Michelle Malkin » Sen. Edward Kennedy has died

Sen. Edward Kennedy has died

By Michelle Malkin • August 26, 2009 01:32 AM

The U.S. Senator from Massachusetts succumbed to brain cancer at the age of 77 tonight. Put aside your ideological differences for an appropriate moment and mark this passing with solemnity.

There is a time and place for political analysis and criticism. Not now.

Yes, there will be a nauseating excess of MSM hagiographies and lionizations — and crass calls to pass the health care takeover to memorialize his death.

That’s no excuse to demonstrate the same lack of restraint in the other direction. Not now.

ABC News reports:

Sen. Ted Kennedy died shortly before midnight Tuesday at his home in Hyannis Port, Mass., at age 77.

The man known as the “liberal lion of the Senate” had fought a more than year-long battle with brain cancer, and according to his son had lived longer with the disease than his doctors expected him to…

..A hardworking, well-liked politician who became the standard-bearer of his brothers’ liberal causes, his career was clouded by allegations of personal immorality and accusations that his family’s clout helped him avoid the consequences of an accident that left a young woman dead.

But for the younger members of the Kennedy clan, from his own three children to those of his brothers JFK and RFK, Ted Kennedy — once seen as the youngest and least talented in a family of glamorous overachievers — was both a surrogate father and the center of the family.

And certainly it was Ted Kennedy who bore many of the tragedies of the family — the violent deaths of four of his siblings, his son’s battle with cancer, and the death of his nephew John F. Kennedy Jr. in a plane crash.

***

The Kennedy family statement is here.

***

From De Profundis, Psalm 130

Out of the depths I have cried to Thee, O Lord; Lord, hear my voice.
Let thine ears be attentive to the voice of my supplication.
If Thou, O Lord, shalt observe iniquities; Lord, who shall endure it?
For with Thee there is merciful forgiveness:
and by reason of Thy law, I have waited for Thee, O Lord.
My soul hath relied on His word; my soul hath hoped in the Lord…

***

The Anchoress has the best reflection and round-up on Kennedy’s death I’ve read.

Also must-read: Baseball Crank reflects on a Senate workhouse. Plus: Bonus video!

Posted in: Ted Kennedy

Printer Friendly

comments (367)

trackbacks (56)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

« Older Comments

#401

On August 26th, 2009 at 10:56 pm, graysonret said:

They say we should honor Kennedy by passing the health insurance bill. It strikes me as odd, using the word “honor” and “Kennedy” in the same sentence. Well, let the dead remain in peace, whoever they were. It may not be too much longer before I take the trip too. He will be a man that no-one will remember 20 years from now. Students will regard him as another name to memorize for a test and forget. There were many “memorable” senators before, but are not remembered, today. He will be in the shadow of his brother, John, who will be remembered, in the future, as an assassinated President only, much like Garfield and McKinley. Only students of history, like myself, will know who he was, and what he did or did not accomplish and whether, in the end, he had any influence on the country or not. The political atmosphere of the future will judge him, as worthwhile to know or not. Perhaps he will be consigned to history as W.E.B. Du Bois; the name is familiar, but the man is not.
#402

On August 26th, 2009 at 10:58 pm, joao1960 said:

someone asked me what i thought Teddy’s legacy kwould be. I answered in two words, “Mary Jo.”
#405

On August 27th, 2009 at 12:00 am, purplepeep said:

graysonret said:
He will be in the shadow of his brother, John, who will be remembered, in the future, as an assassinated President only, much like Garfield and McKinley.

I’d disagree re:JFK, graysonnet. I think you’re missing at least one very important factor. The national media did not exist in Garfield & McKinley’s time. I think there may be a few snippets of silent, herky jerky moving images but nothing such as the first televised Presidential debate between Nixon & Kennedy.

Certainly the only other assassinated president, Lincoln, hasn’t been forgotten. What people will remember in years to come can be tricky to predict, as we can see from Lincoln himself. In the Gettysburg Address he declared “the world will little note nor long remember what we say here”. Obviously, he got that wrong.
#406

On August 27th, 2009 at 12:22 am, bansharia said:

OT:
Prince Consort,
Prayers are with you and EnglishQueen
in your time of such joy.
,B
#407

On August 27th, 2009 at 12:41 am, graysonret said:

