I wonder if Eugene Kane hurt himself with that straddle?

While it’s impressive to see a guy of a certain age manage to straddle both sides of the Corretta Scott King funeral offence, buy viagra store I have to admit I like it better when Eugene Kane is a little firmer with his crazy convictions.

With one side of his mouth, Eugene seems to be saying he could see why some people found Reverand Lowery’s and President Carter’s Bush bashing behavior boorish.

(After all, even some African-Americans “had concerns about some of the remarks.”)

Meanwhile, he’s using the other side of his mouth to blame President Bush.

His critics had to “act out” at a funeral, because it was the only time they could catch him “outside the protective bubble of subordinates and sycophants.”

I guess a strongly-worded letter was out of the question?

Anyway, after watching Eugene try to have his cake and eat it too throughout the entire column, it was nice to see him return to form with a beautifully made straw man.

Kane said:

The strong reaction from some readers and conservative commentators suggested an extreme breach of etiquette was on display, as if somehow criticizing the president of the United States was tantamount to treason during wartime.

I guess that’s one of the advantages of writing on paper instead of online.

In a blog, we’d expect the author to link to the posts comparing the liberal’s funeral tackiness to treason.

But guess what? I just searched Google, Technoratti and Icerocket and I couldn’t find any conservative bloggers who made that statement.

Now, I’m not calling Eugene a liar.

The web is a big place and I don’t know the content of his fan mail.

But I do think it’s sort of funny that the one place I DID find this comparison was on a liberal blog: Edendale.

Add comment February 12th, 2006