Clinton's an idiot on this one

[kapkomet]

Yep, that explains all the shot comings of the soul-less pukes around here.

 

Allegedly.

 

[cwsox]

Hence, the world allegedly

 

touche mon ami!

 

[Kid Gleason]

Isn't Bill going to be speaking at the Adult Film awards soon though?

[EvilMonkey]

Just wondering if Bill and the Dems (sounds like a bad polka band!) are worried that the Republicans may turn that into a big, televised Republican political event, much like the Dems did with that one Senator's death (Minnesota, I think.). If I recall correctly, that was also taxpayer funded, although MN taxpayers, and the Republicans were shut out and pushed to the side.

[cwsox]

Just wondering if Bill and the Dems (sounds like a bad polka band!) are worried that the Republicans may turn that into a big, televised Republican political event, much like the Dems did with that one Senator's death (Minnesota, I think.).  If I recall correctly, that was also taxpayer funded, although MN taxpayers, and the Republicans were shut out and pushed to the side.

The funeral for Paul Wellstone (may he be eternally remembered) was not taxpayer funded.

 

It did indeed turn into a quasi political event as those attending the funeral so close to the election did want to keep Wellstone's Senate seat in his honor, which he would have won had he not died so tragically. Minnesota Republicans were shut of nothing with Wellstone's funeral.

 

 

The funeral services for a president and senator are very different. The state funeral for a president should be by definition bi or non partisan because the president was president of all the people. Certainly the incumbent is going to be most visible. As we have 2 living former Republican presidents and 2 living former Democratic presidents, they are the only people who know what is was that Reagan experienced and they should have visible roles in public mourning. [if I were planning the funeral, given there are 5, I'd let none speak, just be seated as lead mourners after the family. I'd have an eulogy by a family member and lessons read by family or close friends, Paul Laxalt comes to mind.) Certainly the family must be central as well. There is no question that Nancy Reagan adored her husband (and he her) and that needs to be recoignised.

 

The funeral sermon ought be delivered by a clergy, not a politician, not a president, and any capable clergy can deliever a loving affection tribute for the person and their accomplishments - without being partisan - while preaching the Gospel that the deceased believed in. (If a president were a non believer, then the sermon by the spokesperson of her/his predeath choice.) I could do a wonderful job preaching Reagan's sermon, not because I am so great, but because I am a capable clergy. (Actually I am very good, and I do great funerals.) Take 20 minutes to remember his family, his personality, his acts out of his political convictions for his country as public service an example for all, and preach comfort and Resurrection, and there you are.

 

The full trappings of a state funeral ought certainly be there. This man was a president. He deserves the honors at his funeral. Sing God of our Fathers (the National Hymn), My Country Tis of Thee, O Beautiful, a favorite hymn of Ronald or the family, me being me I'd toss in Lift Every Voice and Sing, and with choral selections from the military and the full panolpy of a state funeral and there you have it. That makes it a funeral for an American president and totally non political.

 

If this funeral turns political, there will be a backlash. Certainly Bush/Rove will try and spin it with Reaganesque comparisons to Bush post funeral. If the funeral itself is politicized, it will backfire. The non taxpayer funeral for Wellstone got quasi political and backlash happened. Time and place. Always rememeber time and place.

[IlliniBob72]

I don't understand how it could be said that this funeral is being made partisan. I have heard of four people speaking, Mulroney (the Canadian guy), Thatcher, and the two Bushes. Bush I was his VP, so it makes perfect sense that he would speak. Bush II is the current president. It would be ridiculous to think that the sitting president wouldn't speak about what Reagan meant to the country he is leader of. And last I heard, Thatcher and the Canuck are not Republicans.

 

Perhaps the better question is why would Clinton speak? Surely there are hundreds of people who were closer to Reagan than he. Someone stated they spoke regularly through Clinton's 8 years. Those conversations must have been doozies, considering Reagan was suffering from Alzheimer's through at least 6 of those years. Besides, I have to question Clinton's motives. Did he love the man so strongly that he can't imagine not being able to sing his praises, or does he want more camera time?

[EvilMonkey]

It did indeed turn into a quasi political event as those attending the funeral so close to the election did want to keep Wellstone's Senate seat in his honor, which he would have won had he not died so tragically.  Minnesota Republicans were shut of nothing with Wellstone's funeral.

They BOOED Trent Lott! At a funeral, THEY BOOED HIM! How is that QUASI political? When they showed the various politicians coming in to pay their respects, they put up 'applause' on the monitors when the Democrats came in, but not for the republicans. I heard reports that they put up 'Boo!' for them, but I haven't seen that anywhere other than in editorials. The TV coverage showed no Republicans, EXCEPT for Lott, while he was being booed. Hell, the Wellstone family also told the VP to stay home, his respects were not welcome.

