Conservative media invoke Wellstone memorial smear in predicting politicization of Kennedy's death
Following Sen. Ted Kennedy's death, conservative media figures have returned to the smear that the memorial service for Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-MN) became "a political rally" to suggest that progressives will excessively politicize Kennedy's death. But as now-Sen. Al Franken documented at length, the claim that Wellstone's memorial was politicized is a myth based on distortions propagated by the conservative media.
Conservative media invoke Wellstone smear in anticipation of Kennedy's service
Hannity on Kennedy's death: "a lot of this was the politicizing of -- remember Paul Wellstone's death?" Discussing Kennedy's death during his radio program, Sean Hannity asserted, "We've got The Wall Street Journal reporting -- and by the way, a lot of this was the politicizing of -- remember Paul Wellstone's death? You know, 'Let's do everything for Paul.' And we're now being implored to get behind Obamacare because it's what Ted Kennedy would have wanted." [The Sean Hannity Show, 8/26/09]
Savage fill-in Markowski on possible naming of health care bill after Kennedy: "It's political theater" like the "Wellstone memorial." Chris Markowski, filling in for Michael Savage on his radio program, took a caller who said that "if Ted Kennedy had wanted his name on this health care bill, I think that he would -- I would want to see where he said that in writing before he died. He had plenty of time." Markowski responded, in part, by asserting: "I don't think he's requested -- you got to understand, it's a show. OK? It's political theater. Like the Democrats thought that whole Wellstone memorial was going to -- it was going to force them to -- it was going to allow them to win the Senate race in Minnesota. This is political theater. It's a show." [The Savage Nation, 8/26/09]
Lopez on Kennedy's death: Wellstone service "turned into a political rally." The National Review Online's Kathyrn Jean Lopez wrote in an August 26 post to the blog The Corner titled "Re: The Politics of Ted Kennedy's Passing": "All politicos need to remember the Wellstone funeral when a well-known politician dies. Instead of memorializing his life, his service turned into a political rally. Some of the MSNBC coverage today I'm catching looks like a [sic] Obamacare convocation. Human life is about more than poltics. And politics isn't American Idol. Or, even, The Lion of the Senate."
Allahpundit "sure" Kennedy "eulogies won't be politicized at all." Hot Air blogger Allahpundit wrote in an August 26 tweet: "Looking forward to the Democratic line-up at TK's memorial service. I'm sure the eulogies won't be politicized at all."
Instapundit: "A Wellstone Memorial on steroids?" An August 26 post on Instapundit.com linked to a post by JammieWearingFool with the headline "A Wellstone Memorial on steroids? And how did that work out?" JammieWearingFool asserted in the post, written the same day, "While we have no doubt the Democrats will do all they can to exploit his death and will probably have a Wellstone memorial on steroids, we'll stay above that." The link on the words "Wellstone memorial" were to an October 30, 2002, Slate.com article describing Wellstone's memorial services as a "pep rally."
Noting "conservative talking point," Politico's Smith says "[i]t would seem odd to bar politics" from Kennedy's funeral. In an August 26 post, Politico's Ben Smith referred to the comments by Allahpundit and Instapundit as "a conservative talking point [that] is emerging to counter the the hope on the left that Kennedy's death will advance his cause of health care reform," and commented:
It would seem odd to bar politics from the funeral of an intensely political figure who took his causes so personally, but the Kennedy family, the White House, and Senate Democrats -- as well as their foes -- will be navigating complicated, and political, terrain in the days ahead, with real advantage to be won and lost on one of Kennedy's signature causes.
Franken debunked Wellstone smear in 2003 book
Al Franken: " 'This Was Not a Memorial to Paul Wellstone': A Case Study in Right-Wing Lies." In his book Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them (Dutton, 2003), Franken wrote:
Paul died on October 25, 2002, when his plane went down in Northern Minnesota. Sheila; their daughter, Marcia; his driver, Will McLaughlin; two other close aides, Tom Lapic and Mary McEvoy; and two pilots died with him. Four days later, C-SPAN, along with almost every Minnesota TV and radio station, carried a hastily-put-together memorial service for Paul, Sheila, Marcia, Will, Tom, and Mary. I was there. It was a beautiful memorial, sometimes incredibly sad, sometimes funny, sometimes rowdy, and sometimes political. Some people watching on television were offended. Some people were moved. But the right saw an opening. They took moments out of context, lied about the rest, and used it as a political club to attack the Democrats. It won them the Senate election in Minnesota and probably in Missouri, which means it gave Republicans control of the Senate.
