember, those who believe in White supremacy hate blacks.

Last year, Charles W. Pickering Sr. was appointed as an federal appeals court judge. Pickering has had ties to the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission, a neo-Nazi organization. People for the American Way recounts many of his anti-civil rights records. By-the-way, that was a recess appointment by Bush."

Judith, I guess you forgot (or are too ignorant to know) that Bill Clinton's mentor was William Fulbright, an avid segregationist in the 50's and 60's. Educate yourself on which party blocked civil rights in this country. Hint: it wasn't the Republicans.

Bush doesn't go to the NAACP because they are no longer revelant in this country. When you have their leader comparing Bush to Nazi's then you've completely lost it. He is isolating them and is instead going to the Urban League to speak. They are the future not the NAACP.

"See, I can always count on the trolls to come out with their talking points to drive up the site's traffic, especially when they get called out on race.

So defensive, and yet so predictable.

Thanks guys."

No, Steve once again you get it wrong. Remember your mantra - "ignore the trolls". Your group has done a poor job at that - in fact you might say they are a "miserable failure".

Looks like it's your group who is having to defend themselves. Otherwise, they would just scroll on by us.

"Real Tough Cookie, the trolls come here because they can't find any intelligent posters on their own sites."

Sure didn't find any here either.

I just watched the entire CSK funeral on C-Span and realized that you can't get a sense of it from a few isolated quotes or sound bites.

It was a marvelous tapestry of art, full of nuance and richness. More important it was evocative of a time when we actually had decent people in the White House and Congress. In the succession of speeches there was poetry, there was soul-stirring song, there was historical context. There was spirituality, and humaneness, and love and hope.

Contrast all that with what these pathetic Republicans did immediately afterward. They seized upon tiny fractions of the event, the ones where allusions were made to Republican failures and criminal acts and lies. It shocked them. But what was more shocking was that these Republicans came away thinking the whole thing was about them.

It wasn't.

But the Republicans were not content to just leave those few TRUTHFUL fractions stand. No, fascist Karl Rove was compelled to immediately send his whores and pimps and slime merchants to try to tear it all down.

That's all they know how to do, they know nothing else. They got into power in Washington on slime and lies and misrepresentations and smear tactics, and they used their illegitimate power to sully everything good about America, most especially by lying us into an unnecessary war. And looking the other way when all those Black folks huddled in New Orleans and begged for help.

And like a poisonous leitmotiv or a lingering putrid smell, there was George Bush, sitting behind the speakers. As usual he was ill at ease and totally out of touch. He actually brought himself to believe he belonged there, sitting among honorable people.

He was so miscast. So out of place.

Yes, some people think its courageous for a president to attend a funeral. Wow, just wow! Umm, since when did funerals and eulogies become all about the courage of the people who attend them.

I know, I know...my bad...but that "courage" comment of Dear Leader was just effed....the mind boggles.

Let's face facts: Bush panders to racists. He went to SC and spoke at BJU, a notoriously racist institution. He bowed down before the confederate flag and said he believed in "states rights"-translation: Bush supports segregation and reinstatement of the Jim Crow laws. His own justice department approved a reinstatement of the poll tax here in GA. He can say over and over he's not a racist but his actions certainly speak differently.

like a poisonous leitmotiv or a lingering putrid smell, there was George Bush

i think i understand the bushit posture in this photo. he is cutting the cheese.

And Laura pretending she didn't like it.

Good Morning Y'all,

I see that very little "scrollin' past the trollin'" occurred last night.

To those that contributed some minimal amount of intelligent thought, thanks. For the looney left, pulling out their DNC manuals on "How to tawk like we knows sumthang", well I imagine its not hard to copy and paste the same diatribes over and over again.

One point that I loved was the Iran Contra affair. Reagan admitted to complacency in that matter but lets re-examine that particular matter in light of todays times.

The Executive Branch is supposed to dictate Foreign policy but the Dems Controlled both branches of the House. So they refused Reagan requests to help the Democracy yearning peoples of Nicaragua from succeeding. John Kerry was at the forefront, helping Daniel Ortega maintain control over his communist nation. (Google that one...its all over the place.)

Reagan wanted to help them but Congress cut him off and refused his requests to aid the contras. Plain and simple, the growth of Communism in our hemisphere was championed by the socialist Democrats like Kerry and opposed by Reagan.

