Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Christopher Merola :: Townhall.com Columnist
Dr. King's Dream or the Cult of Obama?
by Christopher Merola
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



While watching the Obama inauguration on television, I could not help but be struck by two very different emotions. On the one hand, I was happy for the African-American community. An African-American President in the White House is certainly a symbol of affirmation of the civil rights movement. However, on the other hand, I was also left with a feeling of disappointment when I contemplated just who is President.

When Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. marched for civil rights, he was building upon a legacy set in motion by those before him. People like Jackie Robinson and Jesse Owens opened the eyes of the nation to the equality of African-American people by breaking new ground. What is not often known is the class and integrity with which they broke that ground.

Let’s take Jackie Robinson for example. He endured racist insults and discrimination from his own teammates his first year in major league baseball. Instead of retaliating, Robinson put his Christian faith into action by “turning the other cheek” and pressing on. This resulted in his winning the respect of his teammates, including the players who once opposed him.

Jesse Owens also showed poise and integrity by ignoring the attacks on his character and instead showed his equality was indeed real by defeating Hitler’s athletes in the Berlin Olympic Games. His strength of character was such that even the German athletes he defeated befriended him. This is what character is all about: overcoming by enduring the pain and sacrifice of a difficult task for the greater good. It is a Biblical principal highlighted in the Gospels and in the Epistles as well.

Dr. King, a committed Christian and reverend, said in his "I Have a Dream" speech, “I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

This is precisely the standard that we all should strive for in order to heal race relations and precisely what disappointments me about Barack Obama. Just what is the content of his character? Has anyone even bothered to ask that question?

Ask yourself why Dr. King’s dream of character was never discussed during the 2008 campaign? This is no accident I believe. When candidate Obama stated that he does not look like those men on the dollar bill, he was implying that he alone is somehow qualified to heal race relations in America. Here we see the Cult of Obama at work.

Obama’s cult of personality not only made many feel like he was the only one who could heal our nation’s woes, but his own cult leader image drew attention away from his character. So what about his character is so disturbing that he does not want us to see it? Well, quite a lot really.

First of all, Barack Obama is basically a socialist. We must accept that as fact. If you still do not believe it, then look at the evidence. In 1996, when he ran for Illinois State Senate as a Democrat, candidate Obama pursued and subsequently received the endorsement of the New Party, a socialist group that was created by members of the Democratic Socialists for America. If you think this is insignificant, then remember that the New Party is an arm of the Communist Party USA. Do you think we should have heard about this during the election cycle?

Obama has claimed that he was not a member of the New Party, but the New Party’s spring newsletter of 1996 claimed that he was. Truth be told, it does not matter if he actually was a member of the New Party or not. It only matters that he sought the endorsement of an arm of the Communist Party USA and received it.

Another factor in Obama’s association with the New Party is the New Party’s work with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). This is the same ACORN that Obama used to “get out the vote” during the 2008 campaign by awarding their affiliates $832 million. This is the same ACORN that is under investigation nationwide for voter fraud in many elections.

Why was Obama never questioned as to why he used ACORN, a leftist group that apparently cheats in order to elect their candidates, in order to “get out the vote” for his presidential election? If Dr. King’s dream included looking at a person’s character above their race, then it is safe to say that Barack Obama’s character should have been questioned. Instead, Obama was given a pass by the media, in part, because he used symbolic propaganda to hide his nefarious associations and misdeeds.

Do you think I am overreacting here? Well, ask yourself about Obama’s relationship with Franklin Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae. Raines, who was placed as the CEO of Fannie Mae by President Bill Clinton, destroyed Fannie Mae and the housing market by massively increasing the amount of home loans to people that could not afford to pay them. This is what helped crash our economy, not supply-side economics or the Bush administration. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Christopher Merola is the Political Director for Political Media, Inc, a political advertising and public relations firm in Washington, DC.

strong moral character
too many Americans are all for appearance, not substance. How many of our elected federal officials have strong moral character? I can't name a single one.

