Wow: Kennedy didn’t dabble in petty personal attacks, says David Shuster

I’m amused to find myself on Politico’s list of conservatives who couldn’t “hold their fire” on Teddy because I suggested that Democrats just might politicize his memorial service later this week.

Allahpundit, in fairness to Politico, they didn’t mischaracterize what you said as attacking Kennedy. This is what the article says before you’re quoted:

Few – if any – others on the right were willing to attack Kennedy so directly so soon. Instead, they did so indirectly, teeing off against the Democrats who will eulogize Kennedy and the reporters who are covering it all. The fear: The Democrats and their allies in the press will use Kennedy’s death to ram through health care reform.

I think that’s a fair characterization of yours and others’ (accurate and appropriate) commentary.

It *does* seem inappropriate that it’s included in an article titled “Not all Kennedy critics hold fire,” especially when Breitbart seems to be the only one quoted who would fit that bill. And it’s not just a case of a poor headline, because the article also says, “But not every Kennedy foe was ready to forgive and forget.”

tneloms on August 26, 2009 at 6:41 PM

Those are empty platitudes, troll. They have as much meaning and substance as the talking points and juvenile insults you toss out here

you’re a liar, poorly defending a liar

Janos Hunyadi on August 26, 2009 at 6:42 PM

They may be empty platitudes, but that wasn’t crr6′s point. The point is that Kennedy himself said that enacting universal health care was the cause of his life. Therefore, reminding people of that as he is eulogized is less of an exploitation.

Given that he said that this was the cause of his life (even if that’s an empty platitude), should his eulogies omit this fact?

Yes, it’s still exploitation by both Kennedy himself (since he’s the one who said it) and the Democrats who are bringing it up now, because they are trying to play on people’s sympathies to get a policy enacted. But it’s certainly less of an exploitation if he did in fact see it as the cause of his life.

tneloms on August 26, 2009 at 6:50 PM

Try editing your posts for clarity: You muddled whatever it was you were trying to say.

Health care was not “the cause of his life”; that’s a lefty cliche. He DID engage in vicious personal attacks; ask Robert Bork

Janos Hunyadi on August 26, 2009 at 6:54 PM

I’m pretty sure you understand what it was I was trying to say. The part where I said “The point is…” and then “Therefore…” succinctly summarizes it.

I understand that you’re saying that this was just a lefty talking point. But it’s also something that he himself thought and said. Do you really think that the eulogies should ignore this point?

tneloms on August 26, 2009 at 7:06 PM