Purplepeep, Lincoln was involved in a civil war that changed the whole country. It changed the power of the country from states to national government. Of course, he would be remembered. He is “worshipped” today, despite his faults. But, this blog isn’t about the civil war. The national media did exist at that time; don’t forget Hearst. Newspapers were the “media” then. John Kennedy will be remembered, 50 years from now, as a President who was assassinated. Nothing else. Bay of Pigs will be forgotten. Does anyone remember his speech to the Economic Club of N.Y., in 1963, which he stated that the “parodox of economics” was to reduce taxes in order to increase revenue to the government? I doubt it. It won’t be remembered, because it doesn’t fit the mold and is contradictory to the political philosophy today. McKinley and Garfield died in a time, quite different than our own. Does anyone, other than a student of history, know that McKinley got us out of the panic of 1893, or was the President during the Spanish-American War? No, most remember him as a President who was assassinated. That’s it. To equate John Kennedy with Lincoln is ridiculous. His importance in the overall history of the country is minimal, as regarded 50 years from now. Ted Kennedy will be forgotten.
#408

On August 27th, 2009 at 1:56 am, purplepeep said:

graysonret said:

To equate John Kennedy with Lincoln is ridiculous.

I wasn’t making an equation, graysonret, just pointing out that I think it’s a risky proposition trying to predict who\what will be remembered next year, much less 50 years from now. As I mentioned even Abe got it wrong.

I think it’s easy and pretty normal to bring one’s personal political bias factor influence such predictions. But that’s subjective ground, not objective-based. I expect someone who favors a liberal worldview would come up with polar opposite “future histories”. It’s an interesting IMHO intellectual exercise, though. I suspect such speculations have always been made by folks throughout history.

Bay of Pigs will be forgotten.

Could be, but it’s already nearly 50 years out and we’re still talking about it.

Does anyone remember his speech to the Economic Club of N.Y., in 1963, which he stated that the “parodox of economics” was to reduce taxes in order to increase revenue to the government?

I do – and ,in fact, that speech is one reason why Rush states that JFK was a “dittohead”.

Newspapers were the “media” then.

You’re missing my point, graysonret. With the onset of the ability to preserve audio and video came a sort of “immortality”. People keep impressions and they remember “soundbites”, a constantly present, realtime media that’s delivered in devices such as blackberries just reinforces the memories and soundbites.

Folks can be see a JFK speech in a matter of seconds and a few clicks. I’d venture that not very many people have heard a speech by McKinley or Garfield, though I think there might be a rare old disc recording or two.

On the other hand, their memory clicks on at seeing – or just hearing the audio – of:
“Ich bin ein Berliner” or “Tear down this wall”.

If I run off just a top o’ my head list re: JFK, I come up with Bay of Pigs, Cuban missile crisis, Peace Corps, military expansion/involvement in Vietnam, that West Berlin speech, the “Torch has been passed”/”Ask not” inaugural speech, the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, civil rights, the space program.

It’s pretty hard to forget the time when the world was on the brink of nuclear war. Or the first moon landing in 1969, as JFK proposed.

At any rate, I think this is an “agree to disagree area”. The nice thing is that neither one of us will be able to prove the other wrong come 2100 – unless Obamacare is promising eternal youth, of course.
#409

On August 27th, 2009 at 3:14 am, Jason L. said:

On August 26th, 2009 at 6:24 pm, purplepeep said:

You’re certainly welcome to emulate the lunatic fringe left and Chris Matthews if you so desire, Jason. There are even the headcases who protest at funerals to cite as role models, if you wish.

Thanks for twisting my words and their meanings, puprplepeeps. I never said anything, nor alluded to, protesting anyone’s funeral, nor using the same venom and slather that Matthews and his ilk tend to use towards conservatives. What I meant was that I have no intention of eulogizing a man who is responsible for the deaths of millions, whose political and governmental decisions have made the U.S. of A. a much worse place, and who helped to open the floodgates for illegal immigration. And just so you know, purple, I did read Ms. Malkin’s request, and I ahve been cordial in my dissent towards Se. K’s eulogizing by the left. Take or leave it, my friend.

As I alluded before, I’m sadly used to a generation of males lacking even such basic civilities as opening doors for women or taking one’s hat-cap off when entering a house of worship.

So am I. But if you are going to accuse me of uncivility, then just have at it, come on out and od it, but be prepared for a rebuttal to your opinion, and please, do go back and read my posts, and feel free to point out any uncivility I’ve shown. In the words of one of my Football Coachss, “Put up or shut up…”

Usually when someone intones the Royal “We” I wondering if it’s a case of worms or what, but I digress. (Conjoined twins, mayhaps?)

Since you seem to be addressing more than one person, is it not grammatically appropos to use the first person plural we? And, again, thanks for dragging this discussion we are having down to an inappropriate level. Tacking liberally in a discussion is not really a wise course of action.

Obviously you either refused to, or were unable to, read what our hostess wrote above and instead you just went off on a series of Pavlovian political emotional explosions solely as a result of seeing the word “Kennedy”.

