The scene is becoming painfully familiar. At what used to be considered the most inappropriate times imaginable, the left has chosen solemn public occasions to vent their hatred and disgust at Republicans, conservatives, and even the President himself. And while there is something to be said for freedom of speech on any and all occasions, one can certainly question whether or not funerals and national tragedies like Hurricane Katrina are fit circumstances to engage in the kind of rancorous, partisan speechifying that have marked the funerals of Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone, Corretta Scott King, and the immediate aftermath of the destruction of the Gulf Coast.

The way in which one determines appropriate and inappropriate behavior in society has been evolving for more than 500 years. In a very large way, democratic society cannot function without an agreed upon set of manners and behaviors that grease the wheels of discourse and allow for differences of opinion that, in earlier times, would have led to physical combat. Good manners and civility then are not just artificial social constructs which dictate suitable public conduct, but necessary components that make up the nuts and bolts of democratic government, as important as a written constitution to the smooth functioning of our republic.

In order for these constructs to have meaning, all must accept them. But judging by what we have seen from the left in recent years, it appears that this necessary compact regarding civil discourse has been broken and behaviors that previously were considered out of bounds have now become a staple of their unreasoning and pathological hatred of their political opponents.

Just a few days prior to the 2002 midterm elections, a memorial service was held for Senator Paul Wellstone, tragically killed in a plane crash. The service was attended by 15,000 people including nearly half of the United States Senate, several House members, and other local Republican dignitaries. One who was not there was Vice President Dick Cheney who had announced that he would participate but had been rudely disinvited. This sign of extraordinary disrespect to the office of Vice President was an omen for what followed. For what should have been an event that commemorated the life of someone who by all accounts was a good and decent man turned into a partisan slugfest by Democratic speakers who brought the cheering crowd to its feet several times with partisan attacks on Republicans.

It was a shocking display of inappropriate behavior. In addition to cheering wildly at the speeches, the crowd booed lustily when recognizable Republicans like Senator Trent Lott (then the Majority Leader) were introduced. CNN and other TV outlets later explained that they felt they couldn’t cut away from what had become a campaign rally because it was a “memorial service.”

One could make the argument that since the election was literally hours away, such a display was inevitable. I totally reject that notion based on the idea of simple, common decency. Republicans who were also friends of the late Senator had come to pay their respects and were instead used as props in a political passion play, targets to be struck again and again by partisan attacks by Democratic speakers . How can anyone claim that using someone – even a political opponent – in this way was fitting behavior during a funeral?

For the left, good manners and deporting oneself with a minimum of courtesy and respect has no meaning in a political context. Since the 1960’s, it has become more important to “speak truth to power” than maintain even a semblance of decency in conducting political discourse. This has allowed the left to justify shouting down political opponents while claiming to be exercising free speech, an ironic contrivance that seems to have escaped their understanding.

It has also allowed liberals to claim the moral high ground where none exists. Witness the funeral on Tuesday of civil rights icon Corretta Scott King. The Reverend Joseph Lowery, who took over the leadership of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference following the death of Martin Luther King, gave a speech that in content and tone could only be considered “political.” It was given solely to embarrass the President of the United States (whose own speech was a model of restraint and decorum). The Reverend Lowery accused the President of lying about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq as well as making a barely concealed charge of racism:

“She deplored the terror inflicted by our smart bombs on missions way afar,” Lowery said. “We know now there were no weapons of mass destruction over there. But Coretta knew, and we knew, that there are weapons of misdirection right down here. Millions without health insurance. Poverty abounds. For war, billions more, but no more for the poor.”

He was followed by President Carter who didn’t even bother to conceal his belief that the President is a racist and used the occasion to criticize the NSA intercept program:

“This commemorative ceremony this morning and this afternoon is not only to acknowledge the great contributions of Coretta and Martin, but to remind us that the struggle for equal rights is not over,” former Democratic President Carter said to applause. “We only have to recall the color of the faces of those in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi, those who were most devastated by Katrina, to know that there are not yet equal opportunities for all Americans.”

Carter, who has had a strained relationship with Bush, drew cheers when he used the Kings’ struggle as a reminder of the recent debate over whether Bush violated civil liberties protections by ordering warrantless surveillance of some domestic phone calls and e-mails.