This chapter is a case study of how the right lies and viciously distorts. It is the story of how the right-wing media repeats its fabrications until they echo into the mainstream press. It is a story of pure cynicism in pursuit of power. It is the story of how the lying liars took the death of my friends and invented a myth that changed the 2002 elections. [Pages 178-179]
"[T]en-second clips" created partisan picture. Franken explained that a eulogy delivered by "Wellstone's best friend Rick Kahn," "[o]ne of the eight eulogies that night," included calling on the audience to "win this election for Paul Wellstone." Franken noted that to those who "only saw the ten-second clips that were later repeated and repeated on TV, it looked like Kahn and the crowd were just being foot-stompingly partisan -- that Wellstone's death was being used for political gain." Franken continued:
But Kahn's speech was also full of phrases like "[our] hearts are now shattered" and "tonight we are filled to overflowing with overwhelming grief and sorrow." This speech was coming from someone who was crushed by the deaths of his best friend, his best friend's wife, his best friend's daughter, and three other very close friends. Yeah, it had some inappropriate moments. But I assumed that people would understand, and cut the man a little slack. [Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them, Pages 183-185]
Speeches not vetted by memorial organizers. Franken included the following statement from Ann Mulholland, who helped plan the memorial:
We asked each family to choose someone to do the eulogy. At no point did it ever cross anyone's mind to read the speeches. The day before, the people from the hearing impaired group asked, "Do you have any of the speeches?" I just laughed. They wanted to type the speeches in for the closed captioning, but we just didn't have anything.
On Monday night, our press guy said to me, "Oh my gosh -- this is going to be on TV. Should we be thinking about something?" By then, it was just kind of too late. [Page 192]
"Political" smear started by GOP operatives including former Rep. Weber, who later admitted "there was some very nice stuff" at the service. Franken wrote:
The morning after the memorial, I picked up the Minneapolis Star-Tribune and turned to the special section devoted to the event. It was titled "One Last Rally: Victims Remembered with Cheers and Tears," with a heartbreaking picture of Paul and Sheila's granddaughter, Cari, crying. There were two stories on the front page. One was about the event itself: "Overflow Crowd Pays Tribute to Wellstone." The other was about GOP spin: "Republicans Decry Service as Political." With the stories side by side, it was as if two different events had taken place. The real one, and the lie one.
Vin Weber was framing the Republican story line. "This was NOT a memorial to Paul Wellstone. This was a political event." Weber said that the event was a "complete, total, absolute sham" and accused the Democrats of "exploit[ing] Wellstone's memory totally, completely and shamelessly for political gain."
[...]
When I called Vin Weber to research this chapter, I asked him whether he had watched the whole event and whether he had seen any of the eulogies. He said, "Yeah, there was some very nice stuff." This candid Vin was a refreshing break from the lying Vin who talked to the Star Tribune in 2002. But Lying Vin had planted the story line: The memorial was a total sham, a political charade. [Pages 186-187]
Franken traces spin of memorial as "political event" through media. Franken documented the evolution in the media of the smear that Wellstone's memorial service was politicized. He traced the Republican spin of the memorial service as a "political event" from the Minneapolis Star Tribune to C-SPAN's Washington Journal to Rush Limbaugh and eventually to "the mainstream" with Tucker Carlson, who claimed on CNN's Crossfire that "a memorial service for the late Senator Paul Wellstone was hijacked by partisan zealots and turned into a political rally. Republican friends of Senator Wellstone were booed and shouted down as they tried to speak." But Franken undercut those claims in an interview with Carlson documented in the book. Under Franken's questioning, Carlson admitted he had not yet seen the tape of the memorial when he made those claims and was under the incorrect assumption that Kahn was not in fact Wellstone's best friend. Moreover, there were no "Republican friends of Wellstone" who spoke or attempted to speak at the funeral, a fact Carlson acknowledged in his conversations with Franken. Nonetheless, the myth that the memorial was a political event continued to spread throughout the media. [Pages 193-195]
Media similarly accused liberals of politicizing King's funeral, but ignored politicization of Reagan's
Media highlighted purportedly "partisan" funeral of Coretta Scott King. As Media Matters for America documented, the claims that King's funeral was "partisan" stemmed primarily from a tribute delivered by civil rights activist Rev. Joseph Lowery, which included a reference to prewar intelligence failures in Iraq, and one by former President Jimmy Carter, who made what many interpreted as a reference to President Bush's warrantless domestic surveillance program.