Yes, yes, when you have nothign else in your “bag of ‘tricks’”, why not attack a person’s intelligence? That always *cough* “works” (and is, sadly, another trick of liberals and the left: attack the messenger, not the message [usually because they can't attack the message]). Yes, purple, as I mentioned above, I did read Ms. Malkin’s request. Now, if you will, please point out where I have been uncivil. Again, “put up or shut up”. And, quite in an opposite flow to your assumptions (never assume: ’tis always dangerous), I admire Ted Kennedy’s elder brothers. They were far more conservative than Sen. Kennedey was. Thanks for asking though….
#410

On August 27th, 2009 at 4:25 am, purplepeep said:

Jason L. said:
I never said anything, nor alluded to, protesting anyone’s funeral, nor using the same venom and slather that Matthews and his ilk tend to use towards conservatives.

Let’s look at the context, Jason:

What purplepeep and others in her eforget is that the left and the MSM (but I repeat myself) actually DID do that to President Reagan: I watched Chris Matthews smear him.

To which I replied with basically a “so what’s that to you here”? I agree with Michelle’s view that “Well, they do it, too!” is usually a pretty bad excuse. If Michelle had written a entry about media hypocrisy where everyone was having at the media your off-topic complaint might fight in. But that’s not the case here.

I have no intention of eulogizing a man who is responsible for the deaths of millions

Again, that’s just so much total emotional hyperbole strawmen. Can you point out where anyone, much less Michelle, even suggested you to “eulogize” anyone??

By the way, assuming you’re speaking of abortion there;it was legalized under President Nixon and most of the Presidents of our country since that time have been Republican/Conservative. So when you’re looking for comparison points on which to build self-righteousness you have a whole lotta people to point fingers at. I’d say the same to self-righteous loony lefties who go off on derangement syndrome tirades about GOP leaders who’ve “killed millions” (e.g. Bush killing a million+ Iraqis)

Since you seem to be addressing more than one person, is it not grammatically appropos to use the first person plural we?

I have no idea what you’re saying there, Jason. I can only comment to one person at a time, e.g. you-now-here. It makes me giggle when anyone other than the Queen of England employs the term instead of “I” or “me”. But I believe even the Queen has dropped the usage.

“you just went off on a series of Pavlovian political emotional explosions solely as a result of seeing the word “Kennedy”.”

Yes, yes, when you have nothign else in your “bag of ‘tricks’”, why not attack a person’s intelligence?

Nope, that’s speaking to emotionalism, not intelligence. Knee-jerk reactions are not wrong in and of themselves. When they come out at the wrong time and place, that’s wrong. In this case, more to the point, it’s disrespectful to Michelle’s extremely clear plea to set aside the knee-jerk reaction for a day. It was your emotional reasoning that somehow incorrectly processed her plea into a demand for a eulogy.

I admire Ted Kennedy’s elder brothers.

I believe I noted it was some other commenter’s – not yours – own over-the-top emotional reaction that was, quite frankly, not just incredibly disrespectful but truly mentally unbalanced re: the Kennedy brothers.
#411

On August 27th, 2009 at 4:45 am, bansharia said:

Hmmm 27 hours and purp is still being rude guest in MM’s house.
a hoot
#413

On August 27th, 2009 at 9:14 am, Ignatius Reilly said:

On August 27th, 2009 at 4:45 am, bansharia said:

Hmmm 27 hours and purp is still being rude guest in MM’s house.
a hoot

LOL

I’ve just had my first look of the day and see that the manic forum monitor, purplepeep, looks to have gone through a second night without sleep, so important is her self-appointed role as assistant to MM.

Have you gone off your meds, purplepeep?

I have seen some pajamed lunatics in my years on the internet, but I think you may be the ne plus ultra.

I’ll bet all those cats are really getting agitated. You better stir yourself to put out some food for them.
#414

On August 27th, 2009 at 10:47 am, Tazed and Confused said:

“The Bible teaches plainly that what we are when we die, whether converted or unconverted, whether believers or unbelievers, whether godly or ungodly, so shall we rise again when the last trumpet sounds. There is no repentance in the grave: there is no conversion after the last breath is drawn. Now is the time to believe in Christ, and to lay hold of eternal life.”

— JC Ryle
#415

On August 27th, 2009 at 10:54 am, RetFireman said:

Oh look…my self imposed 24 hour moritorium has expired.
#416

On August 27th, 2009 at 2:40 pm, gunslingerpatriot said:

Since its been over 24 hours since Teddy Kennedy has died, its now to speak about the dearly departed:

I hope you are enjoying your time in He11 while Mary Jo is safely in the arms of her loving Lord.

I have not, will not show any more respect for this POS of a Senator than has been shown to far greater men and women that he wasn’t worthy to shine their boots or step a foot on a ship-of-war.

Teddy is a prime example of what the desire for power leads too: A double standard, shredding the US Constitution, giving aid and comfort to our enemies and looking after himself while the rest of us suffer due to the laws he helped write.

