Bush bashing during King's funeral.

Gah... BH you should have this cat as y our avatar!!!


You know I am only teasing right?

The only reason Mrs. King funeral is now a Bush bashing issue is because the people in the audience were real people, not actors or hand pick Bush supporters.

Plus it Was a black funeral meaning that majority were black people, so now if somebody say anything derogatory then it most be racist.

People you are adult behave like one. I agree with BH, the personal Family Affairs of Mrs. King and her husband should not be an issue.

That was a sad comment.

Originally posted by LostSailor
Gah... BH you should have this cat as y our avatar!!!

You're probably right!

Hey, I love to debate and if it's in PTS, I tend to let the claws out a bit. But mostly when someone is making assumptions or being what I perceive to be closed-minded. But I don't call people names, or hold a grudge and the claws never draw blood.

Let's face it. People here are offended because someone said something bad about Bush. (Fortunately, they're not burning buildings about it, and for that I am grateful!) It doesn't matter WHERE it happens, Bush supporters don't like it and that's totally understandable!

What I'm trying to say here is that IF Coretta had supported this war against terror and IF it had been mentioned during her funeral that "the fight she supported against the radicals of the world goes on" or some such emotional verbiage, the very people who are 'offended' now, because it was 'inappropriate', would be praising the events of the funeral, saying that it was what she would have wanted.

Now, you tell me, who's using this funeral as a political gamepiece?

I trust the people who knew her for many years and planned her funeral and I trust this Reverend (who is obviously very connected in the black community) enough to know what she would have wanted more than a bunch of white conservative, bush supporters.

Don't you?

I watched the whole homegoing celebration on cspan and I don't think there was Bush bashing. Carter's speech was the most politically motivated, but Mrs. King was a political figure. All he used was truth...Dr. King was wiretapped. Corretta King did oppose war--all violence in every form--as did her husband. They also showed a video of her life and work and in her own words she said that non-violence is the only way to affect change toward freedom--in Afghanistan, Iraq....anywhere folk are not free. Is this also Bush bashing? No. It is just a different idea, but now-a-days we can't accept the free flow of ideas. I also would like to say that none of it was done in a tacky way. They were talking about the woman and her politics and her life.

As for the comments about the poor. They didn't just say "poor blacks" -- they talked about the poor of the world -- all poor people and Mrs. Corretta spent her life working as an advocate for poor people around the world and many don't know that she's been speaking since her husband died for peace and an end to poverty the world over.

I like how people can take a piece of something without context and get all blown up and offended. I thought it was a wonderful tribute to her life and even G-Dub came off smelling like a rose to me as he talked about her faith and commitment and sacrifices. He got a long standing ovation as well from the "mostly black crowd"...there was no disrespect toward him or his father--at all.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
. But mostly when someone is making assumptions or being what I perceive to be closed-minded. But I don't call people names, or hold a grudge and the claws never draw blood.

You are the less closed minded person I have seen in these boards BH.

They only reason you are a target is because you do not agree with . . .You know. . . Some so if you disagree with the ruling class now in power then you are called many words and none of them very attractive.

I have gotten so used to it I even miss the bashing when it doesn't happen.

Insert applause for BH....

While I have a hard time swallowing the fact that a funeral is a good place to play politics, you make the ultimate point. What do a bunch of white, conservative, Bush supporters know about what should be said at a funeral for someone drastically opposite on the political spectrum? We can only assume, judging from the crowds reaction, that this is what they wanted to hear. The thought process of a speaker is all relative, and none of us (short of those invited) have any frame of reference. We can speculate all we want, but the crowd showed us all where they stand.

Originally posted by marg6043
Family Affairs of Mrs. King and her husband should not be an issue.

That was a sad comment.

Please, oh, please marg. Tell us how it wouldn't be any different if it was (God forbid) Bush's. Everyone here knows that that senile old fool Carter would bash him there as well.

Plus, I noticed that you got caught by DBates making up facts and statistics again.

[edit on 2/8/2006 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by loam
To oppose the war is to lack class???

:shk: Amazing.

No. What is amazing is that people don't understand
what a funeral is for. It's for remembering the person
who died, for comforting those family and friends left
behind, and for worshipping what ever God those
people find comfort in worshipping.

So frankly ... I find it :shk: and also amazing (to quote you)
that people were rude enough, and egocentric enough, and
classless enough to pull the stunts that they did.

No Jesse Jackson ... no Al Sharpton .. the funeral wasn't
about YOU ... it was supposed to be about HER!

Jackson is supposed to be a minister of some sort.
You'd think he'd know better. But of course, he's
a media hog FIRST and a minister second (or third -
behind shakedown artist).

:shk: Amazing

Originally posted by centurion1211

Plus, I noticed that you got caught by DBates making up facts and statistics again.

[edit on 2/8/2006 by centurion1211]

And so did he.