Personality cult
I don't look at race in politics. It's all issues to me. That is why I am appalled at Obama as President. I do not understand the personality cult worship surrounding this guy. I didn't bother to watch the inaugeration because his speeches annoy me with the repitition like "yes we can... yes we can...". It's for the brain dead I'm sure.

I'm also surprised more attention isn't be given to the markets rejecting his economic policies. Markets reflect past events and future expectations. Since August when it became clear he would be the next President, the markets have been tanking. All the promises and bailouts (include Bush on this)seems to make things worse. With all the personality cult worship going on, I'm surprised the markets didn't have triple digit gains.

symbolism vs. substance
I have no problem voting for an African-American candidate. My only requirement of all candidates is they have the experience, qualifications and resume for the job.

Obama has none of the credentials to have been elected President. Condoleeza Rice does. That is who should be President.

One of, if not THE BEST columns on TH!



Excellent! Bravo! Well and succinctly stated!




Letter from a Birmingham Jail

"Martin Luther King points to a people of Christian faith that demanded an end to infant killing.

In Rome in their declining years, it became law that upon the birth of your newborn child, if you didn't like the color of their eyes, the texture of their hair, the complexion of their skin, you could by law lay your child by the side of the road to die.

The law further stated, anyone touching your child to give aid would be put to death.

The newborn child was to be left to die!

The early church under the threat of death scooped those children up and raised them as their own.

Martin Luther King called not giving children "left by the side of the road" receiving no aid, evil!

Barack Obama calls it a good thing.

80% of Americans call partial birth abortion, evil, while Mr. and Mrs. Obama call it a good thing."

Rev. Dr. Clenard H. Childress, Jr.

http://www.blackgenocide.org

NOTE: Please support Dr. Childress by going to his website and encourage him with donations and prayer. Posted with permission from Dr. Childress. Retired Geek


Obama was elected
... because of the color of his skin and in spite of the content of his character. He turned MLK's words inside out. He represents a perversion of American ideals.

The media have done a fine job (so far) of hiding the truth about this corrupt little man. Over time, the content of Obama's character will be revealed, inadvertent slip by inadvertent slip, and the public will begin to connect the dots. He will be a one-term President, and will be remembered as the "What Were We Thinking?" President.

Here's lookin' at you kid ~¿o

like King in one respect
King's opponets tried to attack him as a communist while he was still alive. Merola does not really do much to establish that Obama is not following in the footsteps of King. In fact he shows that he is having a similar effect on his critics who are reduced to nonsense accusations.

This column is absurd
In that it argues that the realization of Dr. King's dream is somehow invalidated by the fact that Obama does not meet the standards of this writer.

Unfortunately, there are very few blacks in this country who meet the standards of the right wing as evidenced by the total absence of black Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Many blacks thought they would never live to see a black President, and left to the GOP, we probably never would have.

This argument is ultimately just a bit of political distraction meant to obscure the fact that on the preposition that race, gender, and creed are no longer an impediment to aspiration, the Dems have demonstrated their commitment to MLK's dream, while for the realizing that dream continues to be a rhetorical exercise.

Big Difference Lon...
King did have a few communist friends but was not a communist. Obama was recruited and sought the endorsement of socialists and placed several in his cabinet.

His EPA head is a socialist and belongs to a socialist organization.

Get over it, Lon.

Make that
For the GOP the realization of MLK's dream continues to be rhetorical.

Bryce, you have no clue...
Without the Republican Party there would be no such thing as civil rights. The Republicans forced the issue of ending Segregation.

Furthermore, MLK was a Republican. So was Jackie Robinson.

DR.KING was not a artificial plant!
.

Charlie: Excellent points!

Especially given that Bozo WROTE HIMSELF that he "chose his friends carefully."

And his "friends and MENTORS" were Socialists, Marxists, and Communists.

