Nauseating Ted Kennedy Tribute of the Day
Courtesy of the L.A. Times. Who else?
In assessing the legacy of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, most eulogies have begun by celebrating his legislative achievements, which have touched virtually every American. He is routinely — and rightly — placed among the greatest senators who ever lived. Others have pointed to his less tangible contributions to the nation — that as his brothers’ heir, he kept the Kennedys’ progressive flame lit and continued to carry the torch for the least powerful among us.
. . . .
What we loved and admired in him, what we hope for ourselves and our country, is his sense of moral largeness, his unbounded capacity to care, not because he was a saint but because he wasn’t. By challenging us as he challenged himself, and reminding us where we fall short, Kennedy shames us, a gift that, one suspects, will linger in the national soul.
Oh yeah he said that. A guy who got liquored up, drunkenly drove a car off a bridge, left his female companion to die, and told authorities about all this . . . oh, about ten fucking hours later — you know, once his blood alcohol level was safely back around zero — what a morally large fellow he was!
Excuse me while I puke.
P.S. You do know that Harry Reid said today of Ted Kennedy’s death: “it’s going to help us” on ObamaCare.
You do know that, don’t you?
I don’t think I need to comment on the wholly uninappropriate “large” commentary regarding his “non-saintedness.” Perhaps some of the folks who were made part of a Senator sandwich could comment.
I never thought that the Left would go so far over the top in overreaching. But they sure have.
They will simply say that, since his second marriage, EMK has been a saint. Well… Michael Jackson has great adulation, too.
I would like to see the bullet points from the Left about what made this fellow such a fantastical person—and I think that they need to include the negative things too.
Just like they insisted regarding Nixon.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 8/31/2009 @ 12:04 amI did note that Gabler is working on a biography for the Conscience of America. So I guess his mash note to the memory of the man is completely altruistic.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 8/31/2009 @ 12:07 amReally all anyone needs to know about Teddy is that the diver that retrieved her body said Mary Jo was probably alive for two hours before she ran out of air.
And I’m pretty sure her last words weren’t “Save yourself, Ted!”
Kevin Murphy (3c3db0) — 8/31/2009 @ 12:12 amIn mostly his own words:
Kevin Murphy (3c3db0) — 8/31/2009 @ 12:23 am“He is routinely — and rightly — placed among the greatest senators who ever lived.”
I rate him slightly below John C. Calhoun
Dave Surls (029226) — 8/31/2009 @ 12:24 amKennedy shames us, a gift that, one suspects, will linger in the national soul.
He should shame you, Neal Gabler. But not in the way you’d like or prefer.
The lesson you need to learn is that the “progressive” sentiments of people like Kennedy are hollow, shallow and actually counterfeit. So if there’s anything he should shame you about, it’s that you and other true believers of the left admire one another, all clinging to the notion that your liberalism — and its promotion thereof — makes you such wonderful human beings, certainly better than your ideological opposites.
Reason.com:
A 2002 poll found that those who thought government “was spending too much money on welfare” were significantly more likely than those who wanted increased spending on welfare to give directions to someone on the street, return extra change to a cashier, or give food and/or money to a homeless person.
[Researcher Albert C.] Brooks finds that households with a conservative at the helm gave an average of 30 percent more money to charity in 2000 than liberal households (a difference of $1,600 to $1,227). The difference isn’t explained by income differential — in fact, liberal households make about 6 percent more per year. Poor, rich, and middle class conservatives all gave more than their liberal counterparts.
The people who give the least are the young, especially young liberals. Brooks writes that “young liberals — perhaps the most vocally dissatisfied political constituency in America today — are one of the least generous demographic groups out there. In 2004, self-described liberals younger than thirty belonged to one-third fewer organizations in their communities than young conservatives. In 2002, they were 12 percent less likely to give money to charities, and one-third less likely to give blood.”
Liberals, he says, give less than conservatives because of religion, attitudes about government, structure of families, and earned income. The families point is driven home by other results from Brooks. He writes that young liberals are less likely do nice things for their nearest and dearest, too. Compared with young conservatives, “a lower percentage said they would prefer to suffer than let a loved one suffer, that they are not happy unless the loved one is happy, or that they would sacrifice their own wishes for those they love.”
Mark (411533) — 8/31/2009 @ 12:27 amI have come to realize that it isn’t just Edward M. Kennedy that is being memorialized, it is the whole notion of Kennedyness that seems to finally have died this week. Let’s face it, the days when the Kennedys served as royalty in this country are over. No longer do they have the family wealth to purchase public office or the hold on the imagination to inherit public office as previous generations have done.
The whole fiasco with Caroline (Kennedy) Schlossberg in New York was proof positive of that. She and her late brother were the bright lights of that generation of Kennedys, and she turns out to be an inarticulate dilettante and he, though potentially formidable in politics, was a reckless airhead. The rest of the brood is a motley collection of reformed junkies, serial philanderers, spoiled rich kids, and pompous, vain nitwits. The family is strictly a minor league operation now. So when the great lamentations are uttered for Teddy they are really being offered for a brand of self-regarding 1960s liberalism that finally has expired (Barack Obama notwithstanding) long past its sell by date.
JVW (d1215a) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:10 amIt was worse than your description. Teddy went back to his hotel room and made a noise complaint that would have established a potential alibi. The Kennedys, in their usual conceal the facts mode, were ready to deny the whole thing. It’s what they do.
arch (6ebeba) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:51 amNot that I was any great fan of that whole family to begin with, but any remaining goodwill went out the window when they pushed that little kid in front of the world to pray for socialized medicine.
Jim Treacher (796deb) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:34 amOh yeah he said that. A guy who got liquored up, drunkenly drove a car off a bridge, left his female companion to die, and told authorities about all this . . . oh, about ten fucking hours later — you know, once his blood alcohol level was safely back around zero — what a morally large fellow he was! Excuse me while I puke!