Iran Contra attempted to circumvent that.

Again, when free elections were finally held in Nicaragua, guess who won...another vindication for Reagan...

Reminds me of Venezula where Jimmah Carter champions another dictator who stole the election under Carter's watchful eye. In a few decades, freedom will come and you democrats will cry about that loss too.

You Democrats have always been for the Socialist/Communistic policies all over this world. Reagan helped destroy them. And you wonder why you hate him so.

Why is Freedom such a dirty word for you guys....Its okay for you to have freedom, but you do not want anyone else to have it, especially those who hold different political views than you, aka Republicans.

Another bad move by the Democrats. How many more times are you guys going to send out soundbites underscoring your Party's extreme weakness on national defense issues? ("Billions for the Iraq war, none for the poor..." Gee, it even rhymes! Unfortunately, the world situation is not that simple, and the voting public knows this.)

Yes, some people think its courageous for a president to attend a funeral. Wow, just wow! Umm, since when did funerals and eulogies become all about the courage of the people who attend them.

Let's see some real courage from Bush, like him attending a funeral of a soldier from his Iraq folly.

Lieberman is a republican

Let's see some real courage from Bush, like him attending a funeral of a soldier from his Iraq folly.

But then he'd have to acknowledge that they're real people and not just soundbite fodder. Will never happen.

LOL! Only the trolls would think that rewarding the Supreme Islamic Revolutionary Council and helping AQ win control of town after town in Iraq is better than helping the poor in our own country. Man, it must be nice to be such a dupe residing in a fantasy world.

Ayatollah Khomeni is proud of you guys. Keep digging your holes. I'm enjoying every minute of it.

I see that most have forgotten about one of the blackest marks that Red Ink RayGun made while his handlers propped him up as pRezNit - the Savings and Loan scandal and the Keating Five. The start of bankrupting future generations so corpo-weasels and the richy rich can keep even more of their blood money.

And - who was that who was one of those Keating Five again? Kneel Bush? What an amazing coinkydink.

Can anyone even come close to imagining what would have happened if Roger Clinton would've been involved in an illegal money grab like that? Or Billy Carter? I remember when they were reamed out on a regular basis just because they had the poor taste to be born of the same mother as a sitting president. Funny how no one ever seems to bring Kneel up, and treat him with the same respect, as those other presidential siblings. Almost as though traitorous Repugnicant Putsch fellators have double standards, hypocrisy, and rabid hatred of anyone not conforming to their faith-based view of the world as their core values.

Oh, wait...

[chanting]

I'm number 1(hundred)! I'm number 1(hundred)!

Tom, Obama should make a simple reference to the Keating Five and see that grin be wiped from McCain's face!

The posts by MisterOpus1 & John Palcewski are classics. Thank you.

Of course Coretta Scott King's death and funeral had political overtones. Of course it was used to advance a progressive agenda. Neither is it at all surprising that opportunities were taken to attack a ruling party and president that is seen by many to stand directly in the way of that agenda.

If you want to know why Mrs. King's funeral became political, you need only look at her life. The woman carried on her husband's legacy and spent her life in the political sphere, speaking out against injustice and inequality. Her life was political by definition, and her criticisms, like those of her husband, were quite harsh when she felt it necessary. Folks remember Dr. King's "I have a dream," line, but they seem lax in remembering the fire-and-brimstone of his criticisms of American institutions and organizations that stood in the way of that dream. His wife carried on that legacy.

It seems quite fitting that her funeral, in "honoring the dead," should not shy away from the beliefs she held in life. To not use her funeral as an opportunity to speak out would be the greater insult to her memory.

Good to know per David that Bush appointed a few blacks to high level positions, so all the dead in New Orleans don't matter.

But I mostly just want to comment that, while Little Caesar is trying his best to pretend he doesn't know what Rev. Lowery is talking about, Laura has gotten that bushist "if looks could kill" stare down pretty cold.

They played a big chunk of President Carter's speech on the radio this morning, and save for his comment about MLK being illegally wiretapped, and having the listener make the EFFING OBVIOUS connection, there was nothing in there that could be considered an attack against bush. Yet the gop smear machine would have you think otherwise.

And I have to think that any comments made by the Daughter and Family would be pretty much unassailable. But the gop smear machine would beg to differ.