But media ignored political elements of Reagan's funeral. President Ronald Reagan's funeral did not provoke similar scrutiny, despite clear political overtones. For example, the media largely ignored the fact that no Democrats were invited to speak at either the funeral at the National Cathedral or at a ceremony held on Capitol Hill two days earlier.
Transcripts
From the August 26 broadcast of ABC Radio Networks' and Premiere Radio Networks' The Sean Hannity Show:
HANNITY: And it is the degree to which the mainstream media has tried to, you know, not talk about his family, not talk about how he battled brain cancer, not talk about -- oh, well, some people did bring up the more controversial aspects of his life. But to the extent that it has been used by so many on the left to promote Obamacare, it is, you know -- that somehow, his death is added reason now to make its passage.
Now, I just -- we have Senator Byrd, according to the Politico, wants Democrats to rename the Obamacare bill after Ted Kennedy. I don't know if they want to call it "Kennedycare," and I'm not sure what the name is here, but -- "Ailing Senator Robert Byrd, one of only two to have served longer than Kennedy, suggests, in an emotional statement, renaming the pending health care legislation for the late Massachusetts senator. 'In his honor and as a tribute to his commitment to the ideals, let us stop the shouting and name-calling and have a civilized debate on health care reform, which, I hope, when legislation has been signed into law, will bear his name for his commitment to insuring the health of every American.' "
We've got The Wall Street Journal reporting -- and by the way, a lot of this was the politicizing of -- remember Paul Wellstone's death? You know, "Let's do everything for Paul." And we're now being implored to get behind Obamacare because it's what Ted Kennedy would have wanted.
From the August 26 broadcast of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:
MARKOWSKI: We got Mike on the phone from Portland, Oregon. Mike, Welcome to The Savage Nation.
CALLER: Yeah, hello. My comment was that if Ted Kennedy had wanted his name on this health care bill, I think that he would -- I would want to see where he said that in writing before he died. He had plenty of time to say, "Hey" --
MARKOWSKI: I don't think he's requested -- you got to understand, it's a show. OK? It's political theater. Like the Democrats thought that whole Wellstone memorial was going to -- it was going to force them to -- it was going to allow them to win the Senate race in Minnesota. This is political theater. It's a show.















The whole 2000-2004 era will go down as a very bad period for the American MSM.
A man spends almost his entire life in, well, politics, such as Kennedy did.
Republicans are worried that his funeral and memorial service is somehow going to be "politicized".
It should be no question, of COURSE politics are going to come up, that's what this man did, as I said, almost his entire life. Of course there are going to be things that are going to be a rallying cry around Kennedy's death, seeing as he also spent most of his life working on, and trying to improve, health care.
You can't be a politician for your entire life, and then expect that whole thing to be ignored when you pass away. It's just ridiculous.
However, if they are not your personal estimates, then perhaps your continuing campaign to be taken as credible would benefit from providing those reputable sources you are withholding.
Perhaps you should check what he said before you question me.
I went to the casino the other night and lost 200 t0 20,000 dollars.
And what you said happened at the Wellstone memorial, well, it never happened.
Interesting logic, or is it biased logic?
Who is editing now?
Those are your words, no one elses.
those are the words puppies wrote that I responded to, no one elses. Try again.
That was the part of my statement you purposely left out. I always find it amazing how people like you like to cut and paste to get the answer you want instead of the truth you demand. But why expect more from someone who can't read beyond a bumper sticker?
