On the national holiday that celebrates the birth of famed civil rights activist Martin Luther King, Jr., the AP decided to remind us all that there was more to King than the popularized view of him affords. AP says that it is a shame that King has been "frozen in a moment in time that ignores the full complexity of the man and his message." Who can disagree with this? After all, very often notable historical figures end up being turned into cardboard cartoons known for that one "frozen moment" in history that made them famous.
But, even as the AP argues that we should learn more about the whole of MLK's life and take a more measured look at his life and works, the AP itself whitewashes several aspects of his real life. AP never mentions, for instance, his ties with communists nor do they mention Dr. King plagarized parts of his doctoral thesis. They don't mention his distrust of capitalism nor his support of the concept of special treatment and quotas, an idea that strays from his acclaimed position of "equal" treatment. So, the AP may want us to avoid putting Dr. King "on a pedestal of perfection," but it is also a fact that they only want us to know some of King's real record instead of all of it as they claim.
The AP has taken the occasion of King's holiday celebration to remind us all that the eeevil government was wary of him toward the end of his life, to tell us that "by taking on issues outside segregation, he had lost the support of many newspapers and magazines, and his relationship with the White House had suffered."
Yes, it is definitely true that King was not the universally loved character that he has been mythologized as today. And, we really should take the time to learn more about our famous American historical figures, just as the AP advises us to do. So, let's look a bit at some of King's warts to balance the gauzy portrait we are used to seeing.
Now let us be clear right off the top, here. King's whole record -- even that with which many of us will thoroughly disagree -- does not detract from the salient fact that he was a seminal leader in bringing the U.S. out of its racial oppression. His leadership was transformational for shining the light of liberty upon a segment of the country that was held back by ignorant custom and racial hatred. But, just as the AP urges, his whole life's record really should be known so that we can take a full measure of the man.
Let us start with the fact that Dr. King plagiarized parts of his doctoral dissertation from Boston University. As reported in 1991, a Boston University investigation concluded that King had plagiarized much of his dissertation. "King included in his dissertation a good deal of material taken verbatim from a variety of other sources without proper attribution (or any attribution at all), an act which constitutes plagiarism by any reasonable academic standard."
The University decided not to revoke his degree. After all, his iconic status would have made a target of the school by King's followers and the effort to reveal the truth and take measures that might have been leveled at any other student who had been so fraudulent in their dissertation would be troublesome at best. It was just easier for the university to forget the whole thing.
Obviously, Boston University wasn't too interested in the AP's advice to celebrate King's "complexity." And who can blame them?
King was also under surveillance by the FBI because he surrounded himself with known and vocal members of the Communist Party of the US. Several close King associates were openly communists. Stanley Levinson, Jack O’Dell, and Bayard Rustin (who stayed in close communication with Benjamin Davis) were all communists or past party members. King also frequently spoke before the National Lawyers Guild and Lawyers for Democratic Action, both of which were directly and openly tied to the Communist Party. He also attended seminars put on by the Highlander Folk School, another organization with Communist ties.
I will point out, though, that King himself was never successfully identified as a member of the communist party and he did denounce the Soviets early in his civil rights career, so to say King himself was an outright communist is a step too far to take. However, it is true that his cures for the past ill treatment of black Americans was increasingly leading down the road to socialist ideals.
For instance, King was not a capitalist, free marketeer and he had drifted toward racial quotas as he neared his final years of activism. In a 1968 Playboy interview, King said,"If a city has a 30% Negro population, then it is logical to assume that Negroes should have at least 30% of the jobs in any particular company, and jobs in all categories rather than only in menial areas." So, quotas was the remedy as far as Dr. King was concerned. His was an ideology of democratic socialism not "the American way."
So, in conclusion, let me say that I agree with the AP that we should learn more about the lives, writings and ideas of our historical figures, including Martin Luther King, Jr. But, I should rather think that the AP would want to reveal the whole man, warts and all, and not to further white wash his life if they really wanted to follow their own advice.
Clearly they don't, however.















Comments Policy
Get Whitey!