Nice comment John P, the difference between soundbites and reality.

Oh, and carpe, nobody gives a fuck whether you appreciate the posts that met your ideal of good commentary, really, nobody does, except for your fellow Bush lovers.

You have a mighty high opinion of yourself. At least somebody does, right?

Stats writes: "Another bad move by the Democrats. How many more times are you guys going to send out soundbites underscoring your Party's extreme weakness on national defense issues? ("Billions for the Iraq war, none for the poor..." Gee, it even rhymes! Unfortunately, the world situation is not that simple, and the voting public knows this.)"

Well - I guess many in the party believe that Iraq has a negative impact on national defense.

In fact, from my world view, Bush has been incompetent in pursuing National Defense. Four years later and Bin Laden still gets to spit in our face on a regular basis. And his adminstration still seems to be pushing for government by murderous religious extremous rather than murderous secular dictators.

Now, as long and the press and the sound bites in the media continue to say Bush is somehow protecting us, I guess the party is in trouble. If reality ever gets into the press and media, though, Bush is in major trouble.

Lets tell the FULL story of the wiretapping on MLK. It was none other than Robert Francis Kennedy, brother of JFK and then Attorney General who AUTHORIZED those wiretaps and other surveillance on MLK. He did this with the full knowledge and approval of Lyndon Johnson and at the behest of the FREAK, J. Edgar Hoover.

Not only that, my reading informs me that RFK and LBJ would really get titillated listening to the audiotapes of "activities" in MLK's hotel rooms.

One could also note that present at the funeral was George Bush Sr, who, as a candidate for the US Senate in 1964 campaigned against the Civil Rights Act pursued by the Kings.

Look, the bottom line is that the funeral was predestined to be "political" cuz, DUH!!, Mrs. King WAS a political person. I mean, for crying out loud, even BEFORE MLK's funeral in April of '68, Mrs. King traveled to Memphis to finish the sanitation workers strike that her husband started.

Yeah, there was HYPOCRISY all around yesterday at New Birth, but the challenge for those of us NOW is to continue the work that Mrs. King continued after MLK's death.

--------------------
You're not supposed to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who says it.
- Malcolm X

OUT.

As a registered Independant, and a member of the clergy and pastor of a church I must say that even though I agree with SOME of the sentiments expressed at Mrs. King's funeral, I was VERY disappointed with Rev. Lowery. Mrs. King's funeral was NOT the time nor the place for such words. To me, denigrating a sacred moment to make a political statement shows a true lack of class. I hold Rev. Lowery in a high regard as his causes closely mirror my own. My regard for him is a bit lower now, as is my regard for President Carter. While not quite as obvious as Rev. Lowery, Carter took a cheap shot at Bush and while perhaps he deserved it, it was not the time nor the place to do so.

It saddens me to see this event which should have been a celebration of a life well lived and something that could have been used to unite people turn into something so divisive. Rev. Lowery, and President Carter, should be ashamed of themselves.

Why was it not the time or place, Reverend?

What better time or place? Should they do it when nobody is paying attention? In a room, with the blinds shut, the doors closed, and the lights off?

Maybe they could do it at the Reflecting Pond?

How about they protest it at a political speech that Bush is giving? Would that be better? Sure, the SS would have the protesteors and free speakers essentially back in that closed dark room, but hey, that would be a better place and time, right?

So, I'm back to my first question, why wouldn't you do it a her funeral, celebrating her life and her achievements? Seems like the perfect time and place to me. Or did you mean when Bush wasn't there, mustn't embarrass his excellency, is that it? But doesn't he work for us, The People? Shouldn't he have to listen to US ALL OF THE GOD DAMNED TIME?

Bush is the biggest pussy in the history of mankind. The greater the invested power, the more pain you should be able to take. At least that how it works with REAL leaders. But not with Bush, oh no, he has to have his minions smear everybody for telling him the truth.

What a loser.

Dear Reverend,

Since when did a funeral become all about watching what one says in order not to offend someone who may be in attendance and making an appearance versus speaking out in celebration of the life led by the deceased? A celebration and remembrance offered by those that knew, loved, and valued the person and expressed through their eulogies. Eulogies that no doubt spoke of the purpose, meaning,values,opinions, and beliefs of the deceased loved one, no matter who they might offend.