I'd like to see more emphasis placed on Kennedy's willingness to work with people across the aisle. He co-sponsored many pieces of legislation with Republicans. In fact, Sen. Dan Quayle's only piece of authored legislation was co-written by Kennedy.
What a hypocritical bunch we have here at MMFA. On Wed, the day that Ted Kennedy's death was announced, I saw numerous post about the predictions that Fox in particular would be trashing Kennedy. Did it happen? No it didn't. What did happen was the classless libtards who were wrong, they dragged out stories about 2 former first ladies, one about 90 years old. Wow what class. Highly evolved and very intelligent people. At least in their own minds. They keep telling us that anyway.
Really, what was her blood alcohol level? What was Ted Kennedy's at Chappaquiddick? Have you already forgotten the numerous unsubstantiated claims you make against Ted Kennedy here weekly?
"The police also determined that no charges were warranted. I guess that is not good enough for you." - FL
And what did the police decide in regards to charging Kennedy as a killer as you so often call him? I guess that is not good enough for YOU.
"Were you there? Do you know something that no one else knows? Speak up." - FL
This is like beating up my little brother, not even worth my time. Were you at Chappaquiddick? Do you realize how ridiculously stupid you make yourself look when these are your repsonses? You fail over and over and over again to defend your indefendible positions.
What did happen is you could not allow the time between a man's death and his funeral to pass without attaching the title killer to him even though he was never charged as such. Now you seem to think because your hero O'Reilly hasn't sunk to the same level as you that you are somehow justified or vindicated? Truly bizarre.
And every post I have seen here in regards to Laura Welch or Nancy Reagan have been in response to you, or POV, or hilight, or someone else's classless assault on calling a recently deceased man who has yet to be buried a "killer". Also, you seem not to know this in your posts, Nancy Reagan and Laura Bush are still alive.
who would have thought driving a car over a faulty bridge, going into the river, trying to save the passenger unsuccessfully and reporting it (albeit, almost a day later) would be considered a murderer. wow, what a heartless bastard... he was like a charles manson 2.0, wasnt he?
please... what a joke.
I do wonder though, you don't agree with people discription of Kennedy as a murderer, how do you feel about the discription of Laura Bush as a murderer. You know her, the 17 year old, who was not drinking and had an accident that cost a life. Do you equate the actions of a sober 17 year old to the actions of a drunk 37 year old? Those accusations have been made in this very thread, but you didn't comment on them. Only poor Teddy.
Really, what was his blood alcohol content that night?
And what was Laura Welch's blood alcohol content? Your assumptions prove what a waste of time a dialogue with you is. Neither Kennedy nor Welch were tested for alcohol. And you say there could not have been a problem with the bridge. Well, what was the problem with the stop sign? Nothing. She ran it.
Welch was no more a victim than Kennedy was. They both killed people due to poor decision-making while operating a motor vehicle. The only difference is in your Paris Business Review, O'Reilly addled mind you are unable to see the similarities.
And to equate Laura Welch's accident with the Kennedy case is pathetic at best.
And to equate Laura Welch's accident with the Kennedy case is pathetic at best." - FL
Are you kidding? Is that the best you got? So, you admit you have nothing? Do I really need to copy and paste your own words in defense of Laura Welch to refute your latest attack on Kennedy? Are you this dense?
Conjecture in Laura Welch's accident is classless, but conjecture in Kennedy's is not only proper, but necessary? Do you see how far your ridiculous lemming-like following of O'Reilly and the entertainers disguised as political leaders has gotten you? You could post this latest post after your previous post defending Laura Welch and it would seem as if you are arguing with yourself. Your cognitive dissonance is so strong that it actually becomes hilarious. I would agree with you on one thing, your attempt to dismiss one accident as merely an accident and the other as a killing is truly pathetic at best.
And what was Laura Welch's the night her poor decisions resulted in the death of her ex-boyfriend.
Yes, good point. And they are interested in generating ratings and advertising revenues, not in the truth, and that means they often act like complete dumb a***ses.