Noting that the Kings’ work was “not appreciated even at the highest level of the government,” Carter said: “It was difficult for them personally — with the civil liberties of both husband and wife violated as they became the target of secret government wiretapping, other surveillance, and as you know, harassment from the FBI.” Bush has said his own program of warrantless wiretapping is aimed at stopping terrorists.

Certainly both Lowery and Carter have a perfect right to make any accusation they think they can get away with at any time. I am not denying their right to do so. What I’m saying is that there is a time and place for everything – and a funeral is not a place for partisan hackery. To use the President of the United States as a punching bag at an event to commemorate the passing of a great American does not contribute to the national dialog nor does it bring honor to the dead. It is a simple exercise in tastelessness.

In a pre-emptive attack on the right who are blasting away at this breakdown in civility, leftists have offered the novel idea that it was entirely appropriate to use the President as a punching bag despite the fact that his presence – not of the man but of the office itself – does an enormous honor to the King family. Jeralyn Merritt:

The tributes were appropriate. They were on topics not only relevant, but central to the lives and work of Coretta Scott King and Martin Luther King, Jr. I’m wondering why Bush was granted speaking privileges to begin with? Their lives have nothing in common and I doubt they were close friends.

If, as we are constantly reminded by the left, that we are a nation of laws and not of men, why is so difficult for Ms. Merritt and other liberals to see that respecting the office of President is so much more important than hating the man who occupies it? Are they that small minded? Are they so consumed with rage that they cannot see the insult done to the office does not damage Bush half as much as it injures the dignity of the Presidency?

John Aravosis goes even further. He accuses the right of “Samboing” the funeral:

How dare a black man not know his place at a funeral, they’ll say. As if the Republican party and its surrogates have any right whatsoever to speak on behalf of Mrs. King, to tell black America what they can and cannot do to honor one of their most revered leaders.

How we got from the right criticizing Democrats for a lack of common decency to the left accusing Republicans of racism is beyond me. As if manners and modes of behavior weren’t the same for all, regardless of race? I guess if you throw enough crap at the wall some of it is bound to stick.

The obvious answer as to why use the funeral of a prominent person as a vehicle for political diatribes is the ubiquitous presence of television. And therein lies the real transgression. For in addition to using their political opponents who are present, the speakers at the Wellstone and King funerals tarred millions of the President’s supporters with the same racist coat of feathers. It is unthinking. It is unworthy. And if we weren’t used to it by now it would be shocking.

That’s because if anyone had any illusions about the left’s claim to moral superiority one need only look at the aftermath of the Katrina tragedy. Almost before the hurricane winds that ravaged the city of New Orleans stopped blowing, the left was blaming the Bush Administration for the plight of the victims. Not only that, there were charges that the government “didn’t care about black people” which is why aid to the nearly destroyed city was so slow in coming.

Arguments about the competence of the federal government’s response have been raging since the tragedy and it is not my intent to add anything to them. The point is one of common decency; while thousands of their fellow citizens were still in need of rescue in a life and death situation and with hundreds of bodies floating in the flood waters, the left deliberately chose that moment to initiate a partisan political attack the likes of which have rarely been seen in this country.

Accusing the government of incompetence is one thing. Accusing them of murder is another. And the thinly veiled charges that the Bush Administration deliberately withheld aid to the nearly destroyed city of New Orleans because it is made up of mostly black people while the rest of the country was riveted by the efforts to save lives would be unbelievable in any other age, any other time.

If there was any doubt that we have entered a new era in American politics where nothing is sacred, no occasion too solemn for partisan attack, the King funeral should disabuse one and all of that idea. With the blanket TV coverage that such events afford and with the need to feed the ideological frenzy of their base, don’t expect any change in the left’s behavior anytime soon. Only the disapprobation of the public will cause them to think before acting in such a disgusting manner.

And as long as that behavior is seen by the media as acceptable, that is not going to happen.

UPDATE

The Anchoress weighed in first on this topic. And said it much better than I did. Read the whole thing

Betsy Newmark mourns a “lost opportunity” to honor the memory of the Kings. Very true.

UPDATE II 2/10

Tom Bevan is on pretty much the same wavelength that I am.