January 21, 2008 - 12:47 ET by RackieWTF?
I've heard of Retribution in context with punishment but Sunday I heard a bible-thumping, pulpit-pounding, angry AA minister refer to Retributive Justice. Apparently social justice and economic justice doesn't deliver the satifaction that a poke in the eye or a kick in the pants would.
Happy MLK JR. day to y'all.
Did he get the words mixed
January 21, 2008 - 12:56 ET by Chris NormanDid he get the words mixed up? If not, "retributive justice" is a scary concept. Next, we'd have "retributive economics"...
And about the content of his character...
January 21, 2008 - 12:57 ET by Jay in NHNot to mention that he was a serial womanizer. The left tends to overlook or forgive their own foibles because overall they truly believe they are working for the general weal. Witness the various female celebs who offered to relieve Bill Clinton of his tension, as a reward for keeping abortion legal.
Sounds like your idea of
January 21, 2008 - 12:59 ET by balboaSounds like your idea of "full complexity" and the newspapers are different.
Yeah, the newspapers idea of
January 21, 2008 - 13:16 ET by Chris NormanYeah, the newspapers idea of rounding out his character, by presenting some negative aspects, would be to reveal that he liked wearing ugly socks, or something equally innocuous.
But is it really necessary
January 21, 2008 - 14:13 ET by balboaBut is it really necessary for an article on MLK Day to point out warts? Why?
It shows how racially
January 21, 2008 - 14:28 ET by Chris NormanIt shows how racially immature we still are, that we cannot honestly analyze a civil rights hero, who was African American. If say, NB had criticized a piece on George Washington's birthday (if we still observed it), that discussed his owning of slaves, would you be so quick to agree? Is Dr. King sacred, above any criticism at all? Even Jesus Christ is run down on a regular basis. Our other national heroes, George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, have been reduced to a shared holiday, primarily for the use of promoting sales at auto dealerships, complete with pictures of them with inserted talking lips. What would be the reaction if Dr. King was used the same way? I'll make a deal with you, I'll agree that any flaws in Dr. Kings character will be ignored, if everyone agrees that other national heroes' stories remain mythical.
I wouldn't criticize an
January 21, 2008 - 14:30 ET by balboaI wouldn't criticize an article that included MLK's foibles, but I don't think it's necessary to criticize an article that doesn't include them.
So, you mean there should be
January 21, 2008 - 14:37 ET by Chris NormanSo, you mean there should be articles devoted exclusively to preserving myths? Are you in favor of "serious" articles of George Washington not lying about chopping down the cherry tree, Abraham Lincoln building his log cabin, and the Pilgrims sitting down with the Indians for turkey, cranberry sauce, and green bean casserole?
I didn't say anything about
January 21, 2008 - 14:48 ET by balboaI didn't say anything about preserving myths. I have no objection to the MLK article as is, or if the "warts" had been included. I just don't think it's necessary to include the warts. That's different than propagating myths.
How so? Perfection of our
January 21, 2008 - 14:59 ET by Chris NormanHow so? Perfection of our heroes is a myth. Not discussing flaws preserves the myth. The kind of article you're talking about should be found in "Our Nation's Heroes" - required reading for third grade history.
Perhaps. I'll remember
January 21, 2008 - 15:16 ET by balboaPerhaps.
I'll remember that next time an article on Guiliani during 9/11 mentions his divorces.
Yeah, there are so many
January 21, 2008 - 16:16 ET by Chris NormanYeah, there are so many articles these days on his 9/11 performance. Gobs and gobs of them. If you find one newly written, please send me the link. All I can find over the last year are stories about his divorce.
Jefferson
January 21, 2008 - 14:38 ET by MikeknaJOn a side note, you know what this reminds me of, is all of the New Historians who can't mention Jefferson without also throwing in a reference to Sally Hemings. It annoys me to no end, as if his Hemmings failures take anything away from the greatness of everything else he accomplished for America.
The only perfect man who ever walked on Earth was Jesus.