Republicans are no longer in the real world and have gone completely into the Land of the Lost!
Not to mention using the memory of 9/11 to gin up support for an illegal invation of Iraq, in which some of our finest are still dying to this day.
- people with disabilities
- minimum wage workers
- studenets
(add your list)
For 2 days I laid off Kennedy and what did I see here at this highly evolved site of intellectual progressives. I saw attacks against former presidents and 2 former first ladies. A particularly disgusting attack on a 90 year old woman. A real show of class from the intellectuals , as they think of themselves.
I guess these vile attacks were preemptive, as if to say "we know the righties are going to attack Kennedy so lets get the jump on them"
Finally today, I figured, "when in Rome". If Nancy Reagan and Laura Bush are fair game, so is Kennedy, it is that simple.
And you say I have said vile things about Kennedy, I have not. Everything I have said about him is true, every word. You hypocrites on the other hand attack Bush for being born into a wealthy family and forget about Kennedy. So i point it out. You hypocrites mock Bush for getting into Harvard on a legacy admission and forget about Kennedy, so i point it out. But Bush was not thrown out for cheating, that is specific to Kennedy.
You libs mock Lt Col Ralph Peters for only being a Lt Col, Kennedy was only a PFC, and promotion to PFC is automatic. So I point it out. You hypocrites still talk of Bush's DUI and forget about Kennedy's case where a young woman died because he drank and then drove. Dispite having a chauffeur. But of course he didn't want the driver coming with him and Mary Jo. So i point it out.
Did I say anything untrue? Of course there is more, but enough for now.
Short answer? yes.
Enough lying bile from a brainwashed reichwinger, that is. Limbaugh will give her more marching orders tomorrow...
Wow, what a champ you are. Please show me where I said any of this nonsense you are trying to attribute to me. You have lost it.
And yes you have said plenty of things that are untrue - even though they may be posted in the Paris Business Review. What was Kennedy's blood alcohol level the night of his accident? Exactly. Then you have the same conjecture to assume he was drunk driving as I do to assume Laura Welch was. That's the point. Get it?
As for Ralph Peters - I didn't even know he was at Chappaquiddick nor there when Laura Welch accidentally killed her ex-boyfriend. As for Bush and Kennedy both getting into Ivy League colleges because of legacies - I still am not sure if you are defending legacies or against them. I have no probem telling you I am against all legacies. Clearly, your opinion changes based on which party it concerns.
And, are you actually trying to say you have said no vile things about Kennedy? Do I really need to copy and paste them for you? Is this all a short-term memory problem with you?
"What about Mary Jo's graduation picture, or maybe her autopsy photo." - FL
How about wanting that displayed in front of a man's family at his wake or funeral for starters? Vile enough for you? You are pathetic, "fair"-liberal.
Excellent idea, we can get Barney Frank to pose for it.
And the Republicans have the Democrats beat, hands down, when it comes to putting on a political show.
They know how and where to get their message out. That is one of the reasons they have been able to sucker the masses into believing that Reagan was such a great president, even though he raised taxes 7 times.
And when did I say that only 2 pres have given out pardons, you are making that up. You are good at that.
But really do you think that a pres who sells his pardon is actually better than the one who does so for the reason that i referenced?
That was just the excuse mr. stumblebutt gave at the direction of the Reichstagg Nationalistic-socialist Committee.
I recall Dubya on an aircraft carrier on May 1, 2003
....apologies, I'm being cynical this morning.
In addition, Imhoffe said today that he wouldn't read the bill because he didn't need to read it if he was gonna vote against it anyways. There's your politicizing.
Limbaugh was RIGHT!
MediaMudders: Bagged by their own content.
So, as you blubber away in your hanky over Teddy's departure keep this in mind during your equally cerebral retrospection of the man.
I'll give you a hint. Do you really think that Limbaugh's statements, made when Kennedy was alive, that the healthcare bill would be called the memorial Kennedy healthcare bill upset people because they thought the comments were inaccurate?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-franken/reflections-on-the-wellst_b_15459.html
Randy
It's a neat trick, to be sure. It wasn't an overwhelming amount of disrespect, only a very significant amount of disrespect. I hope you didn't hurt yourself reaching out to the opposition there.