I was of the opinion that Hannity did a disservice when he continually focused on Bill Ayers, when there were are NUMBER of Socialists, Marxists, and Communists in BO's background whom Hannity overlooked.



Gnucarsmell
Your argument that President Obama's victory is shallow in the extreme.

It totally ignores his campaign's innovative use of the internet, its' prowess at fundraising, its' discipline regarding staying on message, Obama's performance in the debates, Obama's steady reserve as the financial sector impoded, Dean's 50 state strategy, a deeply unpopular President, and a lackluster GOP candidate.

Charlie's tired old bromide
In fact the only opposition to civil rights outside of the south came from the GOP. Not one non-southern Senator voted against, while half a dozen GOP Senators objected at a time when there were no southern Senators. The most notable of these was the GOP presidential candidate in 1964, Barry Goldwater.

The fact of the matter is that if the GOP candidate in 1964 had prevailed, we would probably not be talking about the election of a black President as a reality today.


Again mea culpa
For my abysmal typing. To Gnucarsmell I should have written that his assertion that Obama was elected based on skin alone was shallow in the extreme.

bryce1
Everytime the GOP puts up a Black candidate the Liberals gather to throw Oreos at them. Beside Alan Keys ran against B.H.Obama in Illinois but you can't see skin color past the (D).

Democrats are the most racist people on the face of the earth. The believe because someone is in the minority the are somehow inferior. That's a crock and Dr. King, a Republican, knew better.

Grassfire.org
I am not going to sit by silently as Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid re-make our nation in their liberal image. The Republicans are too frightened to oppose him and the 'news media' will do no honest reporting of his activities.

Join a grassroots conservative group to resist Obama's liberal agenda. Go to the website below.

http://www.grassfire.org/111/petition.asp?PID=18745116&NID= 1

It's time to stop talking and start doing.

fools and foolers
One-third of the Democrats in Congress voted against the Civil Rights bill of 1964, which would end Segregation. Without a greater majority of Republican members in Congress it would not have passed.

The Democrats in the Senate filibustered to stop the bill from passing. Al Gore's father was one of those racist Democrats that voted against the bill.

LBJ almost did not sign it into law but his his advisors told him he should as it was an election year.

LBJ had a long record of being a racist and opposing civil rights in the House and Senate.

bryce
Here's some info for you regarding the Civil Rights Act.

Remember that the Republicans were the minority party at the time. Nonetheless, H.R.7152 passed the House on Feb. 10, 1964. Of the 420 members who voted, 290 supported the civil rights bill and 130 opposed it.

Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34; Democrats supported it 152-96. Republicans supported it in higher proportions than Democrats. Even though those Democrats were Southern segregationists, without Republicans the bill would have failed. Republicans were the other much-needed leg of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.

Obama doesn't deserve to be in the same sentence as MLK, much less PUSA.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/12/13/19 4350.shtml


Civil Rights began with the Republican's
Republicans passed the 12th, 13th and 14th Amendments. The Democrats opposed them.

Republicans supported voting rights for women. Democrats opposed it and kept it from passing for about thirty years.

There would be no civil rights without the Republican party.

Marty and Jimmis
Once again, when you parse the numbers in the House you will again see that while not as distinct, the demarcation was still on regional, and not political lines, with every southern Republican voting against, as well as most southern Democrats.

Even if you ignore that reality, the raw numbers you cite are those of a generation ago. Please note that a generation after King's passing opposition to a national holiday in his honor was almost exclusively Republican. And even as we speak, it is Republicans who oppose an extension of the voting rights bill.

Obama's Culture! How 'bout THIS?

"Economic stimulus? Feds want your medical records"

"Electronic database to include lawsuit, mental health, abortion, sexual details

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87322

"A little-discussed provision in President Obama's economic stimulus plan would demand that every American submit to a government program for electronic medical records without a choice to opt out, and it has privacy advocates more than a little alarmed.

"Patients might be alarmed, too, privacy advocates said, if they realized information such as documentation on abortions, mental health problems, impotence, being labeled as a non-compliant patient, lawsuits against doctors and sexual problems could be shared electronically with, perhaps, millions of people.

