take this argument and shove it

I would have something more poignant to say regarding Teddy's long running battle with cancer that time finally won out on. But I don't. I didn't grow up with the Kennedys in their prime as it were. I grew up with Teddy as a figure working in Congress, working quite effectively and well at that, but not always in the front. Some of that was his own failings in his personal effects and life. We all have them. Clinton went through much of this as well. So did his more famous brother (although much less publicly). I suspect though the difference is that I don't recall the Kennedys ever brandishing a supposed moral club over their political foes regarding their personal life. They probably knew they were scoundrels. That's in part why so much of their work should be regarded as astonishing. Sometimes they made mistakes in politics (Teddy started out for the Vietnam War for instance).

But this was a partial list of major legislative and executive achievements
1) immigration reform (ended quotas)
2) civil rights (pushed to end poll tax, eventual amendment)
3) national teacher corps (attempt to address social-economic imbalance cycle of lack of opportunity in poor and rural areas)
4) pushed to resolve the Irish troubles
5) Cancer and AIDS funding initiatives, along with a long-standing record for single-payer health care, including programs like COBRA and SCHIP.
6) public finance laws for campaigns (post-watergate)
7) Title IX
8) pushed for nuclear freeze, opposed interventionism throughout Central America
9) Americans with Disabilities Act
10) headed committee that eventually de-regulated air travel

When added onto familial legacy achievements like the Peace Corps, Special Olympics, et al, it's a busy, busy list. There are individual quibbles here and there on the effectiveness of some things. NCLB was pretty dumb for example. But even there he reversed himself when Bush wasn't actually funding the bill (same with Medicare part D).

There are two ways to look at a life like that. One is the line at the end of Inside Man "....And then he tried to wash away his guilt. Drown it in a lifetime of good deeds and a sea of respectability." That's certainly one way to look at it. Some of our deeds are just not worth the respectability that we try to earn by serving others. But the other way is to say "guess what, those are some damn good deeds". Sometimes they're outweighed by our burdens or our "sins".

I'm not sure irresponsible or stupid mistakes rather than deliberate mistakes in ethics should be judged that way. It's like trying to hold accountable an adult for things they did as a 15 year old kid. It's one thing if they killed someone on purpose as a 15 year old or tortured animals for example. It's another if they smoked some weed and had oral sex with their boyfriend/girlfriend. Or even cheated on that boyfriend/girlfriend with someone else. Or got drunk and crashed their parents car. Or whatever. A lot of the things that people do as human beings in their daily lives, even as adults, are impulsive and stupid or irrational at best. We know that after the fact and try to make up for it and learn if we can, especially when they have terrible consequences. We therefore make allowances for stupidity and foolishness when we move to punish people legally, ethically and socially for those consequences. And some people will move to make those allowances themselves and drown away that guilt in a sea of good deeds. In most respects, on balance, that's probably a good thing for us to be reminded that we're not perfect and to try to act accordingly. It would be best if we could learn that lesson less painfully or tragically than some have to, as Teddy Kennedy had to, but that's just not how life works.

There's an ancient practice that the Romans allegedly used to use for their triumphs. A slave would ride with the celebrated general/emperor while saying to him the phrase "Memento Mori" (remember you are mortal for those lacking in a Latin education), repeatedly. Whether that's true or not, it's basically the same lesson here. Human beings are flawed creatures. We have limited minds and senses that perceive only so much and only have time enough to experience so much of that even. That inevitably means we're going to fuck up. Some of us a lot or in major ways. We, collectively, have to deal with that when it carries dangers and consequences of danger and risk for the rest of us. But most of the time it just means a lot of pain and suffering for individuals pushing up against each other and making mistakes, taking risks, and trying ever so hard to attain a level of serenity and happiness. The least we can do is try to recognize that an entire life is not always defined by its mistakes.

The most momentous mistakes, that cost us dearly, will be always remembered that way. There's no getting around that. But when I look at figures like Jefferson and Washington and the modern revisionist history that paints them mostly as vilified slave owners (and to that extent, rightly so) and then look at the deeds and works they produced in their time against the works of their contemporaries, I have to wonder. A human being is defined by an awful lot of things. Focusing only on those negatives, painting everyone as a monster (or as Hitler) is convenient if you want to achieve something politically. But it's not intellectually honest. And trying to use that tactic on someone like me it means I will probably take the rest of your argument and tell you to shove it. Because you're probably either trying to sweep the dirt under the rug for your own side or you're just throwing out the cake with the candles. It's just not a complete image of the situation that you're painting or aware of to where I have any interest in anything else you'll have to say on a subject.

I'd much rather have to eat the cake with the candles than have to throw it out entirely. You can learn something that way. (now if it's a huge candle and its sitting on a cupcake, maybe not...but then that's where Hitler actually comes in)