The conservative obsession over an incident that occurred over 40 years ago is fast becoming shrill— and comical. Ted’s dead. And he’s buried. Americans in general and the citizens of Massachusetts in particular who kept re-electing him to office knew EMK’s failings, and those of the authorities in Massachusetts who dropped the ball and did not properly prosecute the putz back in ’69. You can still boycott German beers and Japanese cars, too.
God will judge Teddy. If he’s following a ‘Twilight Zone’ analogy from another thread, Teddy has driven off that bridge 5 or 6 times by now and has an eternity to relive it over and over in the after life, complete with an eternal hangover.
“…there is always inequity in life. Some men are killed in a war and some men are wounded, and some men never leave the country, and some men are stationed in the Antarctic and some are stationed in San Francisco. It’s very hard in the military or personal life to assure complete equality. Life is unfair.” – President John F. Kennedy, assassinated brother of Edward Kennedy, 3/21/62.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 8/31/2009 @ 4:05 amI rank him below Algonquin J. Calhoun.
Dr. Carlo Lombardi (aa0266) — 8/31/2009 @ 4:36 amThat did show the class of the Kennedys did it not? The grandchild of the senator begging God to aid Obama.
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (57cae1) — 8/31/2009 @ 5:34 amAlong the same lines as others above, I’ve seen several mentions that he was a veteran, having served as an MP in Paris during a 2-year Army stint, but there is little mention of why he enlisted. Of course, the irony that he was a military policeman, given the cause of his joining and the events with Mary Jo, is vast.
jim2 (6482d8) — 8/31/2009 @ 5:37 amKennedys shame us … all of them. Mostly cause of how trashy they are. A gutter trash American family. Ick.
Kennedys are a lot why they hate us, really. Corpulent trashy perverted drug addicts.
happyfeet (6b707a) — 8/31/2009 @ 6:36 amIf the dems had a better argument for passing their health insurance takeover scam, they would let us know what it was. They are desperate for that enormous amount of power over all of our lives, and are clawing wildly. People dislike Ted. Idiots might think he’s special for some undefinable reason, but those aren’t the people the democrats need to pick up support from.
I think it’s hilarious that they are voluntarily defining their brand as crooked slob asshole killer.
Juan (bd4b30) — 8/31/2009 @ 7:17 amNo longer do they have the family wealt
Make no mistake – the family still has wealth in the billions at this time. Remember that they sold the Merchandise Mart a little more than than a decade ago, during the height of the economic cycle:
http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/money/1998/01/27/1998-01-27_kennedys_ride_boom__sell_mer.htm
Evil Joe Sr. of course bought the Mart at the heights of the Great Depression for a song – so most of the purchase price was nothing but pure profit for the family, not to mention almost 100 year’s worth of high rent fees for one of the largest commercial buldings in the US (still). So while their direct influence on the political scene is greatly diminished, the power of their purse strings most definitely are not.
Dmac (e6d1c2) — 8/31/2009 @ 7:18 amCouldn’t have stated your last line any better, Juan. As we’ve discussed previously, if the Dems think that renaming their monstrosity under the great man’s moniker will help them pass it, by all means let us not discourage them. Nothing would make it go down the toilet faster than that action, and what a fitting legacy that would turn out to be.
Dmac (e6d1c2) — 8/31/2009 @ 7:21 amAnd don’t forget that while the personal, direct wealth of individual Kennedy’s might be “small” (only in the millions), they have access to trust funds and other tax dodges that are worth many times more.
They were always the master of hiding money from the tax-man.
Scott Jacobs (445f98) — 8/31/2009 @ 7:28 amMake lists of people who are publically idolizing Sen. Chappaquiddick. Make them lose their jobs in 2010 and 2012, if not sooner.
PCD (02f8c1) — 8/31/2009 @ 7:35 amThis dead Kennedy-gasm was a lot different than mounting an argument for dirty socialist health care at a time the dirty socialist couldn’t afford to not be getting any traction. That must be why the New York Times is demanding that Harry and Nancy ram Barack’s health care scheme through Congress without any pretense of debate.
The dead fat pervert is just a distraction to keep the effective criticisms that have been killing Obamacare from getting any further attention for a few news cycles.
happyfeet (6b707a) — 8/31/2009 @ 7:43 amJim2 : Interesting tidbit re Teddy’s military service. He originally enlisted for four years but Joe Sr. pulled some political strings and his period of service was reduced to two years. At a time when every private could expect to make PFC in eight months, Teddy went in a private and came out a private. No promotion?
Longwalker (996c34) — 8/31/2009 @ 7:54 amWell, there’s that guy who kept cash in his freezer. He might be greater.
This article is ridiculous–JFK’s progressive flame? He was more Reagan than Teddy.
Patricia (7aaa75) — 8/31/2009 @ 8:07 amTreach lurvs some Kennedy.
JD (a8fb17) — 8/31/2009 @ 8:19 am[…] Last of the Brothers of Camelot: Edward Kennedy, Rest in Peace Patterico’s Pontifications: Nauseating Ted Kennedy Tribute of the Day and Pelosi: Ted Kennedy Died? Great! That Ought to Help Us Pass Health Care! and The Tedward […]
Yin-Yang Commentaries, Sen. Ted Kennedy’s Gravesite, and Widow Vicki Filling Ted’s Senate Seat (video) « Frugal Café Blog Zone (a66042) — 8/31/2009 @ 9:03 amGag me with a spoon! Valley “guy” Gabler gushes all over the dead senator who came in only slightly behind Senator Jubilation T. Cornpone in the ranks of “greatest Senatuhs “evah”!”
I’ll concede that Teddy Kennedy did do some good things as a US Senator; he was for transportation deregulation in the 1970’s–worked with Dubya on No Child Left Behind etc.