What happened at that funeral was an ambush....this fake Reverand Joseph Lowery is nothing but a Black Raciest and Jimmy Carter shamed himself once again....what was even worse was watching the Black Raciests stand up and applaud these POS's....have these people no shame?

Im not impressed with Coretta Scott King. She has done NOTHING to advanced her great husbands struggle...all she did was try to cash in on it as much as possible.

I felt so sorry for our good President, to have to sit there with these Morons and Black Raciests as they attacked him was heart-breaking.

Maximu§

Originally posted by Bout Time
I'll address your flawed math in a moment, but does anyone else take the above as somewhat rascist.....with that usage of THEY & what THEY wanted to hear? You from the South, D?

Hey bout time.

You actually title one of your threads "White Christian Males" and then "ask" (as in accuse) if dbates is from the South, then procede to bash away. Then if someone questions one of your assertions, you whip out the race card. Look up hypocrite in the dictionary and your picture (your real picture) has got to be there next to the word. Have enough cojones to be able to discuss or bash without hiding behind your race.

Well let me re-phrase that in the form of a question:
"She was also a woman whose husband cheated on her. That should have been brought up, as well as at Hillary's funeral when she croaks, right?"

I trust the people who knew her for many years and planned her funeral and I trust this Reverend (who is obviously very connected in the black community) enough to know what she would have wanted more than a bunch of white conservative, bush supporters.

You have no way of knowing this. Even if they did know, you cannot guarantee that they followed her wishes. The fact that they used it as a political bully pulpit shows their lack of character, and it's pretty obvious that they weren't going to pass up an opportunity to inject their own politics into their eulogies. And it's a bit of a racist statement on your part, btw.

What I'm trying to say here is that IF Coretta had supported this war against terror and IF it had been mentioned during her funeral that "the fight she supported against the radicals of the world goes on" or some such emotional verbiage, the very people who are 'offended' now, because it was 'inappropriate', would be praising the events of the funeral, saying that it was what she would have wanted.

Now, you tell me, who's using this funeral as a political gamepiece?

That's right, because there are always at least two ways to say something. One way is divisive and callow, the other is tactful and brings people together. Now which way do you think the Kings would have preferred: division or inclusion?

And the way it stands, Lowery and Carter used it as a political gamepiece.

from marg The only reason Mrs. King funeral is now a Bush bashing issue is because the people in the audience were real people, not actors or hand pick Bush supporters.

"Real people"? Only Bush-bashers are "real people"? All Bush supporters are "actors"? Now that is a sad, divisive statement.

People you are adult behave like one. I agree with BH, the personal Family Affairs of Mrs. King and her husband should not be an issue.

Why not? Where should we draw the line? You're all glad-happy when someone is attacking the president, but when the tables are turned, all of a sudden you're oh so pious!

FYI, I don't believe that her husband's infidelity should be brought up at her funeral. I only said it to illustrate a point, but obviously you and BH can only agree when you're on the attack.

I've said it before - a funeral is a place where a person's life should be celebrated, and warm memories invoked. You think it's a place to put forth political statements. It must be a difference in cultures, I guess.

Originally posted by LA_Maximus
I felt so sorry for our good President, to have to sit there with these Morons and Black Raciests as they attacked him was heart-breaking.

Maximu§

Since when our elected president only caters to one particular race in this country.

I think you comment is very racist indeed.

Originally posted by Saphronia
Dr. King was wiretapped.

Yes. And the reason was ... because he had known
communists working with him with his civil rights cause.

google it up.

And there are massive records on the man that the
State Department refused to release to the public. Even
when some senators demanded to see them before making
a public holiday of Martin Luther King ... the records remained
sealed.

You'd think that before a national holiday honoring someone
was created that ALL the facts about that person and his/her
practices would be made public so that a well informed decision
could be made. It wasn't.

Of couse... there are probably records about his plagerism to
get his 'Dr' title ... the fact that his name was never legally
changed to 'Martin Luther King', the many adultries he got
himself into - including the one with the four white hookers
(one that he beat up) the night before he died, and then there
are those pesky communists that he kept hiring to help
him with his work.

YES he was wire tapped. Considering we were entering
the Cold War and considering he was working closely with
known communists ... the wiretaps were necessary.

[edit on 2/8/2006 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by marg6043

Originally posted by centurion1211

Plus, I noticed that you got caught by DBates making up facts and statistics again.

[edit on 2/8/2006 by centurion1211]

And so did he.

Actually he didn't. But this was just another example of many where people have questioned the sources of your "information". What was it you said in a recent post - something like - if you said it that's all the proof anyone needs.

Meaning of SCHOLAR
Pronunciation: 'skâlur

WordNet Dictionary

Definition: [n] someone (especially a child) who learns (as from a teacher) or takes up knowledge or beliefs
[n] a learned person (especially in the humanities); someone who by long study has gained mastery in one or more disciplines
[n] a student who holds a scholarship

FlyersFan

The wiretapping was not necessary for Mr. King they went ahead and have him executed.