"The shadow proves the sunshine" - Switchfoot
http://www.xanga.com/mikeknaj
Ironic, then, that Jesus
January 21, 2008 - 14:44 ET by Chris NormanIronic, then, that Jesus comes in for the most criticism and mockery without much of a peep from anyone outside the "Extreme Christian Right". Anyone who protests is told that they are being too sensitive.
no Bal, it's not
January 21, 2008 - 14:27 ET by Cool ArrowIt's offensive in the extreme.
I ♣ My Seal
Frankly, I don't think it's
January 21, 2008 - 13:17 ET by CeceliaFrankly, I don't think it's necessary to expose King's failings every MLK day, anymore than it's necessary to do that with our Founding Fathers.
Analysis of King's "complexity" does not have to include some sort of nod to his having "clay feet".
It's not idolatry to have national heros.
Adding caveats to their names seems more like the practice of leftists, rather than commonsensical conservatives who take it for granted that mere humans can accomplish great things.
I agree
January 21, 2008 - 13:34 ET by MikeknaJI agree. The fact that King was less than perfect and, well, human, does not take anything away from all of the great things he did and stood for. All heroes have their flaws.
I don't know how many of us would appreciate the liberals going off on Reagan if there was a Reagan day sometime in the future, by focusing on his negatives that day rather than his postives.
King wasn't perfect. But he was a great man and it's okay to recognize that w/o listing all of his shortcomings at the same time.
"The shadow proves the sunshine" - Switchfoot
"The shadow proves the sunshine" - Switchfoot
http://www.xanga.com/mikeknaj
Completely agree
January 21, 2008 - 14:39 ET by masslibertarianA rich, white man who owned slaves famously wrote:
What a hypocrite! They should tear down that memorial in D.C. because he wasn't perfect.
Sure Dr. King wasn't perfect, either. But considering the context of the times, the fact that he precarioulsy balanced opposing those advocating violence on his own side while working within the system to change it, I think I'll give him a pass on his failings.
Watch Out
January 21, 2008 - 13:13 ET by TWOTIMETUNAThe Reverand Sharpton is on his way to shut down Newsbusters.
Democrats are either Parasites or Parasite Enablers
TTT.... ROFLMAO! Good
January 21, 2008 - 15:06 ET by bigtimerTTT....
ROFLMAO!
Good one...
dp
January 21, 2008 - 13:35 ET by MikeknaJdp
Context People.... Context
January 21, 2008 - 13:34 ET by chris_gillWhile criticism of King's plagerism is fair game, let's not be obtuse to the circumstances of his beliefs concerning capitalism, communism, and distrust of the government.
Lets remember that in the 1940's, 50's, and 60's, communism was not known as the killer of 100's of millions of people, as it is today. Much of what we knew about communism was filtered through the state sponsered media of the USSR, which presented a picture of equality and state sponsered prosperity. There was little report of the mass graves, starvation of whole villages, and on the spot executions.
And whatever King heard on this side of the water was further complicated by the fact
So judging a Black person's view of "Communism" and "Capitalism" through a present day context, is as silly as a me (Black person) saying the founders were racist because they owned slaves in 1775. The context of the social landscape and culture requires one to examine the perspective of society at that time.
This is even more true for the Conservative who likes to quote King's "content of my character and not the color of my skin" statement, but forget Blacks were judged by the color of their skin then. And even to this day, the sterotypes of criminals, hip-hop, and welfare recipients are attributed to the entire Black community, even though this does not apply to 80%+ of the community who do work and live decent lives.
Finally, I don't think the AP 'romanticizing" King is a problem, considering most people know he was an adulterer and commuist sympatizer. Today is a honor to his acomplishments, not his failures. This is the same standard we hold for Reagan, Kennedy, Washington, Jefferson, Columbus, and Thanksgiving (dessimation of an entire race of people). To apply multiple standards would not be within the spirit of one consistent standard that defines Conservatism.
It sure WAS known that
January 21, 2008 - 13:44 ET by Warner Todd HustonIt sure WAS known that communism was responsible for mass murder. Just because the illiterati refused to recognize it, doesn't mean it wasn't known!
Which is worse, Warner?
January 21, 2008 - 13:48 ET by Cool ArrowThe devil you know? (White opression)?
or the devil you don't know (Communism)?