So if there is a sense of justice in the next life, it would be this:
a) He gets a warm spot in hades with a bunkmate that calls him “Beiotch” (I heard Sadam Hussein’s cell is available)
b) That he is repeatedly waterboarded in he11’s swimming pool-8 feet deep and covered in molten lava rather than Martha’s finest vineyard.
c) Teddy saves a spot for the four animals that murdered Christian and Newsome and that he becomes one of these animals next “Beoitch”
d) That he recieves the same amount of compassion that he showed Mary Jo Kopechne ie NONE!

GSP
#417

On August 27th, 2009 at 3:58 pm, purplepeep said:

Ignatius Reilly said:
I’ve just had my first look of the day and see that the manic forum monitor, purplepeep

I’m honored that I made you feel guilty for both refusing to read what Michelle wrote and for disrespecting her. Next time you’ll think twice and won’t need to feel so ashamed and embarrassed again.

You’re welcome for the lesson, IR. It steams you now, but your parent(s) should have taught you about basic manners a long time ago. But better late than never!
#420

On August 28th, 2009 at 5:18 pm, RetFireman said:

There are an awful lot of waitresses in WAshington who now can feel safe about going to work without being groped, accosted, and “sandwiched” as well as any number of women on the beaches as well as nightclubs and elsewhere in Kennebunkport and elsewhee who no longer need fear being fondled, accosted and raped by Uncle Teddy and his nephews that he was dhowing the ropes to.
#421

On August 28th, 2009 at 11:04 pm, Jason L. said:

Purplepeeps, nice duck-and-dodge, regarding my question asking you when and where I said anything about protesting Sen. Kennedy’s funeral. Again, typical liberal tactic: when the accusations cannot be proven, duck and dodge, or shriek and flail.

If we are going to talk about moral grounds, then lets talk moral grounds, purplepeeps: which of the 1973 judges on the Supreme Court did republican presidents nominate? More specifically, which ones that voted up or down? Further, how many of the Wars of the 20th Century were started under Democrats’ watch, and which ones did Republican Presidents have to clean up? If we are going to talk moral high ground, the njust come out and do it, purplepeeps, because Democratic Presidents have been responsible for the US of A becoming involved in both World Wars, Korea, and VietNam, and in the last two, it took Republican Presidents to clean up the mess left over by the democrat predecessors. And the abortion issue? How many of those Republican Presidents had Democrat Majorities in Congress, which promised to KO any anti-abortion bill proposed by the sitting GOP President? Go ahead and look it up; I’ll wait. What was that, again, about a “strawman”?

I’m mnot asurprised you don’t understand the use of the word “we” in this instance, purplepeeps, so since oyu seem to be a bit ignorant about the use of proper English Grammar, let me educate you: Since you are attacking and rebutting Conservatives in general, purplepeeps, who are taking this time to dissent (notice, I typed DISSENT, not “protest”) agaisnt Sen. Kennedy, it is entirely proper for me to use the plural 1st person “we”. The reason you don’t seem to understand, and are going off on needless and senseless grammatical tangents is because your arguments don’t hold water, and you must obfuscate the point by adding confusatory dalliance in order to make up for your position’s weak stance.

Finally, knee-jerk reaction it is not. Sen. Kennedy is known for his uber-liberal stances, his selling out of the allies the US of A promised ot defend, and opening the borders to the illegal laines of 1965 giving us the problem we have otday. My reaction is not a “knee jerk” reaction as you erroneously imply, but a well thought out response to the sainting that is being carried out by the MSM.

And to end with, again, the charge that conservatives are somehow mentally unbalanced is another trick by the left when there is no sound, resourced argument to proffer. President Kennedy, and Attorney General Kennedy were far more conservative than Sen. Kennedy ever was, and that is just the plain truth….
#423

On August 29th, 2009 at 10:50 am, pdigaudio said:

As any of my regular readers know, I didn’t show one iota of restraint when The Swimmer assumed room temperature. Hell, did their side show any restraint let alone compassion when Ronald Reagan died? Tony Snow? Bob Novak? Charlton Heston?

Not just no, but HELL NO! Talk about true hate. And what do you think their side will do when Dick Cheney, George W. Bush and Rush Limbaugh die?

As for the late Senator from Chappaquiddick being the Lion of the Senate who drew bipartisan consensus, what bipartisan on anything, unless you define bipartisan as RINOs dropping principles to agree with him (John McCain, call your office). Every time a Republican and The Swimmer came to an agreement, it was always on The Swimmer’s terms and principles.

The only reason he’s being buried at Arlington is they need the fat and the booze in him to keep the eternal flame burning. His military service? Submarine duty at Chappaquiddick.

And once again, Mary Jo Kopechne was unavailable for comment.