But mostly he was what one might call down in Texas a crummy little piss ant. He contributed the destructive “Borking” politics to judicial confirmations, he drank his way through entire distilleries; he screwed and abused his way through legions of women, killing at least one along the way. I won’t speak ill of the dead–I figure God can settle his own scores with Teddy at the Pearly Gates.
Mike Myers (674050) — 8/31/2009 @ 9:07 amnot because he was a saint but because he wasn’t
And thus are all his sins and crimes forgiven.
tim maguire (4a98f0) — 8/31/2009 @ 9:19 amHarry Reid: Teddy’s death is “going to help us” pass Obamacare.
Let no crisis politically useful death go to waste.
KingShamus (fb8597) — 8/31/2009 @ 9:28 amAs the child of someone who teaches, that is not an act that is in his favor.
NCLB was one of the worst things to happen to schools in ages.
Scott Jacobs (218307) — 8/31/2009 @ 9:28 amTed Kennedy is dead and, as far as I am concerned, his sins are a matter between him and his maker. My issue is with the goofy leftists who choose him as “the greatest senator ever” when they probably could not name one from the 19th century. Gabler is one of the bits of evidence of the decline of USC into leftist blather. I got a good education there 50 years ago even if their engineering department was weak. I don’t know if that is possible anymore.
Mike K (2cf494) — 8/31/2009 @ 9:29 am“Filed Under: ……. Scum.
I have much more regard for the average scum.
GM Roper (85dcd7) — 8/31/2009 @ 9:43 amAndrew Breitbart has a column at the Washington Times on the media’s “deification” of Kennedy and Michael Jackson:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/aug/31/the-end-to-two-grim-fairy-tales/comments/
Bubba Maximus (456175) — 8/31/2009 @ 10:00 amOops! The link above to goes to reader comments on Breitbart’s column. Here’s the actual column:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/aug/31/the-end-to-two-grim-fairy-tales/?feat=home_headlines
Bubba Maximus (456175) — 8/31/2009 @ 10:04 amGee, he got some kind of honor guard detail in Paris. Not that I have anything against people serving on honor guard, but it sounds a bit too much like what you’d expect him to get.
I’m glad he served anyway. It’s important to show our boys that it’s a good thing to do, even if a few people sham while doing it.
Juan (bd4b30) — 8/31/2009 @ 10:13 amThe link isn’t working on the hill for me.
G (58c282) — 8/31/2009 @ 10:16 amI don’t want to speak ill of the dead, but this constant lionizing (no pun intended) of Kennedy is ridiculous. The waitress sandwich with Chris Dodd was enough to convince me that Kennedy was nothing but a dirty old man who took advantage of others who were not in a position to resist.
rochf (ae9c58) — 8/31/2009 @ 10:22 amSupercache strikes again.
Phil Smith (1cf25d) — 8/31/2009 @ 10:37 amWell, the real-life inspiration for Senator Bluto Blutarsky (from the last scenes of Animal House) is gone. I loved how Ann Coulter commented once that she’d cheerfully blow a chance at a Supreme Court seat so she “could yell back at that adulterous drunk…’We’ll drive off that bridge when we come to it, Senator!'”
I’d have referred to him, repeatedly, as “the distinguished gentleman from Delta Tau Chi…” and been soooo apologetic when corrected…”oh, I’m sorry, Senator Blutarsky—I mean, Kennedy, but it’s such an easy mistake to make!” And when he was trying to talk, I’d chant, sotto voce: “To-GA! To-GA! To-GA!”
technomad (eefe5a) — 8/31/2009 @ 10:38 amthe real-life inspiration for Senator Bluto Blutarsky
happyfeet (71f55e) — 8/31/2009 @ 10:53 amIt’s so sad. If Ted Kennedy hadn’t been such a filthy piece of bloated white trash I think people would have much more respectful remembrances of him – genuine ones – and the dirty socialist media wouldn’t have to lay on the treacle so thick. Whoever replaces Ted in the Senate should take note that being a perverted drunk man-whore maybe isn’t the best way to go.
I loved how Ann Coulter commented once that she’d cheerfully blow a chance at a Supreme Court seat so she “could yell back at that adulterous drunk…’We’ll drive off that bridge when we come to it, Senator!’”
Comment by technomad — 8/31/2009 @ 10:38 am
Had forgotten about that comment – in one of her books IIRC. That is AWESOME. LOL
no one you know (7a9144) — 8/31/2009 @ 11:04 amMary Jo Kopeckne was unavailable for comment.
N. O'Brain (5deb6d) — 8/31/2009 @ 11:25 amDmac said: Nothing would make it go down the toilet faster than that action, and what a fitting legacy that would turn out to be.
You’re speaking out of emotion, Dmac, not common sense. Why would Democrats object to the bill being named for Kennedy?
And of course, the bill will be a Democrat-passed bill. Republicans have dropped out of the process with the “great bipartisan hope” Charles Grassley telling NPR he needs 70 to 80 votes for passage in the Senate for him to feel comfortable voting for it. That’s a fantasy number, as he well knows. There was never any hope for more than 2 or 3 GOP votes, or 4 or 6 as an absolute max.
Health care can pass on reconciliation, maybe in two parts, or on some vote shy of 60. That’s fine, b/c it enhances the chance of getting a public option. From my view, it is very important that Republicans stay out of this process — it’s the only way to get a bill that represents true reform.
OK, sorry to interrupt you guys’ Christ-like bashing of the dead man.
I know it’s cathartic, as he whipped your side many times.
Carry on. 🙂
Myron (6a93dd) — 8/31/2009 @ 11:26 amI rate him slightly below Senator Jack S. Phogbound.