"Sue A. Blevins, president of the Institute for Health Freedom, said unless people have the right to decide 'if and when' their health information is shared, there is no real privacy.

"'President Obama has pledged to advance freedom,' she said. 'Therefore the freedom to choose not to participate in a national electronic health-records system must be upheld.'"



I'm SURE all those who went nuts over the Patriot Act, because their privacy might be invaded when they made phone calls to OVERSEAS phone calls to KNOWN TERRORIST NUMBERS, are going to go BALLISTIC over THIS little plan of Obama's. RIGHT?????????




Poli-sigh
Silly, silly person, which of these two statements is logical and which defies logic?

Republicans___The total absence of blacks, Chicanos, and Muslims as well as zero women in leadership positions demonstrates that in our party race, creed, gender, and national origin are immaterial.

Democrats___The presence of blacks(including a black man as party leader), Chicanos, Muslims, and our appointment of a female Speaker of the House demonstrates that in our party race, creed, gender, and national origin are immaterial.

jimmie
What also needs to be included is the fact that the civil rights legislation would have been passed much earlier.

Except, a majority leader by the name of Lyndon Johnson deliberately held the legislation so it would not be heard while Eisenhower was president.

Under Eisenhower the bill easily would have passed.


Jimmie- I forgot to add for bryce1
Martin Luther King was a Republican. Forget about that bryce1?

The KKK was created by the Democratic party to keep Republicanism away, and FDR the liberal, appointed Hugo black a KKK leader to the Supreme Court.

Now bryce1 which is logical?

What Anne is all about
Her buddy Carlos accuses me of not wanting to associate with 'ordinary' black folks...his words.

Anne: "Whoa, I missed that...bryce1 doesn't want to be around 'regular' black folks? Exactly what is 'regular' black folks? Sounds like a bigot to me."

Bear in mind she is labeling as bigoted her buddy Carlos' words because she confuses them with mine. This says everything about this nasty bitter little woman. It's not the words and ideas that matter to her, it's who utters them. She doesn't come here to debate ideas, she comes to attack, namecall, and denigrate in an empty attempt to bolster her obviously low self-esteem.

To make matters worse, when called on it she had the nerve to assert that she was not referencing Carlos' words, so she's a liar as well.

I never get personal when I debate issues here, but Anne is a pathetic excuse for a human being who demonstrates the worst in human nature every time she opens her cesspool of a mouth.


socialism and crony capitalism
Are both bad. In fact, I would make a case that the Bush massive transfer of money to big pharma (medicaid drug plan) without any permitted negotiations (as is done with the VA) coupled with huge no bid contracts for services traditionally performed by government (like blackwater) is much worse. The fact is that Unions and public employment was much stronger and bigger under President Reagan than today. So, I don't see us "becoming socialist." Even if things were the way they were in 1985 -- I don't think that would be bad. The danger of Obama is radical political correctness. For example, Reverand Wright. Most "white" people today view themsleves as "oppressors" thanks to education and the media. That would even apply to a first generation American whose parents were from Estonia. On the other hand, if you look like Obama -- it does not matter if your family actually owned slaves. The way it works is if you "look" a certain way you are an "oppressor." That is, you don't qualify for certain programs, federal aid and jobs. What a great country!

Anderson
While you reach further and further into history to mine examples of the GOP's commitment to race/gender neutrality, the simple fact remains that no such evidence can be found in the current makeup of Republican lawmakers on the Hill.

MLk was hardly a Republican
MLK believed in a larger role of the Federal Government, not smaller.

MLK was a committed member of the peace movement and freely associated with those the GOP of the time labeled as Marxists, and some were in fact admitted Communists.

MLK died while engaged in the effort to unionize workers in Memphis.

This hardly sounds like a 1960'S Republican to me.