African Americans weren't nearly as likely to be lynched during those years by Nikita Kruschev.
I ♣ My Seal
Lynched
January 21, 2008 - 14:03 ET by Lame CherryPlease let us be very careful of using the liberal buzz word of "lynched" as there were not wide spread lynchings in America ever no more than the falacy of coat hanger aborticides going on that liberals used to push through aborticide now murdering over a million children a year.
To place this into context, PBS which is liberal actually did a documentary on blacks being lynched several years ago and used this example.
It was in the south and 2 blacks had gone into a neighboring town and were being "Bill Clinton". They were being lewd to the women there who just happened to be white. The town's people ran them out of town and told them if they came back they would be hung as they were not going to put up with having their women degraded like that.
These two blacks stated, "No one is going to run us out as we can go where we please".
They went back and the town's people hung them protecting their town.
Granted if they were white, the town's people probably would have beat them to a pulp with baseball bats and dumped them in a ravine to see if they survived on their own, but lynching was never widespread.
If one wants to discuss Senator Jim Webb and his "n*gger knockin" which liberal trash employed in cruising around streets looking for lone black men who they would chase down and then beat up......that is a different story as that is how these sick racists got their jollies. It is what Justice Thomas was warned of in not calling attention to himself.
Too much of this liberal ooze of hysteria ends up in all our vocabularies and hucksters like Al Sharpton drop the lynch bomb in every argument to win it.
God bless.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
→ I surrender, Lame
January 21, 2008 - 14:15 ET by Cool ArrowNow if we can just make that Holocaust fabrication disappear.
Hey, JC Penney has a January clearance sale on percale bed linens.
I ♣ My Seal
So the US government and
January 21, 2008 - 13:55 ET by chris_gillSo the US government and media were reporting the antics of the USSR at the same time as the Yalta conference?
I doubt that. But, to your point, many people in the late 50's and 60's did build bunkers on their property because we belived the USSR would bomb us with nuclear weapons. But again, given that many Blacks who served in WWII overseas in Europe (and were treated quite well over there I might add), only to come home to Jim Crow/The Klan/Segregation/and being called Ni**er by whites in this country....
Who would you believe if you were Black living in this county at that time?
Well said, way to go!
January 21, 2008 - 18:54 ET by TexasOptimistA conservative who thinks... you are one! Thanks!
George W. Bush is not a full-fledged conservative, but I still support his presidency. (Although I am rethinking this position daily!) Still, I'd rather have him as president than ANY of the Democrats. Merry Christmas 2007.
Great Post Mr. Huston
January 21, 2008 - 13:53 ET by Lame CherryI have never appreciated Martin King jr. as I studied this person of extremely weak character placed in the power of a movement. He is no different than Teddy Kennedy or Bill Clinton who democrats celebrate.
I have seen the evidence which Martin King jr. beat on women and was involved in adultery as much as the above mentioned, but what angers me is what Martin King jr. did in Selma, Alabama.
Mr. King knowingly picked Selma as a thug white town. He then sent in young children who he knew would be beaten and have dogs turned on them all for public propaganda for his movement.
That is about the lowest thing any leader can do is sit in safety and allow children to be abused for your glory.
That is why I destest a day honoring a person who did not work for all Americans, but for a segment........and a segment who right now in the black majority neither care nor know a thing about Martin King jr. That is bothersome.
It is the nameless kids who were ravaged in this who deserve the honored place in history as Martin King jr. deserves a day no more than Teddy Kennedy does for pregnant woman's rights.
One has days which honors all Americans or brings all Americans together. MLK day does neither and the blacks in the majority could care less about it.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
→ Dr King
January 21, 2008 - 14:01 ET by Cool ArrowDr. King is a hero. Warts and all.
Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln. Heroes. Warts and all.
I ♣ My Seal
cool -- and maybe extend
January 21, 2008 - 14:19 ET by Jack Bauercool -- and maybe extend that list internationally to a man with an American mother and Britsh father...
Who was a borderline alcoholic...
Who suffered debilitating bouts of manic-depression all his life...
