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
Monday, January 21, 2008
Paul Greenberg :: Townhall.com Columnist
Martin Luther King: The Radical as Conservative
by Paul Greenberg
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



History is up to its old tricks again. The radical agitator of one generation becomes the conservative icon of another. Martin Luther King Jr. meets the very definition of an American conservative, that is, someone dedicated to preserving the gains of a liberal revolution.

Even when he was leading the civil rights movement, what appeal could have been more conservative or more American than his now classic speech before the Lincoln Memorial in August 1963?

"I say to you today, my friends, that in spite of the difficulties and frustrations of the moment, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. I have a dream that my four little 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."

Is any passage more frequently cited against the quota system called Affirmative Action? Is any passage so clear a call for what conservative candidates for president always seem to be calling for - character?

Even then Martin Luther King's words sounded conservative to those with ears to hear and minds to comprehend, for his message was rooted in traditional values. No wonder the young black radicals of the Sixties used to deride him as De Lawd. It was a toss-up whether his politics or his religion offended them more; the two were inseparable in his case.

To watch this black Baptist preacher out of Alabama on the old, black-and-white television tapes as he describes his very American dream is to realize how easily his ideas could have come from a conservative political tract - if only conservative political tracts were better written. Nothing was clearer about Dr. King's dream than the transformation of political struggle into morality tale. Which explains his effectiveness. He appealed to a common moral ground.

There were always those who thought of Dr. King's sermons as just window dressing for his social aims. They had it backwards. It was his religious ideas that compelled him to make the case for social and political change, and seek to create what he called The Beloved Community.

"Black and white together," the demonstrators used to sing. You don't hear that song much any more. Which may explain why the civil rights movement stopped moving. It became infected with much the same racial myopia it had fought, only with the colors reversed. (Black Power!)

After he was gone, a new black intelligentsia arose that knew not Martin. His would not be the name embroidered on the baseball caps of another generation. The legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. would give way to the frustrations of a Malcolm X, the demagoguery of a Louis Farrakhan, and the general hucksterism of the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons.

Today, any black leaders who don't adhere to the party line - a Ward Connerly or Clarence Thomas or Thomas Sowell - are called traitors to their race. Others are dismissed as "not black enough" because they reach out to all of us. This is the new racism, and it needs to be called such.

A new intolerance divides us by Race and Gender, and into Minority and Majority. It strives to make many out of one. It's called multiculturalism, and it reverses that most American of mottos: E Pluribus Unum.

But the light can be blinked only so long. John Marshall Harlan's old ideal of a color-blind Constitution still shines, and begins to be reflected in Supreme Court decisions - and in a general American indifference to racial appeals. Barack Obama runs for president not as a black candidate but as one more choice, and does well. Indeed, he demonstrates daily that a black presidential candidate can be as vacuous as any other. It's progress of a sort.

You can tell a lot about an age by the heroes it chooses. While the Malcolms and Farrakhans come and go in favor, Martin Luther King Jr. remains the standard by which all other leaders are measured, and not just black leaders. That's a hopeful sign.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Lest we forget
I could not agree more that Dr. King's dream has been completely ignored by the liberal left as it fails to fit their agenda of keeping a permanent class of victims in their base.

Let's not forget the role which Democrat Presidential hopeful and then Attorney General Robert Kennedy played in matters pertinent to Martin Luther King, see:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200207/garrow

and an excerpt from a magazine that is generally highly regarded, as follows:

On October 10, 1963, U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy committed what is widely viewed as one of the most ignominious acts in modern American history: he authorized the Federal Bureau of Investigation to begin wiretapping the telephones of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. Kennedy believed that one of King's closest advisers was a top-level member of the American Communist Party,

The above truths, as accurately reported in this magazine and chronicled factually in most well regarded historical references seems to have been conveniently forgotten by the liberal left and the Black population that follows the party mantra of the Democratic Party.

King dreamt of the day when his ..."four little 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."

Despite a National Martin Luther King Day celebrating him, this Nation has yet to achieve his dream and this is becoming all the more evident by the jousting seen between the Bill/Hillary ticket against Barack Obama.

Lest we forget - part 2
And while it may be true that Barack isn't openly running as a Black candidate, he rarely misses any opportunity to cash in as seen by his behavior and commentary in Selma, his many appearances in primarily Black neighborhoods and his berating the Clinton comment about Johnson's role in putting through the legislation which has been perpetuated to this day, not to speak of Oprah's presence at his side.

I don't need to remind anyone of the declared position of Reverend Wright, pastor of Obama's church or of Barack's loyalty and admiration to the agenda advocated by Reverend Wright.

Anyone who has taken the time to read Obama's two published books will know his true sentiments and how he has set out to become the first Black President, his pathway from the day he graduated from Columbia University to the present time has been one that is deeply rooted in the Black community.
His entire political career has relied upon what he's made of himself from the time he left high school. His flights of fantasy about himself and his Father, including his racial concerns, are alluded to in great abundance in his first book as are his fantasies about meeting members of the African National Congress on the campus of Occidental College at a time when our State Department prohibited admitting entry of Mandela's ANC officials to the USA. Review his imagined graffiti denigrating Blacks which he describes seeing on the Columbia University campus which his fellow students decry.

Read the books..........my comments are simple recitations from his pen. When Bill Clinton described Barack as a "fairy tale", I suspect he may have had some genuine insight.

Much as I'd like to agree with Mr. Greenberg, it's my firm and experienced belief as a member of the visible minority community that the racial divide is alive and well in the USA notwithstanding everything which MLK desired.







On a roll
Last week Mr. Greenberg stirred up a hornet's nest of controversy when he described Robert E. Lee as a man of honor whose memory should be an example to all good men. Now he writes amout another Southerner and asserts that MLK's message was really a conservative and Christian one. I already hear the hornets swarming! Of course, Mr. Greenberg is right on both counts.

This writer has it right
A new intolerance divides us by Race and Gender, and into Minority and Majority. It strives to make many out of one. It's called multiculturalism, and it reverses that most American of mottos: E Pluribus Unum.

This quote from the piece that Mr. Greenburg wrote hits it right on the head. The race baiters and reverse rascist like those he wrote about are the pervayers of fragmentation of the social fabric of the nation and those who follow them are blind to the hell and slavery that they are being lead to.


Our nation is based
on those mutual longings and goals that unite the human race. America is a success because it rises above the tribal/class distinctions that divide mankind, and reveres our common worth and opportunity. An infantry squad, NFL team, operating room crew, or a software development group succeed on appreciation of talent, respect for contribution. Diversity is best ignored or dealt with. As a 50 year old white guy who enjoyed playing basketball on community courts in Wsshington DC, it took a while to break into the young black culture. But once a competent level was established, i had no trouble getting chosen by 19 year old black youths who wanted to win and chose the best players to do the job. I wasn't picked for diversity sake, for crying out loud, and being a different race than my team mates helped none of us at all.

Savage99: Not only "Well Said" but

"I wasn't picked for diversity sake, for crying out loud, and being a different race than my team mates helped none of us at all."....

probably one of the single best posts I've ever read on TH!!!



(And especially not bad for some guy who does a good job crossing the street!) :-)







Anne
You don't know the half of it. I was chewing gum at the same time.

And good morning and thanks for giving me my first morning smile :-D

MLK was wrong
If he thought that individual moral changes could result in societal changes he was wrong.

In MLK's day conservatives talked of "organic change;" that blacks weren't ready for equality; that whites weren't ready for equality; but that change was "organic," and given enough time things would change; blacks would learn what they needed to learn to be successful in the larger society; whites would come to accept this new black person; and that through this "organic change" blacks would someday be accorded, or perhaps easily slip into equality.

The problem with this is is that the problem is structural and institutional; always has been.

IT'S OK TO DREAM
I find it amazing that people talk about the fact that Obama wanted to be the first black president from his childhood. To me it shows that he's committed to his goals come hell or high water. Actually if the truth be told a lot of us could learn from him about how to achieve our goals, because a lot of us have dreams that are deferred. I know it's painful to change and accept something new.... but " THE FUTURE IS OBAMA"

Savage: And don't tell me you were

talking too! :-)

THAT would be even more impressive!!!!





Don from DC writes: "IT'S OK TO DREAM"

".... Obama wanted to be the first black president from his childhood."

You make an excellent point! And I agree that many (especially the young people today) could learn a lot about from Obama about dreams and determination, AND especially about dreams that are deferred.

Unfortunately, we live to a society that is too focused on "immediate gratification.'

My only question is, WHAT would be Obama's life long motivation to be pres.?

Admittedly, I do not agree with Obama's idiology, but I ask that same question of anyone (regardless of party and idiology) who is so determmined to be that powerful... be it pres. or even in Congress (such as our life long Congressmen.)

Dtermination is one thing... motivation is another!



Reflections on social structure
The clubs with which the British soldiers continually bashed in the heads of the Indian Salt Protesters is the basis of social structure.


when Jackie Robinson was on a military base in Texas blacks had to get off the base bus and give their seats to whites and wait for a less full bus.

You ask yourself now how an individual could have cooperated with this indignity to his personhood. Negroes should simply have refused to go along with this indignity.

A column by a black reporter described how black families in the south had to get on the front of the bus to pay the the family had to back off the bus and go to the rear door to get on the bus so they wouldn't brush against the whites on the bus. How could they go along with this indignity?

The answer is that the laws and the police power of the State were arraigned against them. If they refused to go along with these indignities the white power structure would find many ways to punish them.

The answer to this problem was not "organic change based on moral conversion of whites" as conservatives believe, but mass disobedience and confrontation of the police clubs and dogs.


Proud Liberal
You are either a shameless liar or colossally stupid. It is not conservatives who opposed civil rights, though that is the popular myth that people like you have been peddling for years now. If you want to talk about institutional racism try checking out the democrat party, bucko! It is the democrat party that gave us the Ku Klux Klan (look it up) and it is the democrat party that continues to enslave the black community with a failed welfare state and perpetual promises to fix the problems which were created by their own policies. Their motto for the black community is much like it is for the unions:'vote for us and we'll give you nothing'. Ever notice how there are no prominent elected black democrats? They look at black people as political pawns and nothing more.

Why MLK is revered
King has two things going for him.

For conservatives, he had a conservative message. Content of Character, not color of skin is our motto. Standing together as one nation abiding by the foundational principles of "united we stand".

There is nothing more conservative.

For Libs, he has the benefit of being black so he gets one point for that with them at least.

So all in all, he did well.



MLK
I admire Dr. King because he believed that all Americans must look beyond race. In 2008, I believe Dr. King would tell everyone to drop the hyphenated American tag when describing themselves. If he were a presidential candidate, I believe Dr. King would target all Americans for their vote. Someone needs to point these virtues out to Clinton and Obama.