N. O'Brain (5deb6d) — 8/31/2009 @ 11:30 amUm. Well, in Bizarroworld, I suppose. But do have a nice day.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 8/31/2009 @ 11:37 amAnd you might ask how EMK was doing in the 80s. In mean, when he wasn’t trying to get the Soviets involved in a Presidential election, and wasn’t acting like a pervert, I mean.
I like how he supposedly got all wonderful and nice when he remarried. But then, we were told he was wonderful and nice before, and the truth came out.
I have great sympathy for his family. Not for him.
“Lion of the Senate.” Puh-leeze.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 8/31/2009 @ 11:42 amEric: So I assume your side supported the numerous, major pieces of legislation he pushed through over his time in the Senate? That doesn’t sound right.
Myron (6a93dd) — 8/31/2009 @ 11:43 amBy the way, Eric, these are a few of my bullet points (responding to your first comment). And this is far from comprehensive:
*Civil Rights Act (key supporter)
*Voting Rights Act
*increase in minimum wage
*Family Medical Leave Act
*American with Disabilities Act
*Title IX
*Pregnancy Discrimination Act
*SCHIP program (co-sponsored with Hatch)
*Mental Health Parity Act
*No Child Left Behind (key supporter, unfortunately)
*He also had major or sponsoring rolls in bills on AIDs and cancer research, Apartheid and of course, what will eventually be health care reform
Now, as for the negative things, clearly people here are familiar with them, since that’s their only focus. I won’t repeat.
Myron (6a93dd) — 8/31/2009 @ 11:53 amDear god I hope you are right moron. That would be the fastest and easiest way for conservatives to get a majority in both houses in 2010 and the presidency in 2012. Indeed, I bet that would be the death knell of the Dem party.
Monkeytoe (e66874) — 8/31/2009 @ 12:05 pmThe permalink for the item about Harry Reid failed. here’s a redirect: http://bit.ly/pxWDk
sierra (dfb2fa) — 8/31/2009 @ 12:07 pmMoron,
the question that was posed was “I would like to see the bullet points from the Left about what made this fellow such a fantastical person”.
You listed why you think he was a good senator, based on your agreement with is politics.
that does not make him a good person – or remotely the saint that the media and left are claiming he was.
What did he do as a person that was honorable, or good?
Monkeytoe (e66874) — 8/31/2009 @ 12:09 pmLongwalker – #20
Thanks for that information! I may have known that at one time but, if so, I had forgotten. Certainly, I am not surprised at it. It is consistent with the durations with which I am more familiar a few years later. That is, that those drafted served 2 years while enlistments were 4.
jim2 (6482d8) — 8/31/2009 @ 12:33 pm*Civil Rights Act (key supporter)
Not as key as the Republicans who passed it.
*Voting Rights Act
Vote Statistics:
Senate Passed 77-19
Democrats: 47-17
Republicans: 30-2
*increase in minimum wage
*Family Medical Leave Act
*American with Disabilities Act
*Title IX
*Pregnancy Discrimination Act
*SCHIP program (co-sponsored with Hatch)
*Mental Health Parity Act
*No Child Left Behind (key supporter, unfortunately)
*He also had major or sponsoring rolls in bills on AIDs and cancer research, Apartheid and of course, what will eventually be health care reform
The list includes lots of bills that violate basic economics, like minimum wage, but the victims were not smart enough to see that they were being harmed.
MIke K (2cf494) — 8/31/2009 @ 12:34 pmWas he for, or against Apartheid?
And what did the bill actually do about it.
Scott Jacobs (6aff37) — 8/31/2009 @ 12:38 pmHey, Myron. You know what I support?
I’m perfectly happy, by the way, to disdain any Republican guilty of any of the above. You for your beloved Democrats? Not so much.
Just like you won’t get rid of Charlie Rangel, no matter how venal and corrupt he is—because you like how he votes. End of story.
What you mean is that Kennedy’s “good side” outweighs the bad, for you—including what is at least a form of manslaughter (and his actions afterward say more than the act itself). And Kennedy had a long, long history of dishonest acts. It doesn’t matter to you, because of the votes.
And that should give you pause, and make you realize that you just don’t care who a person is, so long as his politics agrees with your own. That is the definition of an alphabetist.
Let’s be clear. I wanted to see the Left say they loved Kennedy’s politics, and disliked his person.
We didn’t see that. Instead, we get hagiography. And it will bite you in the butt, as more and more bad press comes out about that awful man.
He is your hero?
I disagreed with Paul Wellstone’s politics, but just try to imagine him acting like Ted Kennedy. Go ahead, I’ll wait.
And if you think that the personal does not matter, then tell me you wouldn’t mind a young female relative working with Kennedy alone at night. Just be sure to buy her a snorkle.
Or maybe, like some of those nuts at HuffPo, you might think some more deaths are worth the august legacy of Edward Kennedy.
And I have read you blather on about GWB or Cheney. But Kennedy is your hero?
Alphabetism has taken you down a strange road.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:34 pmAll: For the record, and as a general policy, I am not addressing or reading any posts where I am called anything other than my screen name, “Myron.”
I’m one of those rare folks in the blogosphere who left fifth-grade tactics in the fifth grade.
Mike K: Thanks for the breakdown. With so much Republican support for bills Kennedy and the Democrats already supported, one wonders why there was so much wrangling over them? Maybe we shouldn’t even have two parties. 🙂
Myron (6a93dd) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:34 pmEric: If you’re waiting for perfect people to lead, you’ll be waiting a long time, hoss. Read your Bible, if you’re a believer: One perfect person, and guess what? It ain’t you.
Obviously, Kennedy made some big mistakes. Do I wish he had curled up and disappeared or thrown himself in the pond, and done none of the things he later did? No, I don’t wish that. I think he did some great things, and I’m glad he kept on chugging after the deaths of his three brothers.