Who changed political parties twice... conservative to liberal to conservative...
And who found time, aged 65, to become the greatest man of the 20th century when he single-handedly galvanized an almost defeated nation to hold out until America entered WW2 where together they defeated a monstous evil..
Arise...
→ Bigger than life Jack
January 21, 2008 - 14:36 ET by Cool ArrowBigger than life on both sides of the pond.
Wait a minute. . . He really was that big, wasn't he?
I ♣ My Seal
Sad
January 21, 2008 - 14:03 ET by MikeknaJThis post just makes me sad.
And it's a bit slanderous as well.
"The shadow proves the sunshine" - Switchfoot
http://www.xanga.com/mikeknaj
Agreed. From what I have
January 21, 2008 - 14:08 ET by Jack BauerAgreed.
From what I have read, Dr. King was the pivotal force in the efforts to prevent a race war in America.
Let's just do a It's A Wonderful Life and imagine what may have happened if Dr King had never lived. And his peaceful path counsel was never heeded.
Yeah, well ... not good I think.
Makes me sad too. It's as
January 21, 2008 - 14:16 ET by WisdomMakes me sad too. It's as if the motto of this site should now be changed to...
Newsbusters: "Defending the rich, white male from discrimination and oppression."
I'm embarrassed by this slander of MLK. I feel like it just put us 40 years backwards into the past.
Not surprisingly, that's
January 21, 2008 - 14:26 ET by Chris NormanNot surprisingly, that's incredible stretching and distortion of what was written.
Wisdom, To slander a
January 21, 2008 - 15:41 ET by hydrodynDMWisdom,
To slander a whole site based on the ranting of one member is what's embarrassing.
If you visit this site with any regularity (or just read the comments on this post), you know that Lame Cherry is routinely ignored and criticized. I personally don't even bother reading his crap anymore.
And as Chris Norman points out, I find it odd that you would somehow twist Lame Cherry's post into some statement about "Defending the rich, white male from discrimination and oppression." Where did that come from?
hydro -- I think we all
January 21, 2008 - 15:44 ET by Jack Bauerhydro -- I think we all know.
The place he normally cannot find in the dark with both hands.
Hydro, I can't say that I
January 21, 2008 - 16:12 ET by Chris NormanHydro,
I can't say that I agree or disagree with Lame Cherry's thoughts, as he usually loses me about the eighth or ninth papargraph in. Still, I marvel at his ability to type so much, so quickly. :)
Chris, Like you, I have
January 21, 2008 - 16:25 ET by hydrodynDMChris,
Like you, I have trouble reading Lame Cherry's posts. His writing style is so disjointed and erratic, I find myself having to re-read each sentence to get what he's trying to say. I don't even bother anymore.
On top of that, there have been a couple of times where he's made statements regarding some area of science which were just flat out wrong. If he doesn't have any qualms about throwing out lies about things like that, I can't see talking much of anything he says seriously.
Actually, Wisdom, white males could use an advocate.
January 21, 2008 - 16:11 ET by R D HelmNewsbusters: "Defending the rich, white male from discrimination and oppression."
The"rich" part of that statement notwithstanding, white males are now the most discriminated-against group in this counry today. Most of this discrimination has become institutionalized (as in government-enforced) in recent years.
All this indicates to me is that all this talk of "equality" among those on the illiberal left is just that. Talk.
What the left is really interested in is revenge.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
Hidsight is 20/20. So,
January 21, 2008 - 14:07 ET by chris_gillHidsight is 20/20. So, assuming your variables that King was a woman beater (never heard that one before, but I don't troll on Strom Front affiliated websites either) and adulterer, what would you (I assume a white person) have done during Jim Crow, to help all Americans, since Blacks were the only segment dealing with this particular problem? Is that possible?
And you have more of a problem with Blacks marching for the right to vote (they were even carrying the American flag as a symbol of their patriotism to a country that hated them) and getting attacked, but have no problem with the whites that perpetrated the attack. If so, that is being selectively obtuse... and is indicative of weak moral character. Please don't let your prejudices of one group, blind you to the historical malvolence of the group you belong to.