Dr. King
First, to all the Morons on this board who think it was conservatives who opposed the Civil Rights movement and the Civil Rights ACT of 1964; here is a simple fact: The only reason the act passed is because Republicans helped President Johnson get it passed. The Democrats, particularly from the South, bailed on the ACT!!! Get your history right you grade school drop-outs!

Now, The sad truth of the matter is that if Dr. King came back today he would be appalled. The people who opposed him would simply say to all of us, "we told you so."

Five depressing situations:

1. Our ten largest (10) cities with the highest black population are the most dangerous cities in America. If you live in one of them you are more likely to be terrorized by a black male than by Al Quada. The black on white crime rate is at epidemic levels. This situation came to be after the Civil Rights movement. After blacks were given equality.

2. 1 in 3 black males is a violent felon.

3. Aids/HIV is the leading cause of death for both black females and males aged 15-44. This is a preventable disease. What does this say about the mentality of blacks? Was the historical stereotype of the over-sexed black male wrong or correct? Are black men having gay sex and then infecting their women?

4. There are more black males in prison than there are in college.

5. West Virginia has the lowest crime rate in the nation. It is also the poorest state by per capita income. It also has the highest white population of any state at 98.6% white. Poverty does not equal a high crime rate. Character, values, and morals, does.

The question is, how can these horrible problems be turned around?

Why are blacks having so much trouble coping with modernity?


Tampa Dave: Interesting....

"....drop the hyphenated American tag when describing themselves."

The "hyphenated American tag" was always a great annoyance to my mother... who was, btw, a legal immigrant, and later a naturalized citizen.

And this was many, many years ago!

Her only caveat to that was that if people insisted on hyphenating, at the very least it should be "American - ?????."


Martin Luther King, Jr.: I Have a Dream

Ames Tiedeman
You made some great points about southern Democrats and their opposition to the Civil Rights Act. You may remember that Al Gore claimed his father, Senator Albert Gore, Sr., was voted out of the Senate because of his support for Civil Rights. Surprise! Junior lied! His father voted AGAINST the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Anne
Teddy Roosevelt specifically advised against the use of the hyphenated-American label, saying there was no room in America for such discriminators. I agree. Non-Caucasian descendants from Europe call me "white," yet I must identify them as African-Americans, Korean-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Tibetan-Americans, etc. Absolutely ridiculous because of the needless discrimination among Americans.

Ken
Ken:

You are absolutely correct about Al Gore Sr.

What is even more amazing is Hillary's little past:


Some facts.

1. Hillary grew up in a Republican household in Illinois.

2. She claims to have heard MLK give a speech in 1963. She says her father took her to hear him speak in Chicago. This would have happened when she was a Goldwater girl. For those of you who do not know, Hillary was a Republican before she became a Democrat. Goldwater was against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and he was a Segregationist. Hillary was a massive supporter of Goldwater in 1964.

3. Bill and Hillary had a long relationship with Senator Fullbright of Arkanasas. He led the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for decades. He was a staunch Segregationist. Bill worked for him. Hillary worshiped him and his power.



American
You are either an American or not.

Teddy was 100% right.

If you want to be called a Mexican American, African American, Asian American or European American, then by all means, leave our land.

America is one.


Period.

HankReardon
One always has to ask a conservative what his base year is.

Yes, southern Democrats did oppose civil rights and they did so because they were/are conservative. They left the Democratic party and joined the Republican party after civil rights was passed because the republican party overall was as conservative as they were. It was the northeastern RINOs who supported civil rights.

As for base line years, conservatives always argue that Democratic policies have made things worse for blacks after civil rights. Worse in relation to when?

Too Late, Folks
So now the conservatives want to claim Martin Luther King as one of their own? Funny, in his lifetime they called him a Communist. Actually, they called him much worse than that, and they saved plenty of name-calling (not to mention killing) for the Freedom Riders and lunch-counter-sitters and marchers who stood with Dr King. Too young to remember? Go to the library and rent the Civil Rights documentary film series "Eyes on the Prize". See how many conservatives you can count being attacked by dogs, getting knocked down by fire hoses, and being dragged off to jail.

You folks remind me of the story of the Little Red Hen. She worked hard to grow corn while all around her the other animals refused to help. Once the corn was on the table, they all showed up at the dinner table.

But then, gee whiz. It seems to be election season and, thanks to Dr King and his supporters, black people can now vote---everywhere. What better way to solicit the black vote than to suggest that Martin Luther King was really a conservative who would want black people to vote Republican? All of which goes to show that conservatives have learned nothing: they still think black people are all stupid.

MLK
I have little doubt that MLK meant well and wanted a better life for black Americans and a better America for that matter. His dream is not reality, not because the majority in America did not give it a chance. His dream is not a reality because blacks have not put forth the effort to integrate into American society at all levels. Today it appears blacks favor separatism in many areas of their lives. Today many blacks self segregate themselves by their failure to get the most basic education: A high school diploma.


Ames Tiedeman/Tampa Dave
Funny how cons cite Teddy Roosevelt to oppose people honoring their heritage. As for America being truly one based on unity, maybe in a Frank Capra movie. Reality and history proves otherwise.

BTW, read this article on Roosevelt. It was put out by Cato, an organization I'm not in anyway ideologically in support or agreement with. Very interesting though.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/v24n6/chapman.pdf

Curious to hear your assessment. Seems as if Teddy was a serious racist.

Lilly
Facts are facts. The Republican party freed the slaves and the Republicans in the U.S. Senate in 1964 joined with President Johnson to get the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed. Without the Republican party neither of theses things would have happened. History would look much different. This is simply a historical fact that one must accept. You can argue that this is not the case, but you will only look ill-educated.

pjal got it right in his post.....
but also forgot to add the fact that American society has conveniently forgotten Dr. King plagarized his way through Harvard and was an iverterate horn dog/whoremonger. These fact were verified not only by the FBI wiretaps but also by Ralph Abernathy a prominent member of the "Movement". His "movement" was riddled with communist sympathizers from day one. I for one won't celebrate a nationl day of honor for this two-bit huckster, charlatan and phony.

Ralph

I am all for honoring ones heritage. I am opposed naming people who live in America anything but "Americans."


Understand?


Thanks,
Ames Tiedeman

Shameful & Historically Inaccurate Colum
I just knew that the cons on TH would again defame the memory of MLK. Many never marched with King. Many were apathetic to Civil Rights. Many still suffer from “White Backlash”. So sad. Lilly and I have had our past issues, but she is dead right on this issue. Going back to the days of the 1950s to 1960s, many self identified conservatives on both sides of the aisle were very ambivalent if not outright hostile to Civil Rights. The National Review and organizations like the Federalist Society were avidly against Civil Rights and favored racial conservatism mixed with white supremacy. Conservative “forbearers” like William F. Buckley, Frank Meyer, and James Jackson Kilpatrick melded conservative principles with white supremacist doctrine in their resistance to Brown vs. Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Of course, they now sing a different tune in public: Color blindness.

I would say that while the GOP voted for the CRA of 1964 in higher percentages, you must also look at overall vote totals, the breakdown of votes by region, and the fact that the 1964 GOP nominee Sen. Barry Goldwater voted AGAINST it. Even though Goldwater was a member of the NAACP and usually had a ambivalent to moderate Civil Rights record overall, he pulled a “Mitt Romney political calculation” there. He eventually lost to LBJ, but “won” the South for the GOP for decades. I wonder why???

Ralph:
On Teddy I say this:

The greatest of men are not without their flaws.

If you want to see what a a real racist President sounds like then simply read up on Woodrow Willson,. He was a DEMOCRAT, by-the-way.

Read what he said about the racist movie: Birth of a Nation.

Hint...He called it "true"

Go read up on it..

Thanks,
Ames

Cont'd
As for Dr. King, I would suggest some cons read more on MLK. Start with reading period. It works. Remember he was not a Republican at the time he was assassinated. Actually, he voted Democratic starting with the 1960 election of JFK. He had became increasing wary of Pres. Eisenhower’s/GOP Civil Rights platform of the late 1950s. Nixon gave him no sense of hope either in 1960. MLK openly campaigned for LBJ in 1964, criticized the GOP and Goldwater for their weak to non existent civil rights platform, and had very adverse feelings toward Gov. Ronald Reagan at that time.

The author stated: “Is any passage more frequently cited against the quota system called Affirmative Action? Is any passage so clear a call for what conservative candidates for president always seem to be calling for - character”

AA and racial quotas are not the same thing actually. As for AA, Dr. King did support it. He is quoted as saying:

“No amount of gold could provide an adequate compensation for the exploitation and
humiliation of the Negro in America down through the centuries…Yet a price can be
placed on unpaid wages. The payment should be in the form of a massive program by the
government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement
in accordance with the accepted practice of common law.”

"“A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for him, to equip him to compete on a just and equal basis.”

“They never stop to realize that no other ethnic group has been a slave on American soil . . .never stop to realize that the nation made the black man’s color a stigma; but beyond this they never stop to realize the debt that they owe a people who were kept in slavery 244 years.”

Dr. King's message
I won't attempt to label Dr. King as a "conservative", but I will say he was an individualist. Dr. King preached, to put it simply, that an enlightened person, when assessing the character of his neighbor, does not take the neighbor's race into account. Simple, fair and logical enough.

Even if Dr. King did enjoy female company, and even if he was friends with Communists, the validity of his message stands.

I would go farther than Dr. King and say that individualism is the only antidote to racism. Racism comes from the drive to identify oneself as a group. When we judge our fellows one by one and call them by their names, it is much more difficult to worry about whence their great-great-grandparents came.

One minor point about MLK Day: I was in high school when we first got the day off, and while I admire the _intent_ of the holiday, I find it ironic that we celebrate the life of a man so dedicated to educating himself and others, by telling kids to stay home from school!

Ames Tiedeman
I see your point. However, I have had this conversation about terms like African American many times before. Seems as if you have a deep seeded fear that those who embrace such terms are indeed "double agents" of some sort. Very interesting and paranoid.

As for TR, I really found it interesting that Cato would publish such a scathing portrait of this man. My point is his opinions on hypenated Americans were not based based on logic, but on core racist beliefs. Cato certainly backs my assertion up.

BTW, Woodrow Wilson was no friend of mine. Just imagine his face at the 2008 Democratic Convention. Man would have had a heart attack!!!1

didn't know King was a Baptist preacher
I thought he was just a politician. This from the article,"It was his religious ideas that compelled him to make the case for social and political change," reminds me of a Baptist preacher running for President.

Huckabee caused a church split by welcoming a black man in his congregation when he was a pastor. He too has a dream for America. No wonder he's speaking at a special service honoring King today.

