The Politics of Crying, from 1972 to 2024
(originally posted as a reponse to an op, but maybe worthy of its own op, with all humility)
My take on Gus is, the MAGAts had so little to attack the Democrats about our convention,
that they were left without much but to attack a young man with disabilities
who cheered for his father in tears.... That's it and that's all.
Reminded me of this incident in political history...
Back in 1972, Senator Edmund Muskie, the front-runner for the 1972 Democratic presidential nomination,
(Hubert Humphrey's running mate in 1968),
was routed out of the race by accusations from the far-right Manchester NH newspaper,
the 'Manchester Union Leader', owned by a notorious right-winger whose name I do not recall anymore,
that he was crying in public while responding to attacks which that newspaper made about his wife.
As it happened, it was snowing heavily when he made his statement outdoors,
so the alleged tears may have actually been only snowflakes melting on his cheeks.
Never the less, he was forced to withdraw from the campaign over this incident,
since back then especially, it was "unmanly" to cry.
Well, there is nothing wrong with crying, whether it actually happened or not,
unless you are not a human being!
In any case, Gus's tears were "tears of joy",
and many such tears were shed by speakers at our convention!
But, to shed tears about an attack on your family which was inspired by politics,
ought not to disqualify you from the presidency,
whether it is 1972 or later...
At least we have moved a bit beyond such attacks against politicians,
and now the Republicans are left with attacking a young man with disabilities who isn't on the ballot...
I suppose that is "progress" in comparison to 1972,
but not so much progress in terms of respect for fellow human beings
who may have disabilities but also have feelings.
= new reply since forum marked as read