Is there no videotape evidence of this anywhere? That should give you a pretty good idea of who's telling the truth. Whether there is such a solution or not, your logic is still garbage. That was my point.
That's stupid. You're suggesting that in a large crowd, milling around, chatting, crying, laughing before the memorial started, that over half of them were staring at the jumbotron for that brief time that Lott appeared on it. And that almost all of that group booed in what would have had to have been an almost immediate reaction. And that the boos of 10,000 people was undetectable by the television broadcast.
What garbage. I'd say that Franken's estimate is probably extremely close to the truth. No more than a few hundred actually booed, probably well under 500.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXNetpeu_mk
Randy
Here are two of the book's chapters:
http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/bonaro-extremism-intro.html
http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/overstreet-reading-lesson.html
That's 23% in the space of 6 months.
My insurance company must need a new corporate jet.
If memory serves, Ted Kennedy was a politician who worked in politics for roughly 50 years - 46-47 of which were in the U.S. Senate. Again, if memory serves, he advocated for patients rights and for improved healthcare for all citizens as a fundamental right, not privilege.
So - why NOT try to pass legislation as a tribute to / in the honor of the man who tried to do that his entire political life?
I also love the way Reps are saying they'd be able to vote for something were Kennedy still alive to compromise. Of course, folks like McCain and Gregg (and others) all voted against Kennedy's last legislation, but I'm sure that's irrelevant.
So I say go for it...do it in the name of Uncle Ted. Pass that legislation and smack the Kennedy name all over it.
The downing of Wellstone's plane has never been fully investigated so they accuse Democrats of politicizing his tragic death to distract focus from the causes of the crash.
Their behavior at town halls models Hitler's brownshirts shouting down the democratically-elected Weimar government officials and their supporters in the 1930s so they accuse Democrats of this.
They accuse Democrats of cutting Medicare funding when they will ELIMINATE this program by PRIVATIZING it, along with Social Security, if they get power again in 2012.
"Do not judge, lest you be judged yourselves. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it shall be measured to you." Jesus Christ in his Sermon on the Mount, Gandhi's favorite prose. (Matthew 7:1-2; Matthew 5-7)
Just imagine what would have happened to Seniors' Social Security pension if Bush/Cheney/Rove and their mega-rich Republican cronies in Congress had been able to PRIVATIZE Social Security BEFORE their surrogates on Wall Street gambled away the world economy for personal mega-profits in 2008.
Judging others with slander and libel is always an indictment of committing the same wrongs those sitting in judgment are accusing their adversaries of doing. Three fingers always point back at you.
And, as Hitler often said," If you shout a lie loud enough long enough people will believe it! Macht ist Recht!"
If Seniors and others shout down Obama's health insurance reform with the public option (Medicare for ALL Americans, not just the elderly and the rich) they will get neocon ideologue Republican PRIVATIZATION of Medicare and SS. Tom DeLay on Hardball: "PRIVATIZE IT!" (Medicare) McCain at town hall: "We (Adam Smith Social Darwinism 'survival of the fittest/richest' Republicans) want to save Medicare and Social Security for your children and grandchildren with good FREE-MARKET solutions!" (PRIVATIZATION!)
By the way, Limbaugh raked in over $33 million in 2007 alone. As "Deep Throat" told Woodward during the Nixon Republican scandal, "FOLLOW THE MONEY!"
"...for the love of money is the root of all evil..." St. Paul (I Timothy 6:9-10)
"Recht ist Macht!"
"By the way, Limbaugh raked in over $33 million in 2007 alone"...how much did Gore and Clinton and Kerry and Kennedy rake in?
And BTW, the rich don't need Medicare, they have far better insurance than that. How many dems do you know who are advocating that they get the same insurance as what they are proposing for the people? Maybe zero?
Instead how about just proposing the candidate obama healthcare plan. The ability to buy health insurance across state lines or national borders in the case of prescriptions. The ability to purchase the same plan as Congress.
This would inrease access,lower costs, not involve taxpayer dollars and most importantly keep intact the most effective healthcare delivery system on the planet.