I've seen many similarities of Huckabee to Reagan. Now I'm seeing some to King.

He's No Conservative
Rev. Martin Luther King was courageous, tough and the primary catalyst for the black civil rights movement. Yet by his death, Rev. King was heading in the direction of where Jesse Jackson went. Rev. King would have been strong for quotas, school busing, corporate shakedowns and reparations, all the sorts of things that Reverands Jackson and Sharpton supported.

Rev. King was a man of the Left, socialistic and egalitarian. He was not a conservative.

Cont'd
Also, will cons embrace Dr. King's writings about war, poverty, and injustice for all Americans? Why not embrace these quotes in the same fervor you approach "I Have A Dream.":

""Whenever this issue of compensatory or preferential treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic. For it is obvious that if a man is entered at the starting line in a race three hundred years after another man, the first would have to perform some impossible feat in order to catch up with his fellow runner.”

"A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom ... Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."

"When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people," King exclaimed, "the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered."

For more on Dr. King, I would suggest reading some of his works including “Why We Can't Wait” and “ Where do we go from here: Chaos or community?”. Also, anything by Taylor Branch, David Garrow, and Clayborne Carson on King is a must read.

Here is some more accurate commentary/facts on King:

http://www.afsc.net/PDFFiles/MLKonWarPeace.pdf

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080128/boggs

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080121/BL OG24/80121004

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marian-wright-edelman/dr-king s-prophetic-call_b_82416.html

http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/about_king/encyclopedia/ vietnam.htm

http://www.hatecrime.org/subpages/coretta.html

Gov Huckabee @ Central High
This is a great speech by Gov Huckabee at the anniversary of Central High Desegregation in Little Rock:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1ajtMCjc_M&eurl

Some Day
Unfortunately, Obama is not a conservative. There are black conservatives...now wouldn't that be something if one of them stepped forward. My skin is not black. But I look forward to the day that any person, any where in this world could not see the color of another. In California that is starting to happen in the elementary schools. Little by little. Some day a black will not see white and a white will not see black. Hopefully, it will be a black conservative that gets into the White House and he will not have to go to black churches for support. He will be able to stand up anywhere and everywhere and no one will see his color and when he looks out he will not see any color either.

Ralph Ellison
You have left out all of the white indentured servants that had to basically be slaves to other white people here in America at the same time that black people were enslaved by their own race back in Africa and sold to the white slavers. It was not the evil white man who subjected these unfortunate souls to slavery but members of their own race just like they are still doing today. Selective arguments are always intellectually dishonest ones.

Also
"But the light can be blinked only so long. John Marshall Harlan's old ideal of a color-blind Constitution still shines, and begins to be reflected in Supreme Court decisions - and in a general American indifference to racial appeals."

Interesting quote. In all truth, I don't think Justice John Marshall Harlan would have totally liked modern day Supreme Court decisions. He probably would have assailed his own grandson for some of his rulings from the bench. Greenberg quotes Harlan from his dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson. He conveniently ignores this quote from the same opinion:

""The white race deems itself to be the dominant race in this country. And so it is, in prestige, in achievements, in education, in wealth, and in power. So, I doubt not, it will continue to be for all time, if it remains true to its great heritage, and holds fast to the principles of constitutional liberty."

Very interesting. He also wasn't too fond of Chinese Americans either.

Also, Greenberg fails to mention the opposition of the GOP in getting the MLK Holiday through Congress. John Conyers and many others championed this bill. Jesse Helms showed his racist colors that day. John East tried to strip all mention of MLK from the bill and from the name and instead name it "Nation Civil Rights Day." Ronald Reagan begrudgingly signed the bill after it became clear he would have been overrided if he decided to veto it.

Even after the signing ceremony when asked by a reporter about King's disproven "communist ties", Ronnie said, "Well,we know in about 35 years won't we." Even at that time and even now, no one can prove King was a communist or had ties to the USSR or communist organizations. Ronnie had to apologize to King's widow. Whatta man!!!!

Donate today!
http://www.freeatlast2008.com

Did Dixiecrats label RINOs?
It occurs to me that the term RINO was coined AFTER the Dixiecrats joined the Republican Party. Could it be that they wanted to make over the Republican party into a more race (and class) determined philosophy. For it was after the Dixiecrats became Republican that the theory of "just deserts" based on "individual responsibility" came to the fore. Thus, Republicans could advance the theory that underperforming blacks underperformed because of their individual values (or lack thereof) rather than any institutional racism in America,

It was certaintly in the Dixiecrats self-interest to assert that there was no institutionalized racism in America and, logically, would lead them to deny the existence of class as well. All consequeces are the resonsibility of the individual.

Almost Forgot
PS: With all the controversy about the CRA of 1964, LBJ and King, let's not forget what Ronnie said about the matter:

"I would have voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964."
--Ronald Reagan, Los Angeles Times, June 17, 1966

Almost forgot, RWR was AGAINST Voting Rights Act of 1965 (called it "humiliating to the South"). When he ran for Governor of California in 1966, he promised to wipe the Fair Housing Act off the books. "If an individual wants to discriminate against Negroes or others in selling or renting his house," he said, "he has a right to do so."

Thanks Gipper for those warm words. Lol!!!

On the MLK column by Greenburg
Some observations. For starters, MLK was absolutely not a conservative. He was dedicated to the notion of a larger role for the Federal gov't, something that is anthema to the conservative cause.

Next on the term African-American. I don't demand or expect that others refer to me as such, but I reserve the right to self identify as African American because of the special resonnance it has for me. I for one would never adhere to a party that decries that right.

Lastly, Conservatives like talk about the GOP support of Civil Rights legislation a generation ago, ignoring the Dixiecrat conversion to GOP, but it is what the parties are actually doing today that counts. Bottom line, the fact is that either a woman or a black will be the Dem nominee for Prez this fall, and the GOP nominee will be...?

When it comes to color blind society the Dems are walking the walk.

Dr. King was a great man
He was a 1960's liberal:

-He loved his God
-He loved his family
-He loved his country

He is the perfect example we can point to that verifies that 1960's liberalism has become 21st Century conservatism.

And 21st century liberalism? It has become:

-apathy and antipathy for God
-redefining and denigrating the family
-hatred of the United States

Sad, but true...

Derek Leaberry
I'm curious.Where you against the Civil Rights Movement at the time it really came to a head? What were your opinions at the time? Was integration a bad thing in your opinion?

Pease just stop it.
Once again we have the republicans/necons distorting Dr. Kings memory in order to promote their political agenda. Once gain we have Republicans/necons cherry picking a few lines and excerpts in order to distort the beliefs of a man that had a wide range of political and cultural beliefs. I often wonder have any of you Republicans/neocons ever read any of his speeches???? King states the following when referring to what he calls “compensatory treatment”:

"Whenever this issue of compensatory or preferential treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree, but he should ask for nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic. For it is obvious that if a man enters the starting line of a race three hundred years after another man, the first would have to perform some incredible feat in order to catch up." Martin Luther King

He states this when referring to American capitalism and African Americans:

“You can't talk about solving the economic problem of the Negro without talking about billions of dollars. You can't talk about ending the slums without first saying profit must be taken out of slums. You're really tampering and getting on dangerous ground because you are messing with folk then. You are messing with captains of industry… Now this means that we are treading in difficult water, because it really means that we are saying that something is wrong… with capitalism… There must be a better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism.[11]”
Martin Luther King




please just stop it p2
The truth is Dr. Kings views were diverse and complex and cannot be simplified by just offering a few lines from a very popular speech. He wasn’t a politician, he was a brave Civil Rights activist who had a variety of beliefs on a variety of subjects. I really wish the Republicans/necons would stop trying to take ownership of his beliefs and memory, it’s disgraceful, intellectually dishonest, and rooted in pure political opportunism. Please just have a little dignity and self respect, and just stop it.

King Was a Liberal
King was a liberal of his time; he supported the values of a liberal revolution.

His values contrast with those of today's progressives.

A liberal is someone who thinks the United States might be executing too many people.

A progressive is someone who KNOWS that Stalin did not execute ENOUGH people.

Ralph
Great post Ralph!!! I think I may have repeated one of your King quotes. You covered so much. lol. Obviously, they know nothing about Dr. King, or they choose to forget who Dr. King really was. I don't know which is worse.

MLK and prejudice
We all need to reread M.L.King's "I Have A Dream" speech and relate his truths to today's bigotry. All forms of bigotry are harmful, racial, sexual, class, and religious. The religious bigotry poisoning the presidential primaries today is proof we have lots of work still ahead of us. Our nation NEEDS the best leadership it can produce, and those leaders should not be dissed because of race, sex, or Religious denomination!

Proud Liberal
Again, you are either lying through your teeth or you actually believe the mindless twaddle you posted earlier. You liberals have created an image of the past for yourselves that helps to galvanize your belief system yet barely resembles actual history.
You wanna give me an example of one of those southern democrats who joined the republican party because of its inherent racism? How exactly do you explain Senator Robert Byrd, democrat, West Virginia? Is he conservative? Because he was grand dragon or grand wizard or whatever the hell they call themselves in the Ku Klux Klan, and yet he remains a prominent democrat senator to this day. Truth be told, it was a greater number of republicans than democrats who passed the '64 civil rights act, defeating democrats like Albert Arnold Gore, Sr. (that would be Algore's pappi) and J. William Fullbright (that would be Bill Clinton's mentor). You liberals have been re-writing the history of race ever since. You do what you normally do and ascribe the racist tag on us when it is YOU who are the real racists, historically and practically. Here's what I mean, you go around telling every black person you can find that they can't make it in this damned racist country because of conservative republicans. Of course that's an outright lie but what do you care, it's about votes right? Then you attempt to convince them that the only way out of their misery is to vote for democrats who will enact a whole bunch of big-government programs that are guarenteed to keep them exactly where they are, because if their lives ever actully improve then they no longer need liberals. Then when a black person decides to throw off the shackles of socialism and achieve success without liberals, they are called "uncle Toms" or "sell-outs" by race-baiting poverty pimps like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. You then assume the moral highground by constantly referring to us as racists.

Anthony Thomas, please...
"Please just have a little dignity and self respect, and just stop it."

Look in the mirror when you say, that, sir.

I am a self-described 1960's liberal / 21st Century conservative. I remember Dr. King and I celebrated his rise to prominence with my black brothers and sisters (we were in a church where we were ALL brothers and sisters, even though I was white). Dr. King transcended partisan politics and became an iconic figure - a 20th Century Abe Lincoln. He belonged and belongs to us all - Democrats and Republicans; liberals and conservatives.

