Let me take a moment to express my annoyance with Matt individually, but moreso the global group of conservatives who relished the opportunity to make one last Chappaquiddick crack today.
Not because it's a dick move to criticize someone on the day of their death. I'm OK with that, and believe me, I'll have plenty of things to say about George W Bush after his departure.
But because it's long been held up by the right as sort of a talisman to discredit everything he has ever done in his public life. "Sure, he's been a tireless advocate for the poor and the sick, but Mary Jo Kopechne, amIright?" It's sort of the ultimate ad hominem attack. It's true and tragic that a young woman died because of TK's negligence and/or substance abuse. It's equally true that were he not named "Kennedy" his political career probably would have ended that night. (A more damning criticism, infrequently made but more to the point, was that were he not named "Kennedy" he'd never have been in the Senate in the first place; that seat was bequeathed to him as a family heirloom.) But so what?
Seriously, he was a child of privilege who was granted power and exempted from accountability from his earliest days. Terrible, terrible. But also irrelevant. He may or may not have been a great or awful human being. He was, however, a great statesman, a great legislator, and a great public advocate for the underprivileged. His private life was to some degree stained, but his public career was the stuff of legend, and his principles have never been questioned.
I saw a headline on a (liberal) blog that read something to the effect that "Teddy was the only Kennedy who wasn't overrated." True.
Consistency matters, and I'll try to hold myself to the same standard. So when W croaks, I will do my best to avoid pointing out that he was a shallow, incurious religiously-blinkered draft dodger, but the fact that he did lasting damage to our Constitution and shed the blood of countless innocents I will be happy to point out.
Not because it's a dick move to criticize someone on the day of their death. I'm OK with that, and believe me, I'll have plenty of things to say about George W Bush after his departure.
But because it's long been held up by the right as sort of a talisman to discredit everything he has ever done in his public life. "Sure, he's been a tireless advocate for the poor and the sick, but Mary Jo Kopechne, amIright?" It's sort of the ultimate ad hominem attack. It's true and tragic that a young woman died because of TK's negligence and/or substance abuse. It's equally true that were he not named "Kennedy" his political career probably would have ended that night. (A more damning criticism, infrequently made but more to the point, was that were he not named "Kennedy" he'd never have been in the Senate in the first place; that seat was bequeathed to him as a family heirloom.) But so what?
Seriously, he was a child of privilege who was granted power and exempted from accountability from his earliest days. Terrible, terrible. But also irrelevant. He may or may not have been a great or awful human being. He was, however, a great statesman, a great legislator, and a great public advocate for the underprivileged. His private life was to some degree stained, but his public career was the stuff of legend, and his principles have never been questioned.
I saw a headline on a (liberal) blog that read something to the effect that "Teddy was the only Kennedy who wasn't overrated." True.
Consistency matters, and I'll try to hold myself to the same standard. So when W croaks, I will do my best to avoid pointing out that he was a shallow, incurious religiously-blinkered draft dodger, but the fact that he did lasting damage to our Constitution and shed the blood of countless innocents I will be happy to point out.
No comments:
Post a Comment