Shows what you know...
MLK, Jackie Robinson and Jesse Owens were all Republicans. Most African-Americans were Republicans at that time. It was not until the sixties that many African-American's switched to the Democrat party.

The Democrat's bought votes with government programs. Government programs to African-Americans increased by 200% from 1966-1978.

bryce1
bryce1 there has been numerous law makers who are of an ethnic origin other than white on capitol hill in the last ten years. Your blindness to that fact does not change it.

GWB appointed Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, and others, not because of race but because he felt they were the best for their jobs.

Steele the former lt. Governor from Maryland, Bobby Jindal out of LA are just two current pols who are not white.

How is it that race matters when electing a representative? Isnt that gross racism, and the lowest form of racism? Cant a white represent others? Or a black or Hispanic?

Neither party has a lock on the hearts and minds of others. Millions of blacks and Hispanics voted for GWB, and McCain. Millions of whites voted for BHO.


bryce
Are you saying members of the MLK family are liars? It is they who confirmed MLK was a Republican. Years ago.

See bryce1, your social justice professors forgot to mention that fact.

anderson659: Excellent points!

And of course, you're exactly right!

The truly amazing and stunning thing is how the left treats any accomplished and successful black... whether here on TH, such as Elder, Sowell, Black. Jackson, Parker, or Williams, and any Conservative black in politics... and most especially Justice Thomas.

Of course, no leftist wants to, or can bear to hear the truth... which is one of the many reasons they go off on rants and rages, such as bryce1.


Merola makes many excellent points.... Excellent column!

Marty
You keep sYing MLK was a Republican. Just saying it over and over doesn't make it true. Can you at least attempt to support your statement?

Further, until 1964 blacks voted 35-40% GOP on average. The nomination of Goldwater marked their retreat from the party, and Nixon's 'southern strategy' of 1968 cemented that shift.

bryce
You missed it. If you care to look up the King family, his wife, and their daughter and other members you will find your confirmation. i dint plan on doing it for you.

It is nothing new, it has been known for years.

If you doubt it, dont take my word for it, look it up yourself. Other posters independent of me have told you the same thing.

And you failed to address any other points I made. To date you accept nothing offered by any other posters as a fact. Yet you post as an authority withour a baseline to draw from.

Exercise your intellectual abilities and take a look at the life of King. And his political affiliation.

RESPONSES
THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST RESPECTFUL BLOG SITES I HAVE SEEN....MOST OF YOU DISCUSS AND SPEAK YOUR PEACE, NO NEED FOR FILTH, OR VULGARITY,
IT WAS A PLEASURE TO READ IN THIS BLOG SITE,
I CALL IT THE LADIES AND GENTS SITE...
GOOD WORK....

Anderson
The sole member of King's family, his niece, is a Republican who is offering her opinion. I've seen her on panels and heard her in interviews, and she can offer no evidence that MLK was a Republican beyond her own opinion. Again, how can you reconcile a big government, pro-union, peace activists with Communist and gays as advisers a Republican?

As to Powell and Rice, they are appointees, and in fact examples of what a fine job Bush did in terms of race/gender neutral appoints. He is to be commended.

Steele and Jindahl are RARE exemptions to the usual GOP rule. Can you for instance name a single black candidate in last year's 500 odd races? It this helps, there were six, none of whom received any measure of support from the party.

And where I ask you, are the women in leadership positions?

Again the facts on the ground today don't lie. On the proposition that race, gender, national origin, or creed are no longer impediments to aspiration, the Dems have walked the walk, the GOP continues to talk the talk.


Anderson
If you won't provide a source can you at least provide a quote where Mrs. King asserts MLK was a Republican. A Republican who by the way was for bigger government, stronger unions, and consorted with admitted Communists.

bryce
Democrats: Blacks, women, hispanics, asian whatever. Yeah, we get it, y'all are diverse. Are they good people? Does it matter to you?

Many good people of good character, Blacks, women, hispanics, whites, men, asian, whatever, are not Democrats. And for good reason.