Mr. Thomas, I will try to be as respectful to you as possible. You, sir, are not even worthy to "carry Dr. King's water". If you are truly black, you should be ashamed of yourself; I'm convinced Dr. King would be ashamed of you.

THE DREAM

.....MLK's dream was a delusion that became a nightmare for both black and white ...

.....I don't know if MLK really believed what he preached ...but he must have suspected that his purported goal of a color blind society where whites and blacks held hands in brotherhood was an unlikely fantasy ...not just because whites were racists ...but because blacks were too ...

.....A few years ago the City of Dallas gave a parade to honor the Dallas Cowboys whose members were 80 percent black ...part of the parade route passed through a mostly black neighborhood ...the white fans who showed up were harrassed and assaulted by roving gangs of black thugs ...I personally witnessed a grown man spin around a young woman with a baby in her arms and punch her in the face knocking her to the ground ...so much for MLK's dream of brotherhood ...

.....Today a parade will be given for MLK along the same route ...guess how many whites will show up? ...I know that I won't be there .....COLOSSUS

Real name
Whats his legal name? I do believe it is not Martin. Everyone likes to quote that I Have A Dream speech but they do not quote some of his other speeches. I wonder why?
I think if people read some of his other speeches their would not be a holiday for Mike.

Utter self-delusion
Martin Luther King Jr. wasn't a conservative, never saw himself as one, and wouldn't accept such a designation today. As much as we conservatives ritualistically delude ourselves every January, King embraced everything foreign to conservatism. He was a radical egalitarian, choosing equality over liberty every time. He evidenced no real interest in the U.S. Constitution. And his foreign policy ideas were rooted in the principle of "Third World first, America last."

I suppose that in wanting to preserve such principles, he could be called a "radical" conservative. But preserving bad ideas isn't the spirit of conservatism. Paul Greenberg should get a real education and read some books by real conservatives.

ANTHONY & RALPH

.....Sirs!!...I have to say that you are both "Uncle Bills" ...

.....You no more honor the spirit of Dr. King's message than do Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, both of whom no doubt will be on all the talks shows today basking in the reflected glory of MLK ...and when you call me a racist ...do it looking into a mirror .....COLOSSUS

Anthony Thomas
Thanks. I appreciate the comment. I enjoyed your posts as well. I wanted to present truth and reality against the falsehoods Mr. Greenberg and several posters tried to pass along as "fact". To insinuate that Dr. King was a conservative or would align himself with the GOP of today truly is a insult to this great man and his legacy. To answer your question, I believe it is a concerted effort on the part of many cons to box the message of Dr. King to a few lines from one speech. Many cons have never been able to come to grips with the radical and redemptive message of Dr. King. By publishing columns like these, they attempt to purposefully suppress the power of Dr. King's words. However, truth triumphs these lies.

As Dr. King once said,

"I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. This is why right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant."




If MLK was a conservative
then i guess ronald reagan was a racist lib. seriously, history is just a plaything to be distorted by second rate hacks like Mr. Greenberg.

HankRearden
You've just given me the usual conservative pap that "people are sheep." It's a belief that you quote consistently to support whatever it is that you want to "prove." As always it's a belief that holds other people - never you - in low esteem.

In this case it's that blacks are so dumb that they don't know their own minds or can't experience their own experiences, so that they are gullible prey to whatever liberals want to tell them. This is insulting to blacks as it is insulting to every group that you try this "people are sheep" offense on.

This is so sad
Fred Thompson is the epitomy of the type of person we need as president. He does not chase it as if it were the Holy Grail or a life and death situation. He is not eager to sit behind the most powerful desk in the entire world. Anyone who is chomping on the bit to do that HAS to be an egomaniac of the highest order. I would feel much safer with a Fred Thompson at the helm than some ambition-driven populist like Hillary or Obama or McCain,who all seem to be scratching and clawing their way to the top of some beauty contest.
Remember folks, the POTUS is also Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful army ever assembled. God help us if one of these plastic shape-shifters is elected president. And the scary part is, some folks are so ignorant as to think Obama and Hillary represent the future of America.

phileo
Do not compare Mike to Abraham Lincoln. President Lincoln had to make life and death decisions to preserve the Union that is the United States of America. MLK was just a big talker and thats it. If you ask the question What did he do? The answer is nothing but talk. Other people took action.

I have a dream
That the day will come when hucksters like al and jesse and their ilk will stop playing the race card because it just don't work like it used to

phileo
"You, sir, are not even worthy to "carry Dr. King's water"." If you are truly black, you should be ashamed of yourself; I'm convinced Dr. King would be ashamed of you."

With all due respect, why did you attack Mr. Thomas? What did he say that wasn't truth or an actual quote from Dr. King? Why would Dr. King be ashamed of his full quotes that accurately describe his true dream and message for American and the World? Wouldn't you agree he would be outraged to see his entire message/lifes work marginalized and selectively chopped?

Seems as if you have an strong aversion to truth.


baseballdoc
Thanks for the kind words. I love you too. Have a great day!!!!

Lack of knowledge of African Americans.
"The legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. would give way to the frustrations of a Malcolm X, the demagoguery of a Louis Farrakhan, and the general hucksterism of the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons."

With every conservative column, and every conservative post, conservatives just reinforce the preconceived notion that they are racist and know NOTHING about African Americans and African American history.

First to equate Malcom X to Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan and Jesse Jackson is ignorant, and rooted in intellectual ineptness. It is also a slap in the face of the memory of Malcom X. Malcom X views were more in line with (but not identical to) Martin Luther King towards the end of his life. He left, and turned away from the militant teachings of the Nation of Islam and his views became more inclusive than they were when he was apart of the Nation of Islam. Louis Farrakhan remained apart of this organization (the Nation of Islam) which was very much responsible for assassinating Malcom for openly expressing (among other reasons) these inclusive views. Also, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson were not, are not, and will never be as influential as Malcolm and Martin in the African American community. White republicans use Al and Jesse to racially stir up their base by claiming these two have more power and influence than they actually have.


Black Republicans
“Today, any black leaders who don't adhere to the party line - a Ward Connerly or Clarence Thomas or Thomas Sowell - are called traitors to their race. Others are dismissed as "not black enough" because they reach out to all of us. This is the new racism, and it needs to be called such.”

First of all, Ward Connerly and Thomas Sowell are not black leaders. Second, they are not liked (particularly people like Sowell) because they are not principled men, and support political agendas that many African Americans feel are counterproductive, i.e. opposing universal healthcare, Affirmative action, etc. Also, they intentionally neglect to study race from a comprehensive perspective. They attack the defaults and personal shortcomings of blacks, while turning a blind eye to the historically inequity, and white racism that has also affected blacks. If one is going to talk about individual responsibility, one must also talk about the racial institutional barriers, that have existed, and still do exist to some degree. They like holding blacks accountable for their shortcomings, but don’t like holding white America responsible for theirs, especially on matters of race. This is very problematic.



Well, maybe
I agree that King's message is usually misrepresented by liberals - but what about his dramatic decision to oppose the Vietnam War - which Was that based on a conservative principle? What about his critique of capitalism and its uppression of the poor? These views come not from a libertarian or conservative position by a form of socialism. Perhaps he was closer to liberation theology.

Ralph Ellison
The Gipper was right of course, individuals should be allowed to discriminate, (it's called freedom of association) it is only government that should not be allowed to do so.

Clarity
Liberals look at black people and they see vehicles in which to win elections, and that's it. They have never had as their desire the elevation of the lifestyle of the black community. They convinced young black women that if they were to get pregnant, the government would take care of them in the absence of a father, and presto, no more self-reliant families. Of course these women and their children have miserable lives and they are then told that the reason for their misery is because of white conservatives, not a failed welfare state. We are then called racist when we suggest that they, along with everybody else, can elevate their lives by getting married and staying faithful, by being lawful and working hard, by relying on themselves rather than accepting whatever pitance government provides. Of course these things work and that is why liberals oppose them, which is why they call us racist for having the audacity to suggest people do things which will actually benefit and improve their lives. Because, after all, if they actually did have a better life than they won't need liberals. Take notice of this because this is exactly what they intend to do with illegal mexicans.

Anthony Thomas
"They attack the defaults and personal shortcomings of blacks, while turning a blind eye to the historically inequity, and white racism that has also affected blacks."

I daresay that Thomas Sowell and Ward Connerly are old enough to remember when there was real racism in this country, yet they managed to rise above it. Maybe that's why they don't buy all this "victim" talk from younger blacks.

too many typos
I agree that King's message is usually misrepresented by liberals, who seek to ignore his Christianity, and miss the aspect of "content of their character" which implies absolute value

But what about his dramatic decision to oppose the Vietnam War? Was that based on a conservative principle? What about his critique of capitalism and its suppression of the poor?
These views come not from a libertarian or conservative position but from a variant of socialism. Perhaps he was closer to liberation theology than conservatism - which does not redound to his credit.

Ralph
I was born in 1960 so the early Civil Rights revolution happened when I was a little boy. My great civil rights learning experience was the school busing inflicted on Prince George's County, Maryland in the early 70s. I was witness to school crime for the first time, witnessed a school system destroyed, witnessed demographic revolution in Prince George's County and witnessed "white flight" to all those rural/exurban counties in Maryland- Anne Arundel, Calvert, Howard, Carroll and the Eastern Shore. Personal experience has sort of colored my views with regards to civil rights.

AT
Thomas Sowell is black and a leader. But he is not a black leader, because he does not lead blacks. Is that right? Who says he does not lead blacks?

Semperfei/par you sir are ignorant
I don't often resort to name calling, but you are in fact an ignoramous of epic proportions. Apparently you are too ignorant to note that for a black man in the 1960's south to 'talk' about freedom and equality was tatamount to a death, as evidenced by the eventual King's eventual execution. That qualifies as much more than just talk, it's called putting your life on the line for that in which you believe.

Besides which ignoramous, what would you call the Montgomery Bus Boycott, just talk, or one the most successfull grass roots organization in our nation's history?

Actually, ignorant is too mild a term for you, idiot is much more appropriate.

AT
"Lack of knowledge of African Americans."

And now you are saying that African Americans lack knowledge. I'm shocked.

Say it ain't so
It seems that there are a number of blacks where I am working who are not living up to MLK's dream. There's a black flu going around. That's a shame because I would assume that some of them wanted to celebrate today as a holiday. Surely they're not. . . no, it couldn't be that they are at home getting drunk anticipating their new entitlements should Hillary get elected. If only MLK knew what he died for.

A lesson from South Park
In one of the more brilliant societial commentaries on record, Stan turns to Token, the black kid in South Park, and says at the end of the episode, "No wait! I get it now! I don't get it!"

