A funeral tunred into a political rally

Sorry, that should be MIN. c.i.

My take on it is what would you expect? Paul Wellstone's life was about politics. He fought tooth and nail to maintain a liberal democrat presence in the government. Why wouldn't a commemoration of his life call for a continuation of that?

Well, I'm not a Democrat (heck, I'm not anything! lol) but I think the complaint was that the event was organized as a "Memorial Service", people from all political parties were invited and statewide air-time was donated by the TV and Radio stations.

I don't think there would have been much stink if they had stuck to Wellstone's accomplishments and discussing HIM but spending an hour of the 3 hour event encouraging people to vote for the candidate that succeeds him (and others not even in his district) crosses that line between a "Memorial Service" and a campaign stop and quite possibly raises some legal issues concerning the use of air-time for political purposes.

I never considered Wellstone as someone who stood for luring people to an event for under false pretenses. That sort of conflicts with the first two hours worth of speeches about his integrity and honesty.

Surely the only folks who really have any valid cause to bemoan events are either the surviving family, or anyone who came to pay respects (sincerely) and was made unwelcome. It is election season, and it is a tight contest in that state, so rather a lot of noise is being made by (guess who). It's spin, not sin.

I had been hearing different reactions to the service, but I think that you bring up the most salient point!

ci

You might find this balanced....
http://slate.msn.com/default.aspx?id=2073261

fishin', again, what did you or anyone else expect? The people who die in the midst of an all-encompassing fight are honored by promises to continue that fight. That is comforting to the survivors, and helps them comes to terms with the loss.

I eulogized my grandmother by noting that her kindness and generosity would live on in us; that, for example, I would continue her tradition of sending actual physical cards to everyone I knew on their birthdays. If there were some specific event that she was known for that occurred shortly after the funeral -- if there were an annual hunger drive that she always contributed to, say, I would haved called on the mourners to honor her by donating record-breaking amounts of food.

If stations had not wanted to contribute their air time, well, fine. But they shouldn't have been surprised, and it is not a sin, as blatham says, for the organizers to hold a service in keeping with the spirit of the man they were honoring.

Soz - I suspect that Ronald Reagan wil pass away during the next few years. Do you think Wellstone's supporters will hold their tongues if during the nationally televised services that follow, Bush gets up on a podium and announces that everyone in the country should "Vote Republican" and re-elect him to follow along with Reagan's vision?

That is EXACTLY what happened with Wellstone's Memorial service. An announced non-political gathering was turned into a completely political event and the people who did it knew full well that invited guests in the audience were members of opposing political parties. It may or may not be a sin but it IS both tacky and crass and it violates all of the protocols for paying respect to a recently deceased national leader.

If Ronald Reagan had died 11 days short of the 1984 presidential elections, yes, that's exactly what I would have expected to happen.

Isn't politics inherently a bit crass? I fully expect politicians to both attempt to gain political capital from any and every happenstance as well as cry foul when the other side does it (which is really the same thing).

Doesn't mean I condone it and yes there are rare situations where a reprieve is called on both sides (like the 9/11 anniversary) but I am not suprised at this.

One side says the other uses war for political capital, the other side uses this accusation to take another pot shot and repeat the words that started the mess in the first place.

Republicans will use the percieved distasteful behavior to their benefit just as said behavior was used for Democratic benefit.

Memorial Services/Funerals have traditionally been "off limits" events for political pandering as a matter of protocol. Even waring Armies call truces to retrieve their dead. That tradition is now gone so yes, I fully expect that in the future we can expect more of this silliness from all sides.

Off limits in the sense that it is genarally counterproductive. If crass enough it can easily backfire.

To take this out of the realm of politics:

When Wendy's founder died they hadn't planned to use it in advertising but when polls showed that people wouldn't mind they did.

Hey, hey, fishin', ya didn't answer my question...

If Ronald Reagan had died in an airline crash 11 days before the 1984 (or 1980) elections, do you really think there wouldn't have been any "Vote Republican/ Do it for Ronnie/ We will carry on his legacy" rhetoric?

By the way, this memorial service was held in a stadium. We're not talking graveside eulogies here.

hey, hey soz! You didn't answer mine! You changed it around! lol

"We will carry on his legacy" is one thing (and a statment of what the speaker will do.) Urging others to act in a purely partisan manner on behalf of the dead is another level. People who urged others at the death of MLK urged people to carry on his fight for justice and equality and no one balked because the request was non-partisan.

Where the event was held is irrelevant. If they wanted to hold a campaign rally in his memory then that is how they should have announced it. They defrauded the local media outlets and deceived their own invited guests.

But MLK wasn't up for election... there's a specific aspect of Paul's legacy at stake right now, and a specific action that people can take to carry on that legacy.

(Unseemly aside... SO fun to have an actual political debate without trollage...)

Relax...it's just politics. Despite the billing of the event as a memorial service, it's not a given that it would be a solemn religious tribute. The sons were the most overtly political -- that's their privilege and could have been their Dad's wishes. I think it is making a mountain out of a mole hill and the opposition is using it for political purposes. Two wrongs don't make it a right. Politicians are shameless by their nature.
They only seem to become humble when they're caught -- some are perceived even than as not humble enough. As if these aren't character behaviours that are in all of us -- they're just magnified when blown up by the media.

True, MLK wasn't up for election. But he was still a political lightning rod at the time of his death and had specific causes he was pushing. The point is that the comments made at the memorial services were entirely non-partisan.

But claiming the "anyone would have done it" is putting blinders on. There were specificly invited guests in the audience from opposing political parties. When was the last time you saw an invited guest boo'd at a memorial service?

You asked earlier "what did you or anyone else expect?".

I expected an event with dignified speakers praising Wellstone for his work and encouraging people to pick up the flag on ISSUES. That is the purpose of a memorial service. Wellstone himself often bucked the Democratic party. What was said intstead was to vote for a Democrat. Any Democrat, regardless of that Democrat's beliefs, just because they are a Democrat. In effect, don't vote for the person that carries on Wellstone's beliefs, vote for the person that is registered in his party - even if the opponent happens to be the one that shares in Wellstone's beliefs.

As for what others expected, well.. apparently even Wellstone's own campaign manager didn't expect what happened and he has publicly apologized for it. TV and Radio staitons across MN were flooded with calls from disgusted listners and the event has been roundly critized in the press since then. Those who see nothing wrong with happened appear to be a pretty small minority.

OK, now is probably a good time to say I didn't see the service, just read about it. I didn't know that anyone was booed... that does take it into a different realm. I know that Cheney was discouraged from coming, which I understand, actually. I still think that there is a definite place for rallying cries and spirited imprecations in his service, because, again, politics was so much of what he was about, and after all why so many people were there. If he'd stayed a professor, his service would have had a much different tenor.

I brought up the "anyone would have done it" thing in response to your suggestion that Republicans wouldn't do such a thing. I think they would. Does that make it right in and of itself? No.

Meanwhile, it sounds like things kind of took off on their own if it was the sons who had some of the most impassioned rhetoric, and the campaign manager didn't expect it and apologized. That doesn't look like callow political maneuvering.

I don't believe it was preplanned by the DNC or anything as some have suggested. Those charges are just over the top. It was still crass and tacky though.