These will be my final comments on this issue.

To the above 2 responders. Look at the 100+ comments on this blog. Bush bashing, Reagan bashing, comments on the Iraq war, wiretapping, etc. Why aren't there 100+ responses eulogizing a legend of the Civil Rights Era? Instead, it turned into partisan bickering between the extreme right and left.

In Ecclesiastes it talks about there being a time for everything. There is a time for criticizing the President. This was not one of those times. It is not as if President Carter and Rev. Lowery don't have the means and opportunities available to criticize Bush. I saw a segment on one of the 24-hour news programs recently in which Carter blasted Bush over the domestic spying scandal. That was the perfect venue to express such criticism and have his views broadcast to millions of people.

This situation saddens me as instead of celebrating Mrs. King's life, the airwaves and blogs are filled with debates about Rev. Lowery and Pres. Carter's comments. The funeral has become about them and not about Mrs. King's life.

To me, that is completely unacceptable. I think Rev. Lowery and Pres. Carter should apologize, NOT for their comments which, as I stated earlier I sympathize with, but the venue in which they chose to express them. It was improper and showed, to me, a true lack of class. I don't care whether Bush deserved it or not, the point is there is a time and place for everything. Taking the sacred and turning it political is wrong no matter which side is doing it. I've heard the argument made here and elsewhere that since Bush has prostituted the deaths of 9/11 for political gain, he's fair game for his opponents to do the same. All I can say is, two wrongs do not make a right. If anything, THAT is what Dr. King showed us in his life. If we truly want to honor his legacy and that of his wife, we would do well to learn from his example.

And I disagree Rev....because CSK's (and her spouses) legacy was one of speaking out no matter what the venue when they saw injustice occurring on any group of people. I feel that she would have welcomed the debate that is occurring here, because it shows the hypocrisy of those who say they actually give a damn about all the people CSK spent her life trying to right and injustice.

They should never apologize just because the truth hurts doesn't it and that is what CSK and her husband spent their entire life trying to expose.

Nice non response to my questions Rev.

Again, if not then, when?

Seeing as how her Daughter was one of those speakers, it seems that that gives a cue to the sensibilities of the family.

And you call the funeral sacred. What the hell is that supposed to mean, that people should prostrate themselves at the feet of the great dead lady?

I'm sorry, your concerns are misplaced, and your lesson is as wrong as can be.

Dead people don't really care what happens at their funerals, you know why don't you? Because they're dead.

Funerals are for the living, to celebrate what the deceased did, what the deceased stood for, what the deceased meant to them. And it's pretty clear that george w bush is not only none of those things, but the antithesis of them, and fully deserving of whatever mild criticisms he was forced to endure. The horror, the horror.

It's not Carter and Lowery's fault that Bush's policies coincide so perfectly with things that the Kings fought against. Or that Bush continues injustices that injured them. To not mention these things that were a big part of Mrs. King's mission would not do her memory justice.

Personally, I think Martin and Coretta were smiling down on the ceremony.

Dear Rev.

I know this post is over, but I'd like you to stay around a bit. And then again, I sort of wish you would leave....

You see, when pragmatic and thoughtful dialogue becomes part of the Democratic Base's foundation, then and only then, will they have a chance of making things happen, i.e. winning elections.

Your sound judgment and respectful presentation was extremely well done. (Of course, I disagree with your positions regarding the content of Lowery/Carter's position) but you eloquently spoke to the heart of the issue and did it much better than I.

There is a time and place for everything. The funeral was a time to cry, to laugh, to rejoice and to share the life of a person known to America as Coretta Scott King. Instead, some of it, not all, but some of it turned into a carnival of cheap palor/political tricks.

Thanks for you posting, but please go away. These people cannabalize themselves and you might help change that.

Hey carpe, go fuck yourself. It ain't your blog, you have no say, and what you do say is utterly vacuous and masturbatory for you, and you alone.

It looks like some of these people never heard a church elder preach peace and harmony. Hmmmm, what kind of Bible does their church use?

....and justice. My old priest, from the days I went to Catholic church, was very focused on justice. But then he's a consistant anti-war/anti-nuke demonstrator too, so maybe that's why I really admire him. And he runs a soup kitchen in Detroit. HE walks the talk.