Selma was not one thug white town. It was represenative of the South, as instances of terrorism (bombings), lynching, beatings, illegal arrests were occuring in Jackson, Birmingham, Montgomery, Mobile, Columbus, and was even worse in the rurial towns.
Despite MLK's flaws, I still
January 21, 2008 - 16:18 ET by Doraemon_OReillyDespite MLK's flaws, I still think he was a great man and a traditionalist who acknowldeged America's Judeo-Christian heritage. The Communist stuff is a flaw, since every human being is flawed. I think of him as one of the greatest black people in America. To me, he was better than all the disgraceful gangsta rappers who make fools out of their fellow black people.
"Kame-Hame-HAAAA!!!!!" - Son Goku, destroying Usama Bin Laden.
Principles
January 21, 2008 - 18:02 ET by ShaftBigScoreMLK was a hero. He was not perfect, no man is or was...or ever will be(except J.C). Ben Franklin was a skirt chaser, but he was part of the creation of this great nation. The real issue is this, what are we doing to keep the MLK legacy and the priniciples alive today?
I favor the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and it must be enforced at gunpoint if necessary. President Ronald Reagan
I agree with you there 100%.
January 21, 2008 - 18:31 ET by Doraemon_OReillyI agree with you there 100%. MLK, Ben Franklin, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson were sinners, but that doesn't take their hero status away. What counts is that they did extraordinary things for America.
"Kame-Hame-HAAAA!!!!!" - Son Goku, destroying Usama Bin Laden.
On the other hand, none of
January 21, 2008 - 19:29 ET by Warner Todd HustonOn the other hand, none of you Founders you mentioned had ideas that would destroy the country and its system like the communism and socialism that MLK wanted!!!
Considering they had just
January 22, 2008 - 00:29 ET by ZapConsidering they had just destroyed a system and made their own, that would be pretty silly.
→ Disagree Warner
January 22, 2008 - 02:05 ET by Cool ArrowI think a case can be made that insurrection is actually written into our founding documents.
I don't think the Second Amendment can be interpreted any other way.
I ♣ My Seal
the 2nd wasn't made for
January 22, 2008 - 07:37 ET by Warner Todd Hustonthe 2nd wasn't made for "insurrection." It was made as a corrective for government straying from the path. The "insurrection" is secondary to the purpose of keeping the government correct, so to ignore the PURPOSE for the insurrection is misunderstanding the amendment!
For an example, jail is meant ONLY to punish. However, sometimes it ends up rehabilitating. To imagine that jail is ONLY for rehabilitation, though, misses the point of jail!
Just because something sometimes has a feature does not mean that is its sole purpose.
2nd Amendment
January 22, 2008 - 08:20 ET by Cool ArrowIt was made as a corrective for government straying from the path.
And if the Government refuses to get back in line?
Sounds like you're agreeing with me but you don't like it.
I ♣ My Seal
No, I am not agreeing with
January 22, 2008 - 09:29 ET by Warner Todd HustonNo, I am not agreeing with you. If the amendment was made ONLY for "insurrection" why has there never been one? (the Civil War doesn't count because it was fought on different grounds. Namely secession)
Seems to me that your interpretation is off the mark.
→ Warner
January 22, 2008 - 09:37 ET by Cool ArrowWhere did I say the Amendment is "only" anything.
why has there never been one? I don't know. Maybe because Aaron Burr is just a figment of our imaginations.
Let me put this into your perspective: When the Government comes to take our guns a la Australia. (Can't happen here?) Maybe you will bend over to the mandate, but I think I'll just claim the authority afforded in the 2nd Amendment.
But just to make it happy for you, we'll call it something other than "insurrection".
I ♣ My Seal
You didn't have to say
January 22, 2008 - 10:16 ET by Warner Todd HustonYou didn't have to say "only" when it was the only thing you said it was for. You mentioned no other reason except for saying it was for insurrection.
→ Say what?
January 22, 2008 - 10:57 ET by Cool ArrowI neither implied nor stated anything about the Second Amendment being "only" a license to overthrow the Government. It adresses other issues as well. For purposes of this discussion, those other issues were outliers.