But then, I wouldn’t throw out Jefferson over getting it on with his slave, either. But that’s me. I’m only human and expect humans to sometimes misbehave.
Myron (6a93dd) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:41 pmAnd by the way, Eric, you know enough about my posts here to know that I think Cheney and Bush misled the country into the war in Iraq, which has led to the deaths of thousands of Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis and helped break the budget.
Cheney told Chris Wallace just on Sunday he was cool with CIA agents breaking the law. That’s some “leader.”
So, yeah, I think they stack up pretty unfavorably next to a guy who made a dumb decision in 69 and chased some skirt and in the meantime pushed through legislation that made a lot of people’s lives better.
He also had the sack and the sense to vote against authorizing the Iraq War.
Myron (6a93dd) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:45 pmI like how democrats still think they were the driving force behind the Civil Rights Amendment getting passed. It’s cute how they have re-writen history like that…
Scott Jacobs (218307) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:48 pmWhy all the hate on NCLB? Instead of going to the failing school 1 mile away my daughter will be going to one of the top two middle schools in the district over the next three years. Only because of NCLB. I also like the test scores that NCLB facilitated – no, a kid can’t be judged on the basis of a test but it’s another data point to add to the mix.
EBJ (2fd7f7) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:49 pm“Cheney told Chris Wallace just on Sunday he was cool with CIA agents breaking the law. That’s some “leader.””
Democrats are fine with a perjurer President. That’s some “party”.
EBJ (2fd7f7) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:52 pmScott Jacobs: Re: Apartheid. I was just about to accuse you of cutesy game-playing, then I realized I guess I should flesh that out a little more.
From ABC News, where people are quoted as saying Kennedy’s visit to S. Africa in 1985 got the ball rolling toward change:
Kennedy championed the 1985 Anti-Apartheid Act, a bill that proposed the most comprehensive sanctions against the South African government of any Western government at the time. The bill banned imports, exports, employment, and loans to be given to the South African government from the United States government or U.S. companies. It declared that “it shall be U.S. policy to impose economic sanctions against South Africa if, within 12 months but not later than January 1, 1987, significant progress has not been made toward ending apartheid.”
Here’s another link, talking about his trip to South Africa: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/africa/090826/ted-kennedy-anti-apartheid-crusader
From the piece:
He embraced the anti-apartheid struggle and gloried in stating why the system of racial segregation and oppression was wrong and should be strongly opposed by the U.S. government.
In eight days in January 1985, Kennedy swept through South Africa, visiting Johannesburg townships and squatter camps in Cape Town. He met with anti-apartheid leaders including Winnie Mandela, the wife of the jailed Nelson Mandela, who was under draconian banning orders which confined her to her home and prevented her from meeting more than one person at a time. Kennedy championed Winnie Mandela as a fighter for democracy.
Kennedy’s inspired campaign against apartheid culminated when he organized an illegal protest calling for the release of Nelson Mandela at Pollsmoor Prison. Defying orders of the South African police, Kennedy strode up to the gates of the prison and urged Mandela’s release and the end of apartheid …
Myron (6a93dd) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:53 pmOh, and Scott, he was AGAINST Apartheid, if it’s not obvious.
Myron (6a93dd) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:54 pmGod almighty you’re dim.
List for me, right now, the items that were a lie and not repeated/stated by multiple other countries.
Also, I guess you were unaware that Obama’s deficit, after 7 months, is more than all 8 years of Bush’s…
Seriously, when you don’t even use facts, you make this way too easy.
Scott Jacobs (218307) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:55 pmDemocrats are fine with a perjurer President. That’s some “party”.
I wouldn’t say “fine” with it. But yeah, if the president’s going to lie, we’d rather he lie about a bj vs lying about why he is sending our men and women to war.
Myron (6a93dd) — 8/31/2009 @ 1:58 pmBecause it is worthless. Not only does it not provide money to actually impliment it’s testing requirements, it punishes schools that were already doing well.
Not only do you have to show a certain level of improvement every year, if you fail to do so you lose money. Meaning horrible schools that manage to eke out the bar minimum improvement and yet are still crappy get money, while schools that already have really, really high passing rates will lose money because when you are in the top 5 percentile, it is impossible to get 7% improvement.
Not 7% of that 5%, but 7% of the whole school. as in “The total would be 102% passing”.
NCLB is one of the worst things that has happened to education since revisionist history books.
Scott Jacobs (6aff37) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:00 pmSo lying under oath = good, lying when not under oath = bad.
Gotcha.
Scott Jacobs (218307) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:02 pmIt’s cute how they have re-writen history like that…
Democrats are not the ones doing the re-writing. It was a majority-Democrat congress. It was JFK who called for the Civil Rights Act and Johnson who signed it. It was Teddy Kennedy who co-sponsored the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
It was JFK who dispatched federal troops to help integrate Ole Miss.
What were the names of the Republican leaders who got out front on the issue of civil rights? The names escape me right now. Help me out.
Myron (6a93dd) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:07 pmScott Jacobs: I’m not a fan of NCLB, either, but, ELB tells you how it helped his/her daughter and you say it’s “worthless”?
It obviously has value to ELB.
My beef with NCLB is that it’s an unfunded mandate that states have to scramble to meet and it bends schools to concentrate on testing, rather than teaching.
It does show that a Republican can be just as much big government as a Democrat. Anyway, it seems to enjoy bipartisan support, so I don’t believe it’s going anywhere.
Myron (6a93dd) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:11 pmYeah… thank god they didn’t have to have the Republicans…
But you’re right. I mean, it’s not like the democrats ever elected to congress white supremacists of Grand Keagels of the KKK or anything…
Oh, wait…
Scott Jacobs (218307) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:13 pmFunny that the leftists have to lie in order to claim that Bush lied them into a war. And Kennedy made some bad choices. He f*cking left a girl to drown in his car that he was too drink to keep on the bridge, and while she was drowning, Sen Gin and Tonic was calling his attorney and manufacturing a false alibi. But that was just a bad decision. You people disgust me.