 

As for funding, they used the arena at State funded U of Minnesota, so SOMEONE paid for that. Although you are correct, the Wellstone campaign paid for the bulk of the expenses. I misread that the first time thru.

 

As for the people speaking, I think for the most part it makes sense. His VP of 8 years, the current president, and 2 of his closest foreign allies. If Bill of Jimmy were to croak next week, would they want either of the Bush's there speaking? The current one, because he is, for the moment, the sitting President, would make sense, but not the elder Bush. Should he be offended if that occurs? I think Billy is just making a big stink because ANY air time he gets will only help his book. You just know that when his mug gets on camera, that one of the TV personalities will mention his book.

[cwsox]

They BOOED Trent Lott!  At a funeral, THEY BOOED HIM!  How is that QUASI political?  When they showed the various politicians coming in to pay their respects, they put up 'applause' on the monitors when the Democrats came in, but not for the republicans. I heard reports that they put up 'Boo!' for them, but I haven't seen that anywhere other than in editorials. The TV coverage showed no Republicans, EXCEPT for Lott, while he was being booed.  Hell, the Wellstone family also told the VP to stay home, his respects were not welcome.

 

As for funding, they used the arena at  State funded U of Minnesota, so SOMEONE paid for that.  Although you are correct, the Wellstone campaign paid for the bulk of the expenses.  I misread that the first time thru.

 

As for the people speaking, I think for the most part it makes sense.  His VP of 8 years, the current president, and 2 of his closest foreign allies.  If Bill of Jimmy were to croak next week, would they want either of the Bush's there speaking?  The current one, because he is, for the moment, the sitting President, would make sense, but not the elder Bush.  Should he be offended if that occurs?  I think Billy is just making a big stink because ANY air time he gets will only help his book.  You just know that when his mug gets on camera, that one of the TV personalities will mention his book.

first of all, the only source for saying Clinton was miffed as from Drudge, aka the Liar and Fantasy Report.

 

So it surely not true.

 

second, Lott Mr White Supremist was not welcome there, and that reaction could be expected. Frist would have been a better choice and his reaction would have been far different. Or send Sen Snowe. She would have been welcomed.

 

 

Your getting all excited is kind of silly when it is based on a Drudge report.

 

 

I have posted how I would have done it. What happens will happen since I am not doing it. If they politicise, there will be backlash.

 

 

Your crying about Clinton' book and your obliviousness to the a political takeover of a funeral amuses me. Clinton does not need this to publicise his book and that sounds like the rantings of a right wing radio host. Clinton already has the record on pre sales.

 

1992, Clinton elected, Reagan greeted Clinton warmly and the warmth the other way was obvious. It has been revealed in other posts and threads that a lot of folks do not understand the friendships that transcend politics. This cannot be made into an either/or situation. Real life and and the real relationships extend far beyond the partisan fray.

[Texsox]

The reason to have a Dem speak is all about celebrating a great American life, not a great Republican life. I think they should have had President Carter speak. IMHO Clinton swapped a blow job for these sorts of honors.

 

This was not a Reagan family funeral, this was America's funeral for a great man. All of America.

 

Make no mistake, politics transends everything in Washington. This is every major league ballpark in one. This is placing the most diehard Yankee and Red Sox fans in the same stadium for every game. The restaurants you go to are Dem or Rep. You have to be carefull what color car you buy. So to think that this wasn't planned under the backdrop of politics is niave.

 

CW, say what you will about the Drudge Report, but I use that as my portal for news links and after daily reading for 18 months, I have found only one mistake, and in that he linked to a local news channel that was reporting something as fact and it was not.

[kapkomet]

I have to disagree with you there, Tex, what about the da-da-da-da-dum.... KERRY AFFAIR with the intern? That turned out to be horse s*** and Drudge ran with it.

[Texsox]

I have to disagree with you there, Tex, what about the da-da-da-da-dum.... KERRY AFFAIR with the intern?  That turned out to be horse s*** and Drudge ran with it.

I believe that was a Drudge link. Maybe I view Drudge differently. I see his portal as a collection of hot links. I was specifically mentioning items that appear under his by-line. Wasn't the alledged Kerry affair a Washington Post or London Times link?

[IlliniBob72]

The reason to have a Dem speak is all about celebrating a great American life, not a great Republican life. I think they should have had President Carter speak. IMHO Clinton swapped a blow job for these sorts of honors.

 

This was not a Reagan family funeral, this was America's funeral for a great man. All of America.