You did, however, state Americans have no such authority under the 2nd. I simply disagree.
I ♣ My Seal
Not at all. I never said
January 22, 2008 - 11:35 ET by Warner Todd HustonNot at all. I never said that the American people have "no such authority." YOU read that into what I said. I said the amendment wasn't made for "insurrection." and I put insurrection in quotes to refer to your own post specifically implying that you meant it to only be for "insurrection."
However, we are now arguing in circles, so I'd guess we are at an end to useful discussion. And if you are now, at this late date, going to agree that the amendment is also for "other issues," then we have less disagreement than we seemed to at first have.
So, I'd say we have both said our piece and we can move along as friends.
→ Other issues
January 22, 2008 - 11:48 ET by Cool ArrowYou just got caught failing to think through your initial retort. I called you on it, and you both introduced and got stuck on the word "only".
I ♣ My Seal
OK, so you don't want to
January 22, 2008 - 12:34 ET by Warner Todd HustonOK, so you don't want to part friends. Fine. You were wrong to focus solely on "insurrection" and you refuse to admit it.
Whatever. Like I said, we both had out say and I find the debate closed.
Better get back to busting
January 22, 2008 - 12:38 ET by balboaBetter get back to busting Ryan Seacrest for more alleged slights...
→ bal
January 22, 2008 - 12:47 ET by Cool ArrowIs Seacrest at it again?
I ♣ My Seal
Being the heathen that
January 22, 2008 - 12:51 ET by balboaBeing the heathen that Seacrest is, I'm sure he must have done SOMETHING recently, and I'm sure WTH will illuminate us all with another stunning expose'.
I can't imagine talking
January 22, 2008 - 13:07 ET by Warner Todd HustonI can't imagine talking morality with you is a subject you are familiar with!
LOL
Morality or hyperbolic
January 22, 2008 - 13:19 ET by balboaMorality or hyperbolic "WOLF" crying?
WOW balboa
January 22, 2008 - 13:21 ET by candanceApparently being a liberal means you have no morals. How DO you sleep at night?
Well, now. It's pretty
January 22, 2008 - 13:23 ET by Warner Todd HustonWell, now. It's pretty obvious that leftism and morality are mutually exclusive!
→ shocking, candance
January 22, 2008 - 13:24 ET by Cool ArrowI'll bet bal actually kissed a girl before his 19th birthday.
Thankfully, HIV/AIDS has now become a chronic disease - Hillary Clinton
that's a stretch
January 22, 2008 - 13:30 ET by candanceDoes every liberal in America run around like Soddom and Gomorrah, having sex with random people, getting drunk, beating their children, lying to their spouses, stealing from their neighbors, and kicking their dogs.
I don't know Balboa personally, but I'd wager he has a moral guideline somewhere.
I was just making fun of
January 22, 2008 - 13:35 ET by balboaI was just making fun of WTH for his Seacrest post, that's all.
bal
January 22, 2008 - 13:42 ET by Cool ArrowGirl kisser! Girl kisser!
And how!
January 22, 2008 - 13:43 ET by balboaAnd how!
Careful who you link...
January 21, 2008 - 20:02 ET by Damian GReally, did you need to link to Lew Rockwell in order to prove a point about a civil-rights leader???
Yikes
January 22, 2008 - 12:56 ET by candanceI had glossed over this story before and I now wish I had simply stayed away from it.
I'm with Cool Arrow on this (seems like we usually agree) that MLK was a determined man who dabbled in dark politics but had good intentions.Yes, the founding fathers were all just as unsure and it's a point blank miracle America ended up the way it did.
Articles of Confederation? The XYZ Affair? The Kansas Nebraska Act? The Know-Nothing party?There were many, many times this country could have gone down the wrong path.
LOL no insurrection. And the Civil War doesn't count (??). What about the Utah War? The Whiskey Rebellion? The Taos Revolt? Just because they were unsuccessful doesn't mean they didn't happen.
Seriously though, bashing Dr. King on MLK day is kind of rude. On July 4th will NB post an article about Thomas Jefferson owning slaves?