JD (25da56) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:14 pmAccording to myron, Bush lied about why we went to Iraq. That’s hilariously dull. But you can’t argue with results. Whatever Bush meant to do, he managed to increase freedom in Iraq and prevent another 9/11. It makes really good sense how going into Iraq would accomplish this, and that’s mainly what Bush was promising it would accomplish.
We didn’t get a bunch of oil or cheap gas, but Bush somehow accidentally did great good while attempting great evil in Myron’s head.
Well, even if that’s the case, I would prefer it to today, where Afghanistan is extremely ill equipped and we need to win.
Juan (bd4b30) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:16 pmWho tried to filibuster those pieces of legislation, Myron?
Sen Kleagle and his hood anxiously await your response.
JD (25da56) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:16 pmAnd a bill granting me the authority to claim any woman I want as mine (btw, where did bridget go? 🙂 ) would have great value to me, but little to none to anyone else, not to mention the poor, tortured girl I’d claim.
NCLB did (and is doing) far more damage than good.
Scott Jacobs (218307) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:17 pm63 So failing schools get more money and better schools get less. That seems like an appropriate redistribution of funds. It may not be fair to the better schools but it’s no different from taxing A to give a benefit to B.
62 I’m not recalling the ‘controversial period’ for South African apartheid in America. Please name the American politicians that embraced South African apartheid, myron, because it’s slipped my mind.
62 Besides, Bush’s, what other minds can you read? You do realize that equivalizing something like ‘Bush lied us into war’ without evidence (except for in your imagination) and Clinton’s actual perjury is a logic fail? Because Clinton really was alone with Lewinski, as alone as two people can be when one is blowing the other, and the Bush lied charge always breaks down when someone asks for evidence because there is none.
EBJ (2fd7f7) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:19 pmTed Kennedy is like that guy at work who is always taking credit for work you know he didn’t really help much with. and slinking away from work he did but isn’t proud of.
NCLB was Kennedy’s last big thing. And it’s been a decade since then and his party hates the bill. Most of the stuff he takes credit for was not his idea and would have passed without him. That’s the glory of the legislature… you can pretend you did all kinds of stuff you didn’t while never being directly responsible for anything.
Juan (bd4b30) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:30 pmDon’t ask Moron, he’s got his daily talking points memo, and by golly, he’s sticking to it!
By the way, Eric, these are a few of my bullet points (responding to your first comment). And this is far from comprehensive:
In response to Moron’s inane prattle, let’s do a point – by – point response, just for giggles (and this is far from comprehensive):
– guilty of vehicular manslaughter;
– guilty of leaving the scene of an accident/crime;
– guilty of reckless endangerment;
– guilty of lying to the police;
– guilty of enlistment of false witnesses to a crime;
– guilty of collaboration with a sworn enemy of the US;
– guilty of rape;
– guilty of bribery of witnesses to a crime;
– guilty of sexual harassment;
– guilty of cheating on a college exam;
– guilty again of cheating on a college exam, this time by using a hired replacement;
– guilty of creating the “Politics of Personal Destruction” (the left loooves pointing this out, btw).
So let’s tally up the score, shall we? All the above compared to Moron’s awesome recitation of pieces of legislation passed in accordance with the good Senator’s whims of the day. My, my, Moron – we wonder who’s next on your lionization roll call: maybe the ex – Beagle of the KKK, Robert Byrd? Go for it, Moron!
Dmac (e6d1c2) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:30 pmMyron writes: “It was JFK who dispatched federal troops to help integrate Ole Miss.
What were the names of the Republican leaders who got out front on the issue of civil rights? “
Another example, Myron, of your rewriting of history. Something you vehemently denied, and then proceeded to do.
The answer to your question is that almost a decade earlier, Eisenhower showed JFK how it was done. Eisenhower declared that racial discrimination was a national security matter in the campaign leading up to the Presidential election. During his administration, he proposed two civil rights legislations and signed them into law and he federalized the Arkansas National Guard and used Army troops to escort black students into an all-white school to carry out desegregation orders.
Grow up, Myron, and learn that real history does not match Democratic party myths.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:31 pmAll: For the record, and as a general policy, I am not addressing or reading any posts where I am called anything other than my screen name, “Myron.”
Then I guess you won’t be posting here anymore, Mary.
He also had the sack and the sense to vote against authorizing the Iraq War
The only “sack” your hero displayed was on unfortunate and unwilling lobbyists, campaign workers and waitresses.
What were the names of the Republican leaders who got out front on the issue of civil rights? The names escape me right now. Help me out.
This is the best example yet to understand why we call you Moron, Mary.
Dmac (e6d1c2) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:38 pmWhat were the names of the Republican leaders who got out front on the issue of civil rights? The names escape me right now. Help me out.
Always ready to help the handicapped. Here’s one.
Here’s how the Democrats treated it:
The bill was reported out of the Judiciary Committee in November 1963, and referred to the Rules Committee, whose chairman, Howard W. Smith, a Democrat from Virginia, indicated his intention to keep the bill bottled up indefinitely.
Because of Smith’s stalling of the bill in the Rules Committee, Celler filed a petition to discharge the bill from the Committee. Only if a majority of members signed the discharge petition would the bill move directly to the House floor without consideration by Smith’s committee. Initially Celler had a difficult time acquiring the signatures necessary, as even many congressmen who supported the civil rights bill itself were cautious about violating House procedure with the discharge petition. By the time of the 1963 winter recess, 50 signatures were still needed.
They call that cowardice. The Democrats had big majorities in both houses.
