His father was also an anti-colonialist
You say that like its a bad thing.
I'm sorry, I forgot.. everything is 100% Obama's fault.
What part of '/sarcasm' did you not get? But in sarcasm there is still a bit of reason for it. Though everything is certainly not Obama's fault, there is still a general air of 'don't criticize him' by many.
What part of '/sarcasm' did you not get? But in sarcasm there is still a bit of reason for it. Though everything is certainly not Obama's fault, there is still a general air of 'don't criticize him' by many.
Sorta like the general air of you always criticizing those who criticize Obama? There's some irony in that me thinks.And there's also a general air of "always criticize him" by many others.
Sorta like the general air of you always criticizing those who criticize Obama? There's some irony in that me thinks.
Sorta like the general air of you always criticizing those who criticize Obama? There's some irony in that me thinks.
October 11, 1991
A committee of scholars at Boston University concluded yesterday that Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. plagiarized portions of his doctoral dissertation, completed there in the 1950s.
Martin Luther King was, like so many great men, a flawed character who engaged in some regrettable behavior. The same can be fairly said of essentially all of the Founding Fathers. This does not vitiate his extraordinary achievements in the civil rights arena. He was largely responsible for dragging our entire country into the modern era in terms of recognizing basic human rights for non-whites.
Your decision to use that mugshot of Dr. King to imply something negative about his character is . . . illustrative of your agenda here. As you presumably know, he was arrested and booked in connection with the Montgomery bus boycotts, not because of some act of moral turpitude.
The fact that you have the temerity to act as though this extraordinary man is a negligible figure because he was imperfect says more about you than it does about Dr. King. You should really be ashamed of yourself.
Very well said, both of you.My opinion: MLK was an idealist. He was able to lead an extraordinary nonviolent revolution in this country (and really it was nothing short of that).
However, as Moonbeam pointed out, the revolutionary has the luxury of being the pure idealist. Those who follow the revolution must be more pragmatic, and must face ambiguous issues not addressed by the revolutionary. Success in navigating those harder issues is one of the things that made the American Revolution lasting, and the failure was part of what made the French Revolution (arguably the more ideologically pure one) a failure.
Would Obama love to snap his fingers and end all war, eliminate poverty, and cure the world of racism? Sure he would. He'd also love it if he could dunk like LeBron James. Things like that are far easier said than done. If there was an easy way to solve this issues that everyone was happy with, it would have been solved long ago. West is trying to claim that he's not worthy of swearing in on MLK's bible because he isn't a miracle worker.
Obama swearing in on MLK's bible makes sense because Obama's presidency, in the simple fact that it exists, is both the product and continuation of MLK's legacy. Without the civil rights movement, Obama probably doesn't get elected to the senate, let alone the presidency. He is a mixed-racial president, the closest possible political fulfillment of the "I have a dream" speech.
Obama swearing in on MLK's bible is not to proclaim him the next MLK. It is a small token to recognize the role that MLK's legacy played in bringing Obama to where he stands. To recognize that without MLK's vision, daring, and idealism, Obama could not be president. That Obama will do his very best, within the confines of his role, to uphold those values that MLK treasured.
Your decision to use that mugshot of Dr. King to imply something negative about his character is . . . illustrative of your agenda here. As you presumably know, he was arrested and booked in connection with the Montgomery bus boycotts, not because of some act of moral turpitude.
My opinion: MLK was an idealist. He was able to lead an extraordinary nonviolent revolution in this country (and really it was nothing short of that).
However, as Moonbeam pointed out, the revolutionary has the luxury of being the pure idealist. Those who follow the revolution must be more pragmatic, and must face ambiguous issues not addressed by the revolutionary. Success in navigating those harder issues is one of the things that made the American Revolution lasting, and the failure was part of what made the French Revolution (arguably the more ideologically pure one) a failure.
Would Obama love to snap his fingers and end all war, eliminate poverty, and cure the world of racism? Sure he would. He'd also love it if he could dunk like LeBron James. Things like that are far easier said than done. If there was an easy way to solve this issues that everyone was happy with, it would have been solved long ago. West is trying to claim that he's not worthy of swearing in on MLK's bible because he isn't a miracle worker.
Obama swearing in on MLK's bible makes sense because Obama's presidency, in the simple fact that it exists, is both the product and continuation of MLK's legacy. Without the civil rights movement, Obama probably doesn't get elected to the senate, let alone the presidency. He is a mixed-racial president, the closest possible political fulfillment of the "I have a dream" speech.
Obama swearing in on MLK's bible is not to proclaim him the next MLK. It is a small token to recognize the role that MLK's legacy played in bringing Obama to where he stands. To recognize that without MLK's vision, daring, and idealism, Obama could not be president. That Obama will do his very best, within the confines of his role, to uphold those values that MLK treasured.
Actually, and this is 100% true, the only reason I posted the mugshot was because the boards wouldn't let me post just what was in the body of the quote.
I didn't feel like typing anything to go with it, I briefly considered some sort of emoticon but that seemed flippant... so I just image searched MLK plagiarism and that was one of the first results. No joke. (Though I did realize the arrest was unrelated to that)
As for editing it as the other person suggested, I certainly wasn't intending to imply he was arrested for the plagiarism. I will go back and make that clear in that post with an edit.
Meantime, here's a good video about MLK.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27lmZFODMoI
Owned, His hypocrisy has been exposed, I have noticed this because he has a problem with me criticizing obama
Your criticism of MLK seems to be all over the map. First, it's that he was a philanderer and a plagiarist. Next, it's that he was religious and that makes him dumb. Now, it's that he was pushing a big-government agenda. Is it possible that your dislike of Dr. King has more to do with your recent "epiphany" that black people are morally deficient, uneducated criminals, and you blame him for unleashing them on white society?
you mean, Alan West, old chum?
\lol!
I was going to give this thread 10/10, but I'm going to go to 11/10 because Adam West was mentioned.
Why would anyone want to hear what some anonymous libertarian wacko has to say about Martin Luther King? I got through 40 seconds of it and it's clear what it is - an indictment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 based on libertarian ideals. I already know Ron and Rand Paul would rather restaurant owners were still free to have whites-only lunch counters and drinking fountains. I (and the overwhelming majority of Americans) disagree.
Except that obama is against much of what MLK believed in, MLK would be disgusted with the wars and drone strikes, obamas opposition towards Israel and his racial politics
By doing this he is disrespecting MLK and Mr. West is right to take him on for this.
No president should disrespect the Bible of MLK
Just throwing this out there: do you think, if he were magically made president in 1964, King could have gotten the civil rights and voting rights acts passed? It took the far more pragmatic and cynical approach by a Texas Democrat (LBJ) to work the back rooms to get the bill through committee. Was LBJ everything King could have wanted in a president? Absolutely not, but he helped accomplish something King could not do alone.
I still remember meeting Adam West when I was 13 or so, he was doing book signing for "Back to the Batcave"
I came up with my copy to have it signed and his agent or guard or whoever the fuck it was, noticed that I was a little starstruck and was like "are you going to be okay?" implying I was going to like, faint or something... I should've said "don't flatter yourself." but yes I was a little starstruck maybe