Here's the lesson: I don't get it. I never will. None of us get it, or ever will, nor can we claim to. That's what I bring to the table of ideas, and it is my one and only concession. Accept it, and let's move forward.

And if you really want to learn something my fellow whiteys, may I suggest also The Boondocks, monday nights on adult swim.

Derek Leaberry
I'm sorry to hear that. I'm sure those students bused have a divergent viewpoint when compared to yours. I think you hold a negative somewhat bigoted view toward African Americans because of your childhood experience. I would caution against that. It kind of limits you.

As for PG County, I believe that it has benefited the countymore than hurt it. PG is one of the most prosperous county in the United States. It is the richest majority African American county in the US. Not exactly a bad place.

bryce3
I second your comments toward Semperfei/par. This dude says King did nothing and apparently has a problem because King and his father changed their names to honor Martin Luther. Very sad.


ken

“I daresay that Thomas Sowell and Ward Connerly are old enough to remember when there was real racism in this country, yet they managed to rise above it. Maybe that's why they don't buy all this "victim" talk from younger blacks”

There have always been the Benedict Arnolds of the African American race. These sort of African Americans predate Sowell and Connerly’s existence. During slavery, there were blacks that worked with the slave owners to maintain control over the slave population. If a slave revolt was being planned, these blacks would warn the slave owners. If a black slave would try to run away, these blacks were sometimes given the permission to shoot the slaves themselves. For doing this, these blacks would be rewarded with a pat on the head and special treatment from the slave owners as an incentive to continue this behavior. These blacks aligned themselves with the enemy, not for principal, but because of their own self hate and for their own personal profit. For these reasons, these blacks have always been reviled by the masses of the race for their counterproductive activity. People like Thomas Sowell, Ward Connerly and Clarence Thomas are just a continuation of this tradition, and this type of black.

goldilocks
In reference to Ronnie, I'm not really shocked you would agree with his opinion that housing discrimination is acceptable. Very interesting.

Also, you seem to champion freedom of association as well as discrimination by private indivduals. Seems as if the the SCOTUS already ruled against this notion in RUNYON v. McCRARY, 427 U.S. 160. Also, I believe the Civil Rights Act of 1991 went on to address your position directly. Sorry.

Hank Reardon on Dems, race, gender
There is a major flaw in your assertion that the Democratic party's committment to a color blind society is all smoke and mirrors. This fall the Democratic will be acting on its' committment to the issue by nominating either a woman or a black man to become the most powerfull person on the planet.

And again I ask...besides talk, how is the GOP actually demonstrating its' committment to a color/gender neutral society?

Sorry bud, Dems are walking the walk on this one.

Proud Liberal
You really are a Lib's Lib. You can read very clearly what I said and see something totally different. I never said nor do I think that any group of people are sheep accept you liberals who see government as your shepard. I think that it is a crying shame that you libs have so successfully convinced such vast majority of blacks that they can't make it without you taking care of them. As I noted earlier, any time a black person throws off the shackles of socialism they are castigated by the libs (Clarence Thomas is but one example).
Liberals are an interesting lot. You combat my brilliant argument by quoting something I never said, and that anyone who knows how to scroll up can find inside of five seconds. Instead of dealing with what I said, you simply invent something, claim I said it and then respond to that false premise, which by the way is a familiar tactic used by your ilk. I think that all people should have the ability live prosperous lives and that the fastest way to make that happen is to get you liberals the hell out of their way.

Obama is running as a black man
I can't read election news without being reminded that Barack Obama is a black man who's not running as a black man, that people don't care about his race, etc.

Come on. If I'm being reminded about his race in every article, then certainly he is running as a black man, and certainly his race matters, or it wouldn't be constantly mentioned.

$
I don't think you should use terms like "whitey". Don't put yourself on the level of folks like baseballdoc, reader,Semperfei,etc. They are filled with hatred and illogical stereotypes toward African Americans already. Comments like yours only add fuel to their fire and hurts the debate (which I beleive is truly over at this point: Sorry Mr. Greenberg). Plus, they will use your comment to justify their hatred and malice toward 38 million people. Don't give them the satisfaction.

As for the Boondocks, I love that show!!!! Do you know why they haven't shown any new episodes in the past 3 weeks. My wife and I are addicted. Uncle Ruckus fits many a person on TH. LOL!! To everyone, regardless of color or age, I highly recommend you watch it.

Here is a funny clip (Warning: Not suitable for Ronnie lovers):

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Jyg-uCosYvw

anthony thomas
"People like Thomas Sowell, Ward Connerly and Clarence Thomas are just a continuation of this tradition, and this type of black."

That is nothing but slander. You don't like these men because they disprove your "victimhood."

bryce3
Read "Whitewashing Race: The Myth of a Color-Blind Society" and "Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in the United States" if you can. These two books completely expose and destroy every conservative talking point on race in America. They are definitely worth the investment.

Wish some cons would read them. It would really help them in soooo many ways. lol!!

ralph
Looove the Boondocks!!!!

Hank Reardon again
You again assert that the Dem committment to civil rights is a craven political trick. And again I point out that they will be putting their mouth where their money is this fall. And again I ask, in what way will the GOP candidate reflect their rhetoric as more than just talk?

bryce3
I have never asserted that the democrat party has ever been commited to a color blind society and in fact have been passionately demonstrating otherwise. Colorblind? Are you high? The first damn thing the democrats see in everybody is their race, gender, sexual orientation, or some other group they make it a point to pander to. Their concern for such groups is most definately all smoke and mirrors. Their real concern is acquiring and maintaining and excericising power over as many people as they can, and I am dead serious about that.
What has the GOP done to demonstrate its commitment to a colorblind society? Ever hear of Abraham Lincoln? How about the '64 civil rights bill? Who exactly was Bill Clinton's Colin Powell or Condaleeza Rice or Clarence Thomas for that matter? In '06 the republican party ran Lynn Swann, Michael Steele and Ken Blackwell for major political seats of power. All three of them lost to white democrats.
What we do to promote a more fair and equal society is called conservatism, because it benefits everybody.

It makes me laugh...
...to no end to hear conservatives try and evoke the memory of MLK to use for their own interests. Of course, the only speech or writing of his they use is the "I have a dream speech". Naturally, they ignore his speeches demanding economic equality (the marches in Chicago), or in support of unions (what he was doing in Memphis when he was killed, or against war. Sorry Townhallers, but it's time to face facts: MLK was a proud radical liberal and that is why conservatives of his time considered him a threat to the nation. If he were alive today, every one of you would be slandering him and calling him a kook. Sorry, it's the truth.

bryce3
Your damn right I'm asserting that their commitment to everything is a craven political trick. Hell, SOCIALISM is a craven political scheme. Whether you like it or not everyone of these candidates on the democrat side is a socialist. There's not much of difference between the three of them, except that the Clintons are more viscious and will in due course destroy Obama's campaign, character, and maybe his career, depends on how uppity he gets with them. Yes, when the rubber does meet the road we shall see just how diverse and colorblind the democrat party really is.

MLK as a Consevative
Here you go again. People like you derided and disrespected Dr. King when he was alive. I ask you to answer honestly: What was your opinion of Dr. King when he was ALIVE? What did you do to help end segregation? Answer: NOTHING! As for your opinion of so called Black leaders,thank God you don't pick them for us. You may regard Thomas, Sorrel, and Ward as leaders to emulate, but some of us Blacks want to do other things with out tongue other than licking your white butt!

Liberal, sort of
This is my first post to Townhall, so please excuse me if I don't follow accepted protocols. I am a black/Afro-American/Negro born in 1955 and certainly remember a lot about the civil rights struggle. And I paid a lot of attention to what both Martin Luther King and Malcolm X had to say. Both were complex individuals (men, not saints) who are not easy to shoehorn into todays standards of liberal and conservative.

Both were, at the time, considered liberal, but would never pass today's liberal litmus test. They both:
1. Believed in God
2. Were (or would have been) against abortion
3. Promoted traditional family values
4. Believed in getting jobs
5. Were against welfare. (I know, they both were more or less open to the idea of reparations, but still felt black men should get a job and not live on government handouts.
6. Would have been completely appalled at the circumstances into which too many blacks have placed themselves.

Were they politically liberal? Absolutely. But they both were able to articulately express their opinions, and the reasons they held them, with out the sloganeering and demagoguery we see today.

Hank, give me a break
If the GOP wants to know why they have lost the black vote (probably permanently), they simply have to look in the mirror. The fact is, blacks were split between the two parties in national elections up until 1964 when the GOP made a calculated choice to run a candidate (Goldwater) who supported "states rights" and didn't believe the government should be involved in preventing discrimination. Nixon then ran on "law and order" platform which involved scaring white people with the ever-popular bogeyman of black criminals. Years later, everyone's hero (hahaha), Ronald Reagan, proudly pronounced himself a believer in states' rights, doing so while standing in Philadelphia, Mississippi, a town famous only for the murder of 3 civil rights workers. Reagan would also go on to say that if he were president, he would have vetoed the 1965 VRA and he sided with Bob Jones University in their fight against misegenation.
Yes, the GOP has had A FEW black candidates run for office, thinking that African American voters are so simple-minded that they will forget about policies and just vote for someone with the same skin color. Unfortunately for them, most African Americans will not fall for that trick.
Conservatives would be wise to just keep their mouths shut and let this day pass by. They do not understand MLK and what he was about and they never will.

Foxtrot, part 1
You seem to make some serious assumptions. You are correct that these men were complex and not easily pigeon-holed, but in regards to the 6 points that disqualify them as liberals, you make some assumptions that need to be challenged.
1. Believed in God. (Yes, this is absolutely true, but most liberals including myself believe in God. Conservatives just choose to deride us and say we don't because our beliefs are different than theirs.)
2. Were (or would have been) against abortion. (Yes, no one likes abortion, but he very likely would have been against the government making laws about what a woman can do with her own body. Fellow civil rights leaders who knew him far better than anyone on this board, such as John Lewis and Jesse Jackson, have not come out as anti-abortion activists.)
3. Promoted traditonal family values. (Hmmm, interesting. Without a doubt, Malcolm X was a loyal family man, but MLK was known to have many affairs. He also didn't practice discrimination against gays, as Bayard Rustin was one of his closest friends and advisors.)

Foxtrot, pt. 2
4. Believed in getting jobs (Yes, true, as most of us liberals believe in. MLK also believed strongly in the collective strength of unions and worked hand-in-hand with union leaders, marching with striking workers.)
5. Were against welfare. (Don't know where you get evidence of this. Certainly Malcolm wouldn't want blacks dependant on the white power structure, and us liberals also prefer people to have jobs that can support their families. But most of MLK's work and writing in the last part of his life was dedicated to achieving economic equality between the races, even if it required reparations; not exactly something which would endear him to conservatives.)
6. Would have been appalled at the circumstances in which too many blacks have gotten themselves today. (Ummm, ok. Fairly vague, so I'm not sure what this means, but they would have been far, far more appalled at the claims by conservatives that equality has been achieved and there is no more need for civil rights work.)

