Martin Luther King Jr. The Dream Dies

Emphasis mine

Which just shows where their real priority is; and it ain't a "color blind" society!!

 

Can you imagine how he would preach against abortion ?

 

Most Blacks were republican in his day since the "white establishment" of the south were mostly Democrats. Also, I think he was only allowed to vote in one or two elections because of his race. I don't think MLK would still be a republican today after forming protest like the poor peoples campaign. That clearly shows where he stands on social issues.

 

In Malcom X's biography, he claims MLK told him that his words brought "shame, and disgrace upon the negro..."

MLK would be no democrat. In fact, the democrats bugged his phone, had an very active file on him, and the democrats were the reason the civil rights bill didn't pass until halfway thru the '60s.

 

I thought blacks were mostly Republican only until FDR, and his socialism sucked about 90% of them in with the Democrats, in spite of the "solid south."

 

Poor People have been voting for Democrats for the last 50 years, and they are still poor." ~ Charles Barkley

 

Here, I have no knowledge whatsoever, but my guess is that MLK would be for the life of the child and for the poor fatherless...... supportive of the poor family and the unwed mothers.

I might be wrong also...... but I don't think he would identify the homosexual agenda as being the equivalent of civil rights unjust divisions based upon race.
Its one thing when God has made us and placed us into a family, a race, and a nation not of our own choosing, and when a person wants to wear a bill board to flaunt 'I'm a sodomite or a fornicator and immoral.... so support me or kick me."

I think MLK would have been very proud of the recognition and acheivements of people who exercise their gifts of intelligence and talents and hold office or are recognized in leadership within the Republican Party without regard to color or origin. Show me as many people of color in a Democratic administration that ever got the recognition of position in a serious area of advisement and policy!

 

Blacks didn't vote before The National Voting Rights Act of 1965. They were either discriminated against when they went to register or the guys in white robes met them before, after or at the booth. The why the voting rights act came about, it was to protect everyone's right to vote and allowed the Fed's to protect and prosecute any person who discouraged or kept another from voting.

There might have been one or two black in the north that voted but not in the south where MLK grew up. No black would go near a polling place except to empty the trash.

 

Malcolm had a violent message and King was about non-violence. That is what King had against Malcolm, he wanted to isolate the blacks and get rights with violence and even spoke of starting a black society.

 

:applause: Excellant post!

 

Because the Republican's keep winning. Of late the Dems had Carter and Clinton, the rest have been conservatives.

 

Something I never knew before until my Dad recently disclosed it to me:

Daddy's family were 'born and bred' Democrats, living in the rural south where they made their living farming. My dad joined the Navy, participated in WW II, and when he retired from service in 1960/61, he openly declared himself a Republican out of concern for our country and the staleness created by the one-party Democrat vote which alllowed NO competition, and the variableness within the Democrat Party.

When Blacks were first encouraged to register and vote, he heard a rumour that some staunch Democrats were planning to show up at the polls with their fire arms to intimidate and discourage any Blacks who showed to the polls to vote: And those who might have registered as 'Republican' were intimidated into believing that such would not be good for their health. Others were persuaded that the Democrat Party was the only viable party (which was true by its dominance and majority) which could offer 'protection' by government. To understand this, one must realize the difficulty of even getting on the ballot as a Republican in a local or state election ...... and even if on the ballot.... getting enough votes to encourage others to believe they'd have support within the community without judgements based on their politics.

I don't suppose this could be generalized to be happening in all areas of the country along these party lines..... But when you only have one party which dominates all the primaries and general elections, and you have people with enough majority to force an intimidation or a tyrany upon those who might make a difference choice, you have effectively controlled and manipulated the election and its' outcomes. When you bind the free choice of people to believe in the false contraints of survival fears, you have established not only their submission but their behavior which will be passed along to their generations.

 

I agree that Dr. King as a Baptist minister would not have supported abortion. However, he would never have supported the needless war in Iraq either. He spoke out against the Viet Nam war which disproportionately killed black American soldiers.

One thing. Supporting the Sanctity of Life isn't just about being against abortion although that's an important part of it. It's also about saving the lives of those who were born. This includes being against unnecessary wars, euthanasia, and capital punishment. Life is life. Supporting life means preserving all human life not just the unborn.

Second thing. Just like Martin L. King, people shouldn't be put into neat little boxes and assumptions made about everyone in that category. I'm against abortion except when the life of the mother is at risk. That's Sarah Palin's position. I'm also against the unjust war in Iraq and capital punishment. Those are not Gov. Palin's position. I'm a Democrat. Why. The Republicans have done nothing to stop abortion, ever. In fact it became legal because of a majority Republican Supreme Court. Therefore, if they're not going to stop abortion I support the Democrats who will stop this senseless war.

 

What's crazy, we are having the most honest elections in our history even with the stuff going on in the battleground states.

 

You can start with the DOJ site...

http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/intro/intro_b.htm

I guess you don't study much about why the civil rights protest and laws came about? Some of that stuff would make your stomach turn. And while this was happening at home, a disproportionate number of blacks were fighting for the rights of Vietnamese.

 

Sounds like Chuck Baldwin is a candidate you might consider. Certainly, by the end of the election, your vote would present more issues of importance and dissatisfaction to both parties to deal with than either of them face with each other.

Just thinking.:thumbs:

 

Upon what facts do you base this superlative?