The politics of Democrats promote the opposite of liberty, self-reliance and self-determination. Granted, too many Republicans have gone that way but there's really no excuse for any educated, reasonable person who is knowledgeable about history to be a Democrat.

bryce
Our new goverenor is a Republican and a woman. A fomer legislator, etc. Jan Brewer. Sarah Palin was an unknown. Now she is not.

I have watched Republican women elected here in Az because of their abilities and populism among voters, not just because they are women. Same with Hispanics.

You categotize someone by gender, race, etc. Somehow in the far left version of correctness, if a certain ethnic or gender is not represented, discrimination or some form of it must be present.

That is a fallacy.

The GOP was always considered the party of business. The Democrats portrayed themselves as the party of the working man. In fact, it is not.

My mother worked for Senator DeConcini, Raul Castro, and campaigned for Jimmy Carter. My father was a union rabble rouser. I have seen the hypocrisy of both parties especially towards the middle class.

However the hypocrisy of the GOP only extends so far. With the Democrats and the far left, hypocrisy has no boundaries.


bryce
Honey, if you're not seeing women in leadership, you're not looking.

bryce
After you have ignored a dozen or more of my points, I wont waste the time helping you out. One sided discussions that you fail to respond to and then demand proof, is not something I will entertain just because you will not do your own research.

Also as Marty pointed out look up Jackie Robinson, etc.

I could also give you other names but that would deprive you of a learning experience. Look up abolitionists, look under the name of Clay, and see what you find.

Women in leadership
Please note I am talking about Capitol Hill. Is there a single Republican woman heading a committee on Capitol Hill.

Examine my premise
I assert that within the Democratic party race, gender, et. al. are no longer impediments to aspirations.

If one's aspiration is to be a power play at the summit of power, Capitol Hill and the WH, it is a proven possibility within the Democratic party, not so within the Republican party.

Republican vs Conservative
MLK was a Republican, not a conservative. Conservatism by definition means to resist change. MLK was all about changing America into a society in which all people were treated fairly. Sure the Republican pary did a lot in regards to civil right, but back then the party was the more progressive of the two. As political trends shifted in the mid 1960's, MLK was more politically aligned with Democratic leaders such as LBJ and JFK. MLK would by no means be a member of today's Republican Party.

I have not ignored your posts
I have recognized them and responded that you are reaching back generations to make assessments about what is happening in our lives today.

uhm
Aren't Democrats assigning committee chairs?

Anderson
I have spent the entire period of our exchange searching for evidence that some member of Dr. King's family behind Dr. Rice claims that he is a Republican, and even she offers no evidence to support her claim outside of her own opinion.

Also, can you be specific about which points of yours I have ignored please?

From the lips of JC Watts...
The last black Republican to serve on Capitol Hill...

"I am grateful for Ken Mehlman did when he was GOP chairman, but I knew that wouldn't last-that was one person. I've never gotten the impression that it was institutionalized."

These are not impressions of a crazed left wing zealot.

bryce1
Just go away. Your stupid liberal arguments just don't work here. No one would mind if you had anything intelligent or even honest to say. But being a liberal that is impossible so go campaign with acorn somewhere.

bryce 1
To find evidence of MLK being a Republican, you need to go to the national black republican association website at http://www.nbra.com.
While you are there take the quiz, and get informed on how republicans have helped the black race more so than dems. We are a small but growing group of black Americans who are tired of the same-o-same stuff dems have been shoveling our way.


Rose-Bud
The National Black Republican Association (NBRA) is ran by a hard-core right winger, Francis Rice. I have contacted her before to have a reasonable exchange of ideas and she is not practical. Micheal Steele said that her rhetoric was divisive, and pretty much severed ties with the organization. I say again, MLK was a republican, but not a conservative. He would not be conservative/republican by today's standards, as evident by those who are stil living that worked with him. Civil Rights was a progressive movement, conservatism is the opposite of progression. Blacks are naturally progressive, given the history of this country and the problems many still face today.