Ms.Aries
"People like you derided and disrespected Dr. King when he was alive."

I did? That was quite an achievement, since I was only ten months old when he was killed.

"What was your opinion of Dr. King when he was ALIVE?"

I don't remember. I was only ten months old when he was killed.

"You may regard Thomas, Sorrel, and Ward as leaders to emulate, but some of us Blacks want to do other things with out tongue other than licking your white butt!"

Then why don't you get out there and do it (as did Thomas, Sowell, and Ward) instead of whining about your "victimhood"?

Hank Reardon
You are putting words in my mouth. I did not ask what has the GOP has done to promote a color blind society. I said that this fall the Dems will be demonstrating their committment to the idea that anyone can become Prez regardless of their gender or race, and again I ask how the GOP nominee will demonstrate that committment?

Wow Ken
Please point out to the rest of us where Ms. Aries once referred to herself as a "victim" or discussed her "victimhoom". Go on, we're all waiting...
She simply made a good and irrefutable point: Today's conservative movement is not made up of people who fought for civil rights. Rather, it's more likely that today's conservatives actively fought against civil rights. Please point to a leader of the civil rights movement who is an active member of the GOP today.

Learned Hand
I read very carefully what you wrote and admit it was cleverly well done. I didn't claim to not know why black people don't vote republican, however I don't think it's permanent. I don't think the three events you refer to are the reasons why. Supporting state's rights is not a racist position no matter how you feel about it. As I wrote earlier, it was a greater percentage of republicans than democrats that voted for the civil rights act in the very same year you claim that black people were turned off by Goldwater. The point about the GOP candidates is that you can be a black republican and have the support of the party. It appears that every time a black person gets close to assuming any positions of real power within the democrat party he/she ends up getting slapped down by some white liberal.
As to conservatives just shutting up on this day that is typical of people who hate debate. Truth be told, most liberals believe debate is beneath them, and thus conservatives should just shut up about everything. I do not think Rev. Dr. King would share that belief.

Sorry Hank
Yes, "states' rights" is a racist position, when it means that the Federal government shouldn't have anything to say about state policies which are openly racist. Even if you don't think so, most Americans and certainly most African Americans would disagree and their voting record serves as proof of this. Whether or not you want to admit it, the GOP has changed drastically since 1964 and has made a strategic decision to recruit white Southerners who were turned off by Johnson's support for the 1964 CRA and the party's general abandonment of Dixiecrat policies.
As far as blacks being "slapped down" by white liberals, this is just simply a lie, or a misunderstanding, as you claim this is how things "appear". John Lewis, Andrew Young, Donna Brazille are among the numerous black politicians who carry serious weight in the Democratic Party. Refresh my mind: how many black GOP congressmen are there? What percentage of African Americans voted for Bush in '04? Yeah...that's what I thought.

Learned Hand
"Today's conservative movement is not made up of people who fought for civil rights."

That's a straw man. How many of today's liberals were involved in that struggle? Let's see:

Bill Clinton - During the struggles for civil rights, he was either in college "not inhaling", or he was working for segregationist William Fulbright. Of course, he did stand up on a public bus to protest the arrest of Rosa Parks (that was quite an achievement for a nine-year-old boy, or was it just another of Clinton's "whoppers"?).

Barack Obama - He was only a kid during the Civil Rights movement, and he wasn't even born during the struggles of the fifties.

Al Gore - Of course, his father was a U.S. Senator during the sixties - who voted AGAINST the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

"Please point out to the rest of us where Ms. Aries once referred to herself as a "victim" or discussed her "victimhoom"."

What has been the context of this whole debate?

Hank Reardon on state's rights
I suppose I can understand why you see state's rights a totally benign, nee positive movement. Blacks see it otherwise. Blacks in American suffered 100 years of apartheid because of state's rights, and it was only under aegis of the Federal gov't that the yolk of state sanctioned oppression was lifted.


The Bush standard
Yes its a good question: how would Mrs Clinton outdo President Bush's record of hiring minorities and women?

bryce3
I don't do the cut and paste thing , but @1:05 your exact words were:

"And again I ask...besides talk, how is the GOP actually demonstrating its' committment to a color/gender neutral society?"

I don't need to put words in your mouth -your own words will do just fine. I will be shocked if Obama beats the Clintons, because many democrats are in fact racist, and the Clintons are going to chop the guy at the knees. When that happens will you condemn the Clintons, two white liberals who obviously don't think now is the time for a black president? If they really were consistent with everything they've said they believe over all of these years, shouldn't all of the democrat candidates just get out of the way and let Obama take on those evil republicans once and for all?

LOL at Ken
Wow, way to completely obfuscate and ignore my question. I guess that's because there are no civil rights leaders in the GOP's camp. What a surprise!
Instead, you ignore the civil rights leaders I brought up in my posting and attempt to smear 3 Dem politicians. I'm not sure what you were trying to accomplish in attack on Obama; yes, he was too young to be involved in the civil rights movement, but I can't imagine too many people holding it against him. As far as Al Gore, bravo on the bait and switch: I suppose we should all have the sins of our fathers held against us. As for Clinton, he does have a mixed legacy, but at least under his administration, the Labor Department and the EEOC actually began to investigate and adjudicate cases of racial discrimination, reversing the trend of the past 3 administrations.
What has been the context of this entire discussion? The context has been the weak, failing attempt by conservatives to portray MLK as one of their own.

PeterE
So, a few cabinet appointments are indicative to an overall commitment to civil rights? Interesting...

Hank
"What has the GOP done to demonstrate its commitment to a colorblind society? Ever hear of Abraham Lincoln?"

...had to wince when you mention old uncle Abe....who was a total racist.

Believe all the myths you want, but that guy was not dedicated to abolishing slavery, and if it was abolished, he was dedicated to deporting blacks to Liberia to make the US all white.

To paraphrase one author, Lerone Bennett, Lincoln was "forced into glory" as the great emancipator....which he never was....he only supported emancipation efforts so he could "preserve" the union. Preserving the union (by force, not voluntarily) was Abe's goal....never emancipation.

The true emancipators of that era were folk like Lysander Spooner, Lyman Trumbull....Fredrick Douglass, etc.

"Learned" Hand
"I'm not sure what you were trying to accomplish in attack on Obama; yes, he was too young to be involved in the civil rights movement, but I can't imagine too many people holding it against him."

Tell that to Hillary Clinton. By the way, many conservatives - such as myself - were also too young to be involved in the civil rights movement, but you seem to hold that against us.

"As for Clinton, he does have a mixed legacy, but at least under his administration, the Labor Department and the EEOC actually began to investigate and adjudicate cases of racial discrimination, reversing the trend of the past 3 administrations."

Past THREE administrations? Hmmm. That would include Reagan, Bush, and CARTER??? I believe Carter is a Democrat.

"As far as Al Gore, bravo on the bait and switch: I suppose we should all have the sins of our fathers held against us"

What did Al Gore ever do for civil rights, other than lie about his father's record on civil rights?

Our Soul...

Dr. King is one of the Greatest men in modern American History. Listening to his speeches, I hear the heart and soul of the Conservative message.

Democrats cannot hear the message, and Republicans have started to go down the wrong road.

Dr. King died with his dream unfulfilled... and so will we. We can surrender to liberal cowardice, or travel our road.

Lets make it one hell of a ride :)

Hank you are picking and choosing
Please note that I have been talking about a race AND gender neutral society. Last time I heard Hillary was of the female gender.

And yes I will say it again. The Dems choice of candidate this fall will actively demonstrate their belief that any natural born citizen can become Prez regardless of race or gender. For the GOP that ideal will still be rhetoric.

Carlos
Are you aware of any other speeches MLK made? Perhaps ones demanding equality in jobs and housing? Or standing side by side with striking union workers (as he was doing when he was murdered)? Or proudly standing with friends who were known homosexuals (like Bayard Rustin, one of his closest friends)?
No, you didn't know about that? What a shock.

Ken, let's try this one last time...
Point to one elected Republican who was a leader in the civil rights movement? What, can't you?

Ken
The "3 administrations" included 2 Reagan administrations; he was elected twice, remember? And as far as accusing the Clintons of being racist for opposing Obama, I didn't know that trying to win an election automatically made you a racist. If Obama is the nominee, will the GOP let him run unopposed or will the run a candidate and be "racist"?

Learned Hand
"The "3 administrations" included 2 Reagan administrations; he was elected twice, remember?"

Nice spin. Did you learn that technique from Slick Willie?

"And as far as accusing the Clintons of being racist for opposing Obama, I didn't know that trying to win an election automatically made you a racist."

When did I call Hillary a racist?


Ken
"Nice spin. Did you learn that technique from Slick Willie?"

Ummm, ok. I don't see how this is anything but a basic statement of facts. Each time a candidate wins the presidency, there is a new administration, even if the incumbant wins (hence the mass resignations of cabinet members, even if they are being invited back.)

You are correct about not calling the Clintons racist. I accidentally misread another poster's comments and attributed them to you. I am sorry about that.

Learned Hand
"You are correct about not calling the Clintons racist. I accidentally misread another poster's comments and attributed them to you. I am sorry about that."

Nice of you to admit it. In response to another one of your questions, "If Obama is the nominee, will the GOP let him run unopposed or will the run a candidate and be "racist"?"

If Obama gets the nomination, you can be sure the demagogues in the Democratic party will label anyone who opposes him as racist.


It's so true and so sad
The legacy of MLK Jr. is so distorted and convuluted that it's virtually impossible to reason with most people about it. If you read King's speeches, listen to his voice in declaring a colorless society and appealing to morality and Christian spirituality (Yes! Christian!) it's unequivocal where he was coming from and where he was going. The hucksters and con men who force themselves upon their own race are liars pure and simple. They distort and have a vested interest in only ONE thing- their own coffers and fame. Dr. King was a modest man and that I am afraid is the type of man who rarely if EVER is heard anymore. If a Dr. King were around today I fear he/she would be unable to be heard above the din of the self serving- perpetual victims and narcissistic voices in our midst today. The people who frequesntly invoke his name rarely if ever convey his spirit. One is reminded of Christ and his words to those who utilized His Name but knew Him not.