Then there was the Senate:
The bill came before the full Senate for debate on March 30, 1964 and the “Southern Bloc” of southern Senators led by Richard Russell (D-GA) launched a filibuster to prevent its passage. Said Russell: “We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states.”[5]
After 54 days of filibuster, Senators Everett Dirksen (R-IL), Thomas Kuchel (R-CA), Hubert Humphrey (D-MN), and Mike Mansfield (D-MT) introduced a substitute bill that they hoped would attract enough Republican votes to end the filibuster. The compromise bill was weaker than the House version in regard to government power to regulate the conduct of private business, but it was not so weak as to cause the House to reconsider the legislation.[6]
Does that help, troll ?
MIke K (2cf494) — 8/31/2009 @ 2:55 pm“What were the names of the Republican leaders who got out front on the issue of civil rights? The names escape me right now. Help me out.”
I’ve noticed a number of your posts here, and you never cease to amaze people with your ability to display what a remarkably dense, stupid, and poorly educated person you are.
SPC Jack Klompus (c1922b) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:01 pmMyron, I’m just curious–what do you think we should do about a senator, or any politician, who showed such poor judgment? The crimes that he committed don’t just disappear because the man died. I find it disingenuous that the Left talks about Kennedy trying to help all of the little people while at the same time he was sexually harrassing and assaulting helpless waitresses, the very definition of little people. Or are they just collateral damage in the war on the right?
rochf (ae9c58) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:02 pm“What were the names of the Republican leaders who got out front on the issue of civil rights? The names escape me right now. Help me out.”
Not to be a troll, but Martin Luther King Jr was a registered republican and even a member of the Christian clergy, a staunch pro lifer, and opposed to gay marriage.
Civil rights in the USA basically started with the formation of the abolitionist party… the Republican party.
The civil rights bill was passed against the democrats/dixiecrats like Al Gore and Byrd swearing it would tear our nation apart. A few democrats were big on civil rights.. Truman was the best democrat president this nation ever had, but it was democrats closing schools to blacks and staring down the national guard. It was democrats putting on the white hood.
that’s in the past and should stay there, but the democrats are still playing the race game. They still want to turn us against eachother. They never cared about which race was mad at the other… they just want to make sure they get in power by demonizing someone.
Juan (bd4b30) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:07 pmThis is my favorite Myron comment:
And chug he did, it appears from all reports, for decades after that. I love that kind of Freudian slip.
I wish Ted Kennedy had resigned and did good works, personally, after the death he caused in Cape Cod. I notice that the response to that is to change the subject, or make some kind of awful “balance” statement.
Still, I like the way Myron has been schooled, incidentally. Particularly over the Civil Rights Act. Because everyone knows that Rethuglicans are racist, and Democrats are the antithesis of racism.
Teh Narrative says so. Too bad history—easily available history—does not.
But I am not surprised at that attitude, by someone who makes a hero of Ted Kennedy having the “sack” to vote a particular way, ignoring the “sack” necessary to own up to his own personal, one on one complicity in the death of another person. He left her to drown, Myron. And then lied about it.
Too bad he didn’t waterboard her. Then you would probably lose your respect for him.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:30 pmSpc Klompus – long time, so see. Hope all is well.
JD (aeb697) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:31 pmAhh, I think moron is upset that I call him names. I’m sure he never called Bush “chimpy” or fascist or anything else.
Kennedy, aside from being a murderer, sexual harasser, drunk, adulterer, and general ass, also was a traiter, seeking to work with america’s enemies to further his own political career.
How you can think such a guy was so swell is beyond me. Fine, you agree with his politics. That does not change the fact that the guy was the scum of the earth.
But, b/c leftist have no real principals aside from worship of the state, personality is politics, therefore they have to worship their political leaders no matter what – a la Kennedy and Obama. Can’t admit the person is not a good person even if you support their politics.
Now, i disagreed w/ the vast majority of things Kennedy pursued in the last 20 years, and probably 50% of the things he stood for before that.
By the way, you’ve earned the name I’ve given you.
Monkeytoe (9d961d) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:43 pmBy the way, what charities does the Kennedy’s vast fortune fund? I don’t think Ted was ever known for giving up his own money. He was only interested in taking money from the rest of us.
Monkeytoe (9d961d) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:44 pmThe bottom line remains that Myron wants to lecture us about history … but does not actually know any.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:44 pmMyron’s comment:
Well, no. I never wrote that. I do want people who aren’t moral pygmies to lead. Again, I come back to this: how would you feel if it was your sister in the car with Ted Kennedy, left to drown in the dark, while he was ginning up alibis? Being lionized as some paragon as freakin’ virtue by pundits?
Would you still feel, how did you put it?
You see, that is the thing with you. I am starting to think that you really do believe in royalty, and what happens to “regular” people doesn’t matter if the Royals can do what they wish.
The Royals that vote the way you prefer, I mean. You have certainly gone after people who vote differently than you prefer, and often over personal issues. Or am I misremembering?
Yeah, that’s different.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:45 pmHey JD! Back in Texas after 23 weeks of army training. All Ted, all the time, eh?
SPC Jack Klompus (237c0e) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:48 pmHopefully, as they say, this too shall pass. I believe in never letting politics deter from civility when being respectful to those who’ve passed on. But when the tributes reach epic levels of schmaltz and are used to pimp legislative agendas, what do people expect but to get bumped back with objective lists of, “Okay, he wasn’t THAT great” points? Especially when there are some pretty glowing examples of character flaws in a man who used his pedigree to elude justice. The very justice that would be meted out to the average folk for whom Sen. Kennedy was always posturing as being a champion and supporter.
By the way, you’ve earned the name I’ve given you
Point of information – that moniker was bestowed a long time ago.
