mlk versus mixxed race man

[blugiant]

lets cumpare ann contrast mlk ann de mixxed race man.

iff mlk wass alive, wood he approved aff mixxed race man policies ar wood he bee bunninn fiyah pon mixxed race man policies?

woo ave dunn more fe uplift blakks?

woo legacy will be judge more favorable?

etc....

[Emperah]

mi nuh kno how yuh cyan compare de two, when one a dem a look de odda way weh blk ppl is concerend.
Mi surprise yuh really fix yuh mout fi sayt
To me it is blasphemy fi dem fi have inauguration pan de same day as de mlk holiday.

Den dem keep on bringing up bout him a use mlk bible and lincoln bible fi swear pan an nuff fu-fool blk ppl will feel good bout dis.
Hail the pusher of Africom
The pusher of drone murders
Another pusher of death


yuh really fix yuh mout fi ahx dis question blu?

[blugiant]

mi nuh kno how yuh cyan compare de two, when one a dem a look de odda way weh blk ppl is concerend.
Mi surprise yuh really fix yuh mout fi sayt
To me it is blasphemy fi dem fi have inauguration pan de same day as de mlk holiday.

Den dem keep on bringing up bout him a use mlk bible and lincoln bible fi swear pan an nuff fu-fool blk ppl will feel good bout dis.
Hail the pusher of Africom
The pusher of drone murders
Another pusher of death


yuh really fix yuh mout fi ahx dis question blu?

“On some positions, cowardice asks the question, is it expedient? And then expedience comes along and asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? Conscience asks the question, is it right?

There comes a time when one must take the position that is neither safe nor politic nor popular, but he must do it because conscience tells him it is right.”
― Martin Luther King Jr.





yuh kno imm innaugarateshamn fall pon mlk weekend so itt a fair qwestian fe ask cah mii ear sum peeps use fe gawn like imm elecshan wass da fullfillment aff mlk i ave a dream speech

[blugiant]

mi nuh kno how yuh cyan compare de two, when one a dem a look de odda way weh blk ppl is concerend.
Mi surprise yuh really fix yuh mout fi sayt
To me it is blasphemy fi dem fi have inauguration pan de same day as de mlk holiday.

Den dem keep on bringing up bout him a use mlk bible and lincoln bible fi swear pan an nuff fu-fool blk ppl will feel good bout dis.
Hail the pusher of Africom
The pusher of drone murders
Another pusher of death


yuh really fix yuh mout fi ahx dis question blu?

mii neva figgit wen wan aff de mixxed man mixxed race supportahs wrote diss



How Barack Obama is like Martin Luther King, Jr.
Melissa Harris-Perry


All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face to face with another problem. –Martin Luther King, Jr.
Barack Obama accepted the Democratic nomination for the presidency on the anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr's historic "I have a dream" speech. He was inaugurated the day after our national holiday celebrating the life and accomplishments of Dr. King. Many asked if Obama's presidency was the realization of King's dream. Cultural products, from t-shirts to YouTube videos, linked Obama's election to King's legacy.

Some observers have made far less complimentary comparisons between the men. Some self-professed keepers of King's legacy have insisted that Barack Obama is embarrassingly anemic on issues of race. Remembering King as an uncompromising paragon of progressive politics, these "black leaders" judge Obama as a wishy-washy sell-out, unwilling to stand firm for his constituency.

This sentiment was perfectly captured last week in the outrageous comments of African American Georgetown University professor Michael Eric Dyson. Lost in the din surrounding Harry Reid's "Negro dialect" comments and Rush Limbaugh's scandalous tirade about Haiti, was Dyson's assertion that "Barack Obama runs from race like a black man runs from a cop."

Dyson's comment is both offensive -to President Obama and to black men in general- and false- no other American presidential candidate paused in the middle of a campaign to deliver an exquisite commentary on race. Still, Dyson's sentiment is indicative of a small, but vocal group of black public intellectuals who have regularly criticized Obama during his campaign and his presidency.

Often comparing Obama explicitly to Dr. King, they conclude the President lacks the moral courage