It's so true and so sad
The legacy of MLK Jr. is so distorted and convuluted that it's virtually impossible to reason with most people about it. If you read King's speeches, listen to his voice in declaring a colorless society and appealing to morality and Christian spirituality (Yes! Christian!) it's unequivocal where he was coming from and where he was going. The hucksters and con men who force themselves upon their own race are liars pure and simple. They distort and have a vested interest in only ONE thing- their own coffers and fame. Dr. King was a modest man and that I am afraid is the type of man who rarely if EVER is heard anymore. If a Dr. King were around today I fear he/she would be unable to be heard above the din of the self serving- perpetual victims and narcissistic voices in our midst today. The people who frequesntly invoke his name rarely if ever convey his spirit. One is reminded of Christ and his words to those who utilized His Name but knew Him not.

RALPH ELLISON

.....Is that what you believe? ...that I am filled with hatred for blacks? ...if it makes you feel better to believe that be my guest ...knock your self out ...

.....The first time I saw the expression "Get Whitey" ...it was scrawled on the side of a building in East Philly in a black neighborhood ...several years later a sullen black employee where I worked was wearing a "Black Power" T-shirt with the image of a black fist crashing through a barrier ...I asked him why he didn't just wear a shirt with the message "Get Whitey" since obviously that was his meaning ...I got a blank look but no answer ...

.....No! Ralphie ...you don't know me at all ...you think you can stereotype me and put my in a tidy little niche with other racists but you are so wrong it is pathetic ...I can tell by your posts and those of Anthony that you two are far more racist than I ever was or could be ...I don't hate anyone Ralph ...not even you .....COLOSSUS

FOXTROT

.....Congrats ....

.....excellent post ... it was factual and accurate and I did not detect any of the latent resentment of Whites or Conservatives White/Black that I always read into Ralph Ellison or Anthony Thomas posts ...they don't like white people or black conservatives and are both "Uncle Bills" .....COLOSSUS

BTW ...If you want the definition of an "Uncle Bill" read my 11:18 post on Star Parkers column ...

clivesdad
Yes, there can be no doubt regarding MLK's Christian faith, but it was a very different kind of faith from the fire and brimstone being spouted by those on the Right. I have never heard a Falwell or a Robertson contrast the philosophy of Ghandi with that of Reinhold Niebuhr. He certainly wouldn't be quick to condemn either gays or communists, as Stanley Levison and Bayard Rustin were among two of his closest friends and confidants.

I would question who these hucksters and con men you are talking about are, as Jesse Jackson was a trusted friend of his and certainly knew King and his philosophies far better than any of us posting on this site.

Learned Hand

Dr. King wanted Unions/ Companies to give equal pay to a man with a Black face. That's nothing more than basic Christian teaching.

Our Vice President has a Gay daughter... shall we say Bush is in your disapproval column as well?

Blacks were not allowed to buy decent homes. They were forced to live in tenant slums. Is that okay with you?

I'll place you in my Liberal column with the Clintons :)


Carlos
Nice obfuscating. Yes, MLK wanted blacks to receive equal treatment in unions, but he also wanted the unions to be strong in their opposition to management. While he opposed the materialistic focus of communism, he was extremely critical of the capitalist system: far too critical to ever be considered a conservative.

His criticism of the housing situation went beyond simply restrictive convenants; he also believed the government needed to take an active role in assuring decent housing for all Americans. Hardly a conservative viewpoint.

As far as the comparison with Cheney's lesbian daughter, way to be completely off track. You cannot choose who you're children are. MLK on the other hand, specifically chose a man as one of his closest advisors who was gay and had strong communist beliefs. Again, this tolerance and open-mindedness would certainly disqualify him from being a conservative.

Face it; people like you considered him a dangerous radical then and conservatives would consider him a dangerous radical today. Stop trying to co-opt what is not rightfully yours.

Learned Hand

Co-opt?

I listened to 3 highly respected conservative hosts today. All praised MLK as a "Great and Powerful Conservative". I'll go with these persons of great intelligence over either of our nobody commenter opinions.

Your Jealousy of Dr. King is obvious. I too am Jealous of a great hero. Neither of us is worthy to carry his briefcase....

But, wouldn't it have been great to walk beside a hero:)

Lotsa lies there, Carlos
Again, I can understand why conservatives would want to try and claim MLK as one of their own now that he is dead and unable to refute their claims. It is very telling that none of his close friends and associates have joined the conservative side. I guess those who loved him and were actually close to him must not have known him as well as a view conservative commenters.

There's no need for jealousy, but you could try to study this man and who he really was before you falsely claim him as a conservative. It would would show some respect for him, at least. Try reading Taylor Branch's biographical trilogy and then you might understand why anyone who really knows about him would never consider him a conservative.

Learned Hand
Good to see ya back. I agree with all of your posts.

As for Carlos, you've got to give him a brak. He is the pride of DPS. It's not his fault he makes such idiotic statements. Just pray for him.

baseballdoc
Your one funny guy. Love you too.

Hey Ralph
Good to see you too. You have to admit, it's pretty amusing to suddenly see all these "scholars" of African American studies on Townhall. Thankfully, I think Dr. King would have been able to find some humor in it too.

HILLARY A RACIST ???
EHOW ABOUT BIGOT?
ARKANSAS FRIENDS HAVE SAID ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION..SHE HAS USED THE "N" WORD BEFORE WHEN SHE GETS MAD AT BLACKS! ALSO "F....JEWS" WHEN THEY TICK HER OFF!
A REAL CLASSY WOMAN!! SOMETHING LIKE MY BUDDIES USED TO PICK UP IN THE BARS IN THE AIR FORCE!
there used to be supreme court justice many years ago..his name? LEARNED HAND!

ELVIS

Elvis
I should know better than to respond to the rantings of an obviously mentally disturbed man, but your posting is ridiculous. You expect ANYONE to believe that you have friends with this inside knowledge that no one else has? Give me a break. Then again, the lemmings here are so hateful, they might believe it.

Learned Hand...

Dr. King can be judged by his Character speech alone. That's the only statement needed to carry the conservative label. I base his greatness on his belief in Character.

Dr. King may have thought one of his disciples would betray him... Not in his wildest dreams would he imagine nearly the whole lot would turn into dollar whores.

Our Party leadership hasn't the courage to call out Dr. Kings men, and label them cowards in public. If our leaders did... We'd have instant respect from Black Americans of character.




Carlos
Thank you for proving you know absolutely nothing about this great man. It's truly sad and insulting to see you denigrate and manipulate his memory to suit your selfish interests. His disciples know more about who he was and what he believed in than you ever will and calling them "whores" only shows you to be the boorish fool that you are. So sad.

Learned Hand
I totally agree. I think some TH posters actually believe they know more about African Americans than I do. lol. When I point out the truth about Dr.King not being a conservative, some like baseballdoc call me a "racist." Hilarious!!!!!

As Dr. King said,"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."

Some of these cons better take notice.

Have a good day Learned Hand.

Carlos
You really are a pity. You give Detroit such a bad name. I understand your knowledge of Dr. King is limited to the cartoon film "Our Friend Martin", but ignorance has no real excuse.

My suggestion: Go to a local library, sign up for a FREE library card, and check out some books on Dr. King. You'll be suprised what reading can do for a person, even yourself.

Question ???
If Dr. MLK spoke of conservative values, then why is the Democratic Party the party of Blacks? Not the Republican Party?

Before 1965, Racism existed in both the Democratic and Republican Parties. Segregation and racism was a way of American Life. Many Conservatives, both Democratic and Republican opposed King and Civil rights. Especially the South and Conservative Christans. Read Falwell's speaches of the time and other Southern preachers finding Biblical justification for segregation.

But the Democratic party as far back as 1947, tried to deal with civil rights - Harry Truman created a committee on civil rights. In 1948, the Democratic platform for Harry Truman included civil rights which led to a walk out of Southern delegates.

But the signing of the civil rights act forever changed the Republican and Democratic parties.

Answer...!
The civil rights act Johnson signed caused the South and racists to defect from the Democratic Party and go to the Republican Party. Thus, Republicans found a constituency with southern racists while Democratic party moved further to the left and integrated blacks and other minorities into their party.

So what have Republicans said?

Ronlad Reagan opposed both the voting rights act and the civil rights act calling it, when running for Govenor, "humiliating to the South" He also wanted to repeal the Fair housing act in California saying; "If an individual wants to discriminate against Negros or others in selling or renting a house, he has a right to do so"

Then there is Trent Lott claiming things would be better if Strom Thurmond won the Presidency.

So as a result, Conservativism became associated with racism and other disenfranchment of minorities. If a person hates gays, or hates hispanics and thinks people on welfare are cheats and lazy, Which party will I join, the Democrates or Republicans..?


stedes
Great posts.

Ralph Ellison
"In reference to Ronnie, I'm not really shocked you would agree with his opinion that housing discrimination is acceptable. Very interesting.
Also, you seem to champion freedom of association as well as discrimination by private indivduals. Seems as if the the SCOTUS already ruled against this notion in RUNYON v. McCRARY, 427 U.S. 160. Also, I believe the Civil Rights Act of 1991 went on to address your position directly. Sorry."

You should be Sorry.
Actually, I don't find it so interesting that you would assume I believe in housing discrimination. You slandered Regan by taking what he said out of context and that's what you are doing to me. Yes, I believe in freedom of association that's because I believe in the Constitution.

You say SCOTUS ruled against this notion in RUNYON v. McCrary. You are Wrong.
They ruled that a private school could not discriminate because it accepted FEDERAL FUNDING.
Big difference buddy. Like I said private citizen's should be allowed to discriminate, but not government. Once you take a government handout you are liable to government rules.

Look at BOYSCOUTS OF AMERICA V. DALE 530 US 640(2000). SCOTUS makes it clear that private person or organizations can exclude whom they please based on Freedom of Association.

Why would you want the government to tell an individual who they could associate with?
What part of Freedom don't you believe in? The part that says Freedom for ALL?

Ralph Ellison

You fear Character sir. I accept Dr. King as a Great American, who rose far above the two of us. Really far above us :)

Now silly folks like you will deny Dr. King loved people of all races. You take your majestic throne of smallness, and deny the life of Dr. King. Tsk, Tsk!

Your anger is yours sir. Anger is unhappiness, and I'll pray you see the light of dear Martin.

His light shines upon all the races. His frustrations were aimed at sad men like you.

I love Dr. King with all my heart, and your lies will never take that away.

He is my hero today and forever.

Sorry that hurts your ego, Martin would not mind :)




Great posts Stedes
Conservatives (understandably) want to ignore the obvious fact that African Americans don't vote for them for the simple reason that they don't have their interests in mind. If we were to believe the words of Mr. Greenberg and his followers, we would have to accept that approximately 90% of black voters are simply too stupid to realize what is best for them. That is truly insulting.