Dmac (e6d1c2) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:49 pmThrowing waitresses around and making sandwiches of them with Chris Dodd is more than just “chasing some skirt”, although that phrase certainly fits with the frat boy version of life that Kennedy led.
rochf (ae9c58) — 8/31/2009 @ 3:55 pmTed Kennedy, like Bill Clinton, inexplicably is allowed to be the “face of feminism,” though I suspect their interests are a bit lower.
In every sense of the term.
Eric Blair (57b266) — 8/31/2009 @ 4:27 pmThis might be news to you, Myron. When CIA covert agents engage in covert operations on foreign soil, they often break foreign laws. Laws against burglary, theft, and even murder. And if they are arrested by foreign authorities, they are often left out to dry, with their employers denying knowledge of them.
As a commenter on Reason.Com pointed out, “I guess one could argue that since they were on Afghani soil, they could be procecuted in Afghani court, under Afghani laws. If Afghanistan so desired.”
Michael Ejercito (833607) — 8/31/2009 @ 5:16 pmA lot of reality is news to Myron.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/31/2009 @ 5:54 pm“Cheney told Chris Wallace just on Sunday he was cool with CIA agents breaking the law.”
Myron – I didn’t make it all the way through the thread yet to see if anyone else corrected you, but that is not what Cheney said. Check the transcript. He talked about them exceeding their authority, which is a different concept from breaking the law. You lefty idealogues need to keep your facts and terminology straight and stop confusing policy with the law. He did not greenflag lawbreaking. If you think he did, pull up the quote.
daleyrocks (718861) — 8/31/2009 @ 8:33 pmDid someone mention revisionist civil rights history?
[note: fished from spam filter]
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 8/31/2009 @ 8:59 pmSeems my comment got caught in the filter.
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 8/31/2009 @ 9:03 pmI just went to the link “Black & Right” excerpted from regarding Democrat civil rights revisionism. Good stuff. linky
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 8/31/2009 @ 10:34 pmNeal Gabler
Knob Gobbler
pain train (f70065) — 9/1/2009 @ 6:16 amGabler is just an unmitigated asshat who reminds me of Paul Krugman. Wait 10 minutes and he’ll contradict himself. With Krugman all you have to do is look in his archives to find a column he wrote two or three years ago which contradicts one of his current positions.
daleyrocks (718861) — 9/1/2009 @ 4:56 pmOh yeah he said that. A guy who got liquored up, drunkenly drove a car off a bridge, left his female companion to die, and told authorities about all this . . . oh, about ten fucking hours later — you know, once his blood alcohol level was safely back around zero — what a morally large fellow he was!
The Emperor (0c8c2c) — 9/1/2009 @ 5:43 pmNo one is perfect. Let it rest folks. Show some respect for the dead.
Indeed. Kennedy never did for you know who…
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 9/1/2009 @ 5:53 pmDon’t let me get in your way, Eric. Carry on…
The Emperor (0c8c2c) — 9/1/2009 @ 6:02 pmPlease. Go on and defend that awful man. Again, praise his politics if you like. Feel sympathy for his family, of course.
For him? Nothing.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 9/1/2009 @ 6:10 pmShow me a comment here where I actually “defended” the man. I simply said, show respect for the dead. A sentiment I believe cuts across party affiliations and moral convictions.
The Emperor (0c8c2c) — 9/1/2009 @ 7:03 pmShow me a comment here where I actually “defended” the man. I simply said, show respect for the dead. A sentiment I believe cuts across party affiliations and moral convictions.
No one is perfect. Let it rest folks. Show some respect for the dead.
Heh…
So because he’s dead, and being triumphed in the media, we should just twiddle our thumbs and let him be praised for the man that he wasn’t?
G (58c282) — 9/1/2009 @ 7:12 pmI have come to bury Ted Kennedy, not to praise him. Sure, his was the voice of Morality, pure and untainted by personal avarice, a champion of women’s rights who let his actions in how he treated every woman who was fortunate enough to cross his path speak for him – look not at what he “said” in public, or the bills his staff prepared – Ye need not look any farther than the sweet, grandfatherly tender care he gave every attractive young woman lucky enough to have the privilege, neigh, the HONOR of serving him drinks. Such a little vixen surely knew, as the late SENATOR’s short thick little vulgarian hands scrabbed at her clothing, that truly – she was in the presence of MORAL GOOD. May the all seeing, loving, kind Sweet JESUS – with his flaming sword of righteousness judgment set upon Kennedy…AMEN.
Californio (ea00ee) — 9/1/2009 @ 9:29 pmWaterboard a terrorist == State prosecution
Drown a girl == State funeral
Yeah, that some great guy you admire.
[note: I believe Jim Treacher first formulated this, but I could be wrong]
steve miller (c5e78c) — 9/1/2009 @ 10:07 pmTed deserves some props. He’s been sober for five days.
daleyrocks (718861) — 9/1/2009 @ 10:30 pmBill Whittle explores the “would Mary Jo Kopechne have thought it was worth it to die for the legislative genius of Edward M. Kennedy?” meme here:
http://www.pjtv.com/video/Trifecta/Dead_Ted_%26_Mary_Jo%3A_What%27s_One_Life_Worth%3F/2386/
Extra points for the LeGuin reference.
Eric Blair (a88004) — 9/1/2009 @ 10:32 pmEric – Bill Whittle is excellent.
daleyrocks (718861) — 9/1/2009 @ 10:38 pmAbsolutely, daley. I don’t know the fellow, but friends of mine do, and they say he is a nice guy besides.
Eric Blair (a88004) — 9/1/2009 @ 10:42 pm[…] his melodramatic story about Kennedy’s funeral. We had to endure commentary talking about the “moral largeness” of a guy who left a woman to drown at Chappaquiddick, promptly informing authorities within a mere […]
Patterico's Pontifications » Patterico’s Los Angeles Dog Trainer Year in Review 2009 (e4ab32) — 1/1/2010 @ 12:07 pm