Skip to comments.Happy Martin Luther Day
Posted on 01/19/2009 8:49:42 AM PST by A Navy Vet
I highly doubt that Martin Luther King Jr. would want to see such a man that is going to take residence in our Oval Office. He was a man of principle - Obama is not.
He was right about the equality of the races, but was a plagerizing commie whoremonger as well.
Please don’t confuse Martin Luther with Martin Luther King Jr. They were two very different men as well.
From MLK’s wiki:
Opposition to the Vietnam War
Starting in 1965, King began to express doubts about the United States’ role in the Vietnam War. In an April 4, 1967 appearance at the New York City Riverside Churchexactly one year before his deathKing delivered a speech titled “Beyond Vietnam”. In the speech, he spoke strongly against the U.S.’s role in the war, insisting that the U.S. was in Vietnam “to occupy it as an American colony” and calling the U.S. government “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today”. He also argued that the country needed larger and broader moral changes:
A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say: “This is not just.”
King also was opposed to the Vietnam War on the grounds that the war took money and resources that could have been spent on social welfare services like the War on Poverty. The United States Congress was spending more and more on the military and less and less on anti-poverty programs at the same time. He summed up this aspect by saying, “A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death”.
Many white southern segregationists vilified King; moreover, this speech soured his relationship with many members of the mainstream media. Life magazine called the speech “demagogic slander that sounded like a script for Radio Hanoi”, and The Washington Post declared that King had “diminished his usefulness to his cause, his country, his people.”
King stated that North Vietnam “did not begin to send in any large number of supplies or men until American forces had arrived in the tens of thousands”. King also criticized the United States’ resistance to North Vietnam’s land reforms. He accused the United States of having killed a million Vietnamese, “mostly children.”
The speech was a reflection of King’s evolving political advocacy in his later years, which paralleled the teachings of the progressive Highlander Research and Education Center, with whom King was affiliated. King began to speak of the need for fundamental changes in the political and economic life of the nation. Toward the end of his life, King more frequently expressed his opposition to the war and his desire to see a redistribution of resources to correct racial and economic injustice. Though his public language was guarded, so as to avoid being linked to communism by his political enemies, in private he sometimes spoke of his support for democratic socialism. In one speech, he stated that “something is wrong with capitalism” and claimed, “There must be a better distribution of wealth, and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism.”
King had read Marx while at Morehouse, but while he rejected “traditional capitalism,” he also rejected Communism because of its “materialistic interpretation of history” that denied religion, its “ethical relativism,” and its “political totalitarianism.”
King also stated in his “Beyond Vietnam” speech that “true compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar....it comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring”. King quoted a United States official, who said that, from Vietnam to South America to Latin America, the country was “on the wrong side of a world revolution” King condemned America’s “alliance with the landed gentry of Latin America,” and said that the United States should support “the shirtless and barefoot people” in the Third World rather than suppressing their attempts at revolution.
I never looked at him as a man of principle. He allowed himself to be led around by interests that were not friendly to America. His principles concerning equality of the races were sound, in other areas, though, they were mirky.
MLK was a socialist and his “dream” had no intention of promoting equality for all.
The only American who has his own holiday specifically in his name. Not Washington, not Lincoln, not anyone except MLK. This is our national tribute to political correctness, nothing else.
“MLK was a socialist and his dream had no intention of promoting equality for all.”
And this nonsense that he was a conservative and would be a present day Republican is bunk as well. I do give him credit for his non-violent approach to protest, however.
The 2008 election crystalized the concept that when it comes to black Americans, race trumps all. I know that, and we see the proof.
Now, in that context, I’d say MLK would love Obama, and be one of his biggest supporters.
This holiday is designated as "Washingtons Birthday" in section 6103(a) of title 5 of the United States Code, which is the law that specifies holidays for Federal employees. Though other institutions such as state and local governments and private businesses may use other names, it is our policy to always refer to holidays by the names designated in the law.
Well... that was nice of him.
Robert Edward Lee (January 19, 1807 October 12, 1870)
I am told that my grandfather's grandfather was his lawyer for a while.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
Today is also the 202nd anniversary of the birth of Robert E. Lee, who combined a noble character with Christian humility.
I have all my decorations out!!!
Three cheers for Bobby Lee!!!!!!!!!!!
I disagree. I think King would be ungrateful that Reagan signed his holiday bill and would be elated over Oprah’s Choice, which would also be his choice. King was a big affirmative-actilon booster too.
Did you thank Reagan for approving King Day?
Leave it to the Government to dedicate an entire day named after a mans ALIAS. I am tired of being force fed how great Michael King aka MLK, Jr. was, when it’s a proven fact that he was plagiarizer, adulterer, and a communist. The day would be better served if it were called Civil Rights Day.
And just how ironic is it that they would set aside MLK Jr day to fall on the Birthday of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. Why not have it on “Dr.” Kings own birthday??
Obama is just like “Dr” King..plenty of pretty words that he stole from somebody else.
Sorry I left of the King, Jr. You know who I was talking about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.