No wonder the tapes were never released, they were kipping tags on him to make sure when was the best time to do the deed and take the problem away.

Out of side out of mind, but that didn't work well he became a martyr.

Centurion you need a good cup of coffee you are rambling now.

[edit on 8-2-2006 by marg6043]

Originally posted by dbates

"They" refers to the liberal democratic crowd on hand, and yes I am in the South. I never brought up race one time, but if you want to spin it that way, go ahead. Right back at you with your thoughts that only black people are poor.

But D, neither I nor the Reverend ever said "poor blacks" - you're the only injecting that presumption, along with the further one of "Blacks in the crowd = Liberal Democrats".

Hot damn son, where's that big Ole GOP tent we all is suppose to fit unda!?

I was addressing the fact that Lowery claims that the poor don't get a dollar more. It's "hogwash" (See, I'm southern) You can try diverting the topic into how much other nations spend on defense, or "Tax cuts for the rich" (As if the poor are being taxed) but it doesn't change the fact the the poor are getting large amounts of money. I'm not comparing apples to oranges. I'm comparing dollars to dollars. As a nation the United States spends much, much more on social programs than defense. It's not spending that's preventing the poor from getting help. Maybe the existing programs are bloated government monsters that do more to help the politicians than the poor.

Lowry's comment was a sham and you know it.

I'm teasing you D.....my Daddy is from further South than yours, even though I'm a damn Yankee.
The absolute dollars are big - but what does it translate out to? For example, let's say a couple makes $100K/yr. That's a good income, right? But they have 10 kids - a mortgage - food bill...life in general. Is that still a good income?
Ab dollars again, the US spent $466B on defense in 2004......the REST OF THE WORLD spent $500B. Global Defense Spending
THe "real" focus when you say "Social Programs" is what exactly? Education? EPA mandates? Social Security which is paid by us & not part of the tax haul by the Feds? Seperate the wheat from the chafe = Do we spend more to feed the poor than on defense?
I agree completely on the mismanagement - a real MBA president is needed to apply a business solution to things & gut bloat. But gutting complete programs as opposed to remodeling for efficency is where we part opinion & what I feel Lowery was on about.
Again, Lowery is guilty of flipping a phrase as slickly as any other pastor, but not of misstating the real dollar effect on the ( he didn't state a color) poor.

Originally posted by Saphronia
Carter's speech was the most politically motivated, but Mrs. King was a political figure.

Yes, he was political. Why bring Katrina into this funeral?

All he used was truth...Dr. King was wiretapped.

By Bobby Kennedy, btw.

Corretta King did oppose war--all violence in every form--as did her husband. They also showed a video of her life and work and in her own words she said that non-violence is the only way to affect change toward freedom--in Afghanistan, Iraq....anywhere folk are not free.

Exactly my point. Mrs. King would have spoken about non-violent solutions, had she been speaking there. Not WMDs. That's what made it political.

They were talking about the woman and her politics and her life.

No, they were bringing their own politics into the funeral.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
What is amazing is that people don't understand
what a funeral is for.

But you know, regardless of whose funeral it is and what arrangements have been made before hand, what a funeral is for... They should have hired you to arrange her funeral, then, I guess.

Regardless of whether or not, on her sick bed, she whispered to the Reverend, "I want you to speak at my funeral. And Reverend Jo, if Bush is there, I want you to stick it to 'im! Stick it to him good for me."

No, FlyersFan knows better what Mrs. Martin Luther King would want at her funeral? I'm sure you're really in touch with her desires.

Uh... I won't be invitin' you to my funeral either.

Originally posted by jsobecky
And it's a bit of a racist statement on your part, btw.

Yeah. I'm the racist one here. Riiiight!

but obviously you and BH can only agree when you're on the attack.

Marg and I agree 99% of the time! And I'm not attacking anyone. If you feel attacked, perhaps you'd benefit from looking at your position.

I've said it before - a funeral is a place where a person's life should be celebrated, and warm memories invoked.

So, you AND FlyersFan both know what funerals are for. Everyone's funerals. :shk:

We DON'T know what she wanted but you're all assuming that she didn't ask specifically for exactly what she got. You're all assuming she didn't write the speeches herself. She was OLD, she knew she was dying, don't you think she made a few arrangements?

Don't you think her dear friends respect her enough not to USE her freakin' funeral as a political pulpit for their own gain?

No, of course you don't. You all know better.

Originally posted by marg6043

Originally posted by LA_Maximus
I felt so sorry for our good President, to have to sit there with these Morons and Black Raciests as they attacked him was heart-breaking.

Maximu§

Since when our elected president only caters to one particular race in this country.

I think you comment is very racist indeed.

No, this is a racist statement:

from BH I trust the people who knew her for many years and planned her funeral and I trust this Reverend (who is obviously very connected in the black community) enough to know what she would have wanted more than a bunch of white conservative, bush supporters

Or can't you see the similarities? And, the hypocrisy of your statement?