 

Make no mistake, politics transends everything in Washington. This is every major league ballpark in one. This is placing the most diehard Yankee and Red Sox fans in the same stadium for every game. The restaurants you go to are Dem or Rep. You have to be carefull what color car you buy. So to think that this wasn't planned under the backdrop of politics is niave.

 

CW, say what you will about the Drudge Report, but I use that as my portal for news links and after daily reading for 18 months, I have found only one mistake, and in that he linked to a local news channel that was reporting something as fact and it was not.

Tex, it sounds like rather than a non-partisan funeral you want a bi-partisan funeral. There is a big difference. If a democrat were asked to speak to balance the "ticket", it would be anything but non-partisan.

 

And elsewhere in this thread the Wellstone service was called "quasi-politcal". That is laughable. And cw made reference to Trent Lott being a white supremecist. I guess Democratic Sen. Byrd of WV, a former member of the KKK, would have been booed as well? Lott was not booed because of any perceived racist philosophy.

[Texsox]

Tex, it sounds like rather than a non-partisan funeral you want a bi-partisan funeral. There is a big difference. If a democrat were asked to speak to balance the "ticket", it would be anything but non-partisan.

 

And elsewhere in this thread the Wellstone service was called "quasi-politcal". That is laughable. And cw made reference to Trent Lott being a white supremecist. I guess Democratic Sen. Byrd of WV, a former member of the KKK, would have been booed as well? Lott was not booed because of any perceived racist philosophy.

You're correct, I guess it would be bi-partisan. I do not think you could have made this a non-partisan event. If they wanted non-partisan, they should have stayed in California.

[cwsox]

Lott was not booed because of any perceived racist philosophy.

True. He was booed for actual racist philosophy.

[IlliniBob72]

True.  He was booed for actual racist philosophy.

You're kidding yourself if you believe that.

 

Lott's statement about Thurmond happened afterward and I highly doubt more than a handful of people present knew anything about Lott's lightly publicized racial statements before that.

[Reddy]

Conversely, we can always talk about the class showed as the Clinton's left the White House. Somebody should have gone to jail over that.

 

ya hear about the one with Cheney and Halliburton? Oh yeah that's not a big deal though... Whatta bout Rumsfeld and ordering the abuses? No that's not a big deal either... Oh yeah, Bush having his brother take away voting rights from democratic black people in florida... Nope... Man, you're right! Clinton really was a douche bag!

[Reddy]

You're kidding yourself if you believe that.

 

Lott's statement about Thurmond happened afterward and I highly doubt more than a handful of people present knew anything about Lott's lightly publicized racial statements before that.

are you seriously saying that Lott isnt racist? And are you seriously saying he does not have any racist beliefs? Cuz uh... that's not true...

[IlliniBob72]

are you seriously saying that Lott isnt racist?  And are you seriously saying he does not have any racist beliefs?  Cuz uh... that's not true...

Did I say that? No. I said they were lightly publicized before his remarks about Thurmond. That is not saying they don't exist. That being said, do I believe he meant that if Strom Thurmond had been elected president that we wouldn't have racial problems today? No, I don't. I think he was just trying to honor a guy who was turning 150 years old and said something thoughtless. And he said that in Dec. of 2002, while he was booed off the stage at the memorial service in Nov. of 2002.

 

But no, to help your comprehension, I did not say Lott doesn't have racist beliefs.

[cwsox]

And he said that in Dec. of 2002, while he was booed off the stage at the memorial service in Nov. of 2002.

 

But no, to help your comprehension, I did not say Lott doesn't have racist beliefs.

and he had spoken to white racist groups a number of times prior to Wellstone's death.

 

And some of us are old enough to remember Lott as the apologist dork smart ass punk supreme for criminality on the 1974 House Judiciary Committee and found his role in 1999 to be the height of hypocrasy.

 

And I suspect some in Minnesota remembered too.

 

And if that is your big issue of the day, wow. But if you agree that Lott has such beliefs, what is the point of this thread going on and on over this?

 

PS No one from Mississippi makes a harmless comment about the 1948 election, ever. And that is one reason I question the integrity of anyone whose presidential campaign's opening act was in Philadelphia, Mississippi.

[IlliniBob72]

And if that is your big issue of the day, wow.  But if you agree that Lott has such beliefs, what is the point of this thread going on and on over this? 

My big issue of the day? Hardly. No, my big issue of the day is getting construction work zone plans finished, and then grilling some burgers for the family. Trent Lott and some jamokes in Minnesota booing him off the stage really doesn't register. But if you believe that Lott was treated that way at what turned into a Democratic political rally because he had spoken to racist groups (I'll take your word on that) then you go right ahead. This thread has continued because I think that concept is a joke. I personally don't give a s*** about Trent Lott.