Those who do their homework will find
that the Democrats are awarded the kudos for many accomplishments of the Republican Party. This would include the economic growth in evidence since Reagan's administration. Clinton came into office, blessed with the results of Reagonomics and promptly began spending. The Democrats came into power and pushed phoney-baloney mortgages. The economy tanked and Republicans get the blame. Our economy is on the brink of collapse, public support of the Democratic Congress is at historical lows, and yet the Democrats are rewarded with continuing control of Congress. Thank you, ACORN. Here's another 4.1 billion to continue your great work.

Dr. King's Dream
Thanks to Mr. Merola for telling the truth about Dr. King's dream! I am a 62-year old
black American who happens to remember well what Dr. King said and meant. I realize most blacks, and other liberals, strongly disagree with what I recall of the truth of the matter.

Needless to say, the so-called Mainstream Media, not to mention Obama himself, have no intention of telling exactly what Dr. King was really
about.

I am part of the very small percentage of black American voters who did not vote for Obama largely because of "the content of his character" that I do not find to be one of integrity.
brownbear95

Brownbear is more qualified...
than the likes of Bryce and other liberal white morons. He has lived through the civil rights movement and knows what it is all about.

Thank you for enduring the sacrifice and winning fight for true equality; and for reminding us thate Obama does not represent the real civil rights movement.

You are a good man.

Patriots United
resistnet.com

Obama and the cult
I dont believe that MLK would sacrifice his moral believes to put a Black man in office. He was a moral man who I have researched at the early age of 5 and I know for a fact that he would not have sacrifice the morals and the lives of innocent babies in our country. Abortion wasn't one of our economic issues yet Obama jumped on it with 72 hours of his term. Even MLK said he detested abortion. If this is the best the blacks had to offer I would hate to see their worst.

Wilson v. Harding
Wilson re-segregated federal civil service in his administration -- Harding actually tried to win black votes and was opposed to violence against blacks when he was President in the early 1920s. Some people say he tolerated KKK people -- but the history I have read would suggest that was not really true. Harding was likely the first (and only) president with black slaveholding ancestry. The evidence of this fact is pretty strong. Likewise, there is some evidence that J. Edgar Hoover was of part black American ancestry.

FDR snubbed Jesse Owens
...after Owens won the gold medal and defeated the Nazi's. Owens was in DC and was supposed to meet FDR, but FDR refused him.

FDR also placed Hugo Black, a member of the KKK, as his first judge on the Supreme Court.

Inauguration cost inacuracies
I wholeheartedly agree with you, Mr. Merola, and have a fairly dismal outlook on the future of our Country under this administration. I'm also dreading the spread of evil that will emanate from our land because of his policies and short-sighted, egocentric dishonesty.

However, as is shown at this link to FactCheck.org - http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_barack_obamas_in auguration_really_cost_4.html - the costs used to compare the inaugurals of our Only-Recently-Former President Bush and that of the current occupant of the Oval Office are actually comparing apples to apples+security+infrastructure. The $42.3M for Mr. Bush's inaugural only includes the amount he raised in contributions to cover the "costs of events in the fun category", while Mr. Obama's "fun" money is estimated to be around $45M or $41.4M in 2005 dollars (actual amounts to be determined as bills are received and -- hopefully -- paid). The expected total cost should be roughly equivalent to what was spent in 2005, adjusted for today's semi-dollars.

America Will Get What It has Asked For
There is ample opportunity for Americans to educate themselves about history and about the people who run for office. Yes, the traditional mainstream media has become a propaganda arm for leftist politicians and their ideology, but they are not the only media available to Americans. Too many Americans choose to remain ignorant and lazy; too many Americans choose to disengage from political discourse. Too many Americans have forgotten that their liberty did not come from, and will not be protected by government taking care of their business. It came from people fighting for it, and dieing for it throughout the history of America.

That's fuzzy math...
the numbers do not add up.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.