Carlos
You are truly delusional. If you actually believe Dr. King was either a conservative or a Republican, you really gotta hit the library tonight. Remember, their is no excuse for ignorance.

goldilocks on discrimination
If you and your ilk don't like having to associate with your fellows Americans, then move!

As long as my tax dollars help to provide, roads, police, and infratstructure which you enhoy, I will insists upon my right to shop, sleep, live, and associate where I choose regardless of the color of my skin.


Carlos, you silly man
Will you PLEASE do some research so you can learn what a great man he truly was and so you can understand why he would be considered a liberal? You sound like a fool citing "Character" without any sort of context or explanation.

Indeed, MLK did love all races; he idolized Ghandi, a man who will NEVER be confused with a conservative. He said that he wasn't fully awakened spiritually until he attended Crozer Theological Seminary, a place that even today prides itself for being liberal and progressive.

His light does indeed shine down on me. I have been privileged enough to actually take classes and study his work and his writing. Again, I suggest you do the same, that way you can actually know what you're talking about.

goldie
"You slandered Regan by taking what he said out of context and that's what you are doing to me"

How did I take Ronnie's comment out of context?

"You say SCOTUS ruled against this notion in RUNYON v. McCrary. You are Wrong."

No I'm not. The SCOTUS said it is illegal for private schools to discriminate on the basis of race. It also implies that it is illegal for private individuals to discriminate on the basis of race when it comes to contracts, etc.

"They ruled that a private school could not discriminate because it accepted FEDERAL FUNDING."

Actually, you are wrong. Bobbe's School accepted no federal funding whatsoever.It wasn't about that at all.

"SCOTUS makes it clear that private person or organizations can exclude whom they please based on Freedom of Association."

Not on the basis of race though.

"Why would you want the government to tell an individual who they could associate with?
What part of Freedom don't you believe in? The part that says Freedom for ALL?"

I don't want individuals to use such freedom to discriminate aganst others. I don't believe in segregation either. These aren't "freedoms" I like to indulge in. Maybe you or some others do.




A liberal on MLK vs. Bush
I don't think it has been said nearly enough. President Bush should go down in the annals of history as one of the most color blind Presidents in America's history. Time after time, with the appointments of Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Roberto Gonzales, Harriet Miers...the list goes on...he has proven that what counts is the interior not the exterior.

I am a liberal, and as such a de facto critic of GWB, but as a person, I believe that he has done much to make MLK's dream a reality.

A Greek tragedy in America.

The "ONLY" thing wrong with Ralph and Anthony... is that they have bought into a truly destructive liberal ideology.

Do they even know...

... that they are actually part of the problem?

... that they are hurting the very people that they want to help?

... that the purposeful victimization of a race. is simply unforgivable?

Black Americans desperately need a second emancipation... from some of their very own.

They truly deserve much better.








I agree with Joseph Sobran...
"...content of his character." is a clumsy phrasing. But MLK was clumsy. He was no great man by any means. He was all for government intervention to force justice - to discriminate on behalf of minorities. He allied himself with the left and was one of them. In that he was really no different from W.E.B Dubois, Marcus Garvey or even Cornel West today. He was implicitly opposed to individualism, as all leftists are, which is the only philosophy to end racism and all forms of social prejudice. Had he lived, he'd be no more significant now than Jesse Jackson, with a number of paternity suits against him in all likelihood.

lilly-putian politics of small minds
Girl, you never seeem to amaze me. Is your right eye in your left socket and vice versa? Lincoln-Emancipation Proclamation-Republican. Woodrow Wilson-Democrat-Interracial Marriage Felony. FDR-Democrat-Appeased Southern Dem's with Discrimination tolerance until Eleanor got involved with Civil Rights. Truman-Democrat endorsed a strong civil rights platform, confirming the shift of the Democratic party from a Southern, white supremacist organization to a predominantly Northern, liberal party. Southern Democrats (self-termed as Dixiecrats) were so offended by the integration of the party that some walked out of the convention, led by Strom Thurmond. Eisenhower-Republican, however, made a pivotal decision in appointing Earl Warren to the position of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in 1953. He unwittingly strengthened the Supreme Court in a way that made subsequent victories for civil rights possible. The Court's ruling on Brown v. Board (1954) made discrimination and segregation in education on the basis of race illegal, rendering Jim Crow schools unconstitutional.

If you tell half truths either through ignorance or design, lilly, I'll call you on it.

LL in La.
What a total joke: your GOP civil rights accomplishments only go up until 1954. Heck, I would have given you up until 1964, but come join the rest of us in the present. FYI: Eisenhower called his appointment of Warren to the SC the "biggest damn fool mistake" he ever made. Oh, and Strom, who found himself unwelcome in the Democrat party found a home with the GOP, along with Jesse Helms.

bryce3

Very good point... Color-blind is what Dr. King prayed and fought for. I guess President Bush thought Dr. King was "conservative enough"... He fully believes in his message, and says he holds deep admiration for Dr. King. Hmmm?

Dr. King and George Bush have something in common... They have the courage to admit their smallness. They both look in the mirror and see a human, not a messiah.

Some Liberals think that Dr. King's dream was focused on, and is now owned by, a single political Party.

Some Conservatives will not accept the truth... Dr. King was a man of courage, and held a greater understanding of the Christian Faith.


Stupidity and sundry
Anyone who says that dark humans and light humans are different races is guilty of gross ignorance of biology. Period.

"Racism" is a phony term used as a cudgel by those who can't persuade by logic.

Ellison and Thomas think that liberty can be redefined to suit their tastes, Constitution be damned, and are historically challenged, as their content-free posts continue to prove.

Neocon is their favorite word, even though they haven't a clue to its origin and meaning.

When are they at least going to be American-Africans or American-Koreans - why is the other country always first?

Goldwater voted against the CRA because of Federalism, a founding principle that the nanny state idiots don't get and apparently won't ever get.

The communist types in Africa that MLK associated with are active in Kenya protesting their election loss with violence. Their leader named his son Fidel Castro and his supporters just torched the house of a Pastor K. (name withheld) while he was away and his wife was inside. They found only part of one of her legs. (I know a friend of his.)

Obama's pastor preaches Africa first. Obama should denounce his kind of "unity" or else they should all move there.

You'd have to offer me a h-ll of a lot of money to move back to my grandparents' country of origin.

And, no, we weren't part of your problem - my father hired the first black bricklayer in our city, and because he could lay bricks well.

Speaking of fathers - where are they?



Carlos
Do me a favor and read the postings above you from LL in LA and below you from Rich D. Then, you will understand that MLK is not, and will never be, considered a conservative.

MLK- COMMUNIST HIGHLANDER FOLKSCHOOL

http://www.wnnnews.com/highlanderreport.html

http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/hfschool.htm

Ralph Ellison
The opinion in Runon v McCrary was based on 42U.S.C. s.1981 which was not designed to prohibit private racial discrimination. Runyon was overruled by Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, which was later overruled by the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Thus, once again we are ruled by judicial tyranny.

You believe that government should meddle in the affairs of private citizens, I do not. (By the way this has nothing to do with race.) That is why you are a democrat; they too believe in Big Brother. When the day comes that you do not benefit from this intrusion on your freedom you are likely to become a republican.
We are as different as night and day (no pun intended). We will never agree, so at least let us agree to disagree.

goldilocks
"You believe that government should meddle in the affairs of private citizens, I do not. (By the way this has nothing to do with race.)"

When private citizens are discriminating against other private citizens based on race, something has to be done. This is what the entire Civil Rights Movement was about, and why we celebrate Martin Luther King, a man that spearheaded that movement. It’s a shame you think these events are damaging and unimportant to our countries progress.

AT
Anthony Thomas writes: Tuesday, January, 22, 2008 12:37 PM

"When private citizens are discriminating against other private citizens based on race, something has to be done."

Why and by whom? Define discrimination. Aren't we all in the human race? Is that power given to the Federal Government or the State or neither. Please cite your support from the Constitution and other other-intent documents from the founding fathers.

Are they still private citizens then, or tools of the state?

other-intent = original-intent; sorry
.

Rich D
"Why and by whom?"

Why???? Well as you very well know, African Americans have historically been discriminated against by both private and public white citizens and institutions. These very same public and private white citizens and institutions have also historically controlled the resources and capital in the United States, partly because they have discriminated against and marginalized black population. If it weren't for government intervention as a result of civil rights protest, it would be both legal and socially acceptable to discriminate against blacks in both the public and private sectors of the United States.

“Define discrimination.”

What whites have did to blacks for over 350 years. They still do it today to a lesser degree.

“Aren't we all in the human race?"

Of course we are, but blacks didn’t drag whites to America, brutally force whites to work on plantations through violence and cultural degradation, nor did blacks institute Jim Crow laws to marginalize and separate whites from the opportunities of a country that boastfully declared “All men were created equal”

“Is that power given to the Federal Government or the State or neither.”

Neither, it’s given by God. Even brutally forced servitude couldn’t take away blacks humanity. No one can take any ones humanity away.

“Please cite your support from the Constitution and other other-intent documents from the founding fathers.”

I feel no need to cite anything from the Constitution.

goldilocks
Just wanted to point out the facts. You were mistaken and misinformed, which is a hallmark of cons. One day when you pick up a book, you will become a Democrat.

We will agree to disagree. I will make sure to vote your party out of power, by the way.

Apparently Godlilocks can't read
Where are you getting this stuff about Runyon? Have you actually read the opinion? Obviously, if you have, you're seeing things so I will offer some quotes from the opinion:

Held: Section s1981 prohibits private, commercially operated, non-sectarian schools from denying admission to prospective students because they are Negro...The racial discrimination practiced by petitioner amounts to a classic violation of s1981...

Held: Section s1981, as applied in this case does not violate Constitutionally protected rights of free association and privacy, or a parent's right to direct the education of his children.

Held: While under the principle that there is a 1st Amendment right to engage in association for the advancement of beliefs and ideas, it may be assumed that parents have the right to send their children to schools that promote the idea that racial segregation is desirable, and that the children have the right to attend such schools, it does not follow that the practice of excluding minority students is also protected by the same principle. The Constitution places no value on discrimination, and while invidious discrimination may be characterized as a form of excercising freedom of association protected by the 1st Amendment, it has never been afforded affirmative constitutional protections.

Held: While parents have a constitutional right to send their children to private schools that offer specialized instruction, they have no Constitutional right to provide their children with private school education unfettered government regulation.

The opinion goes on, but nowhere does it say anything about the schools in question receiving gov't funds, and specifically states that private schools are not exempt from the applicable laws. Additionally, it makes clear, that their decision is specifically based on s1981 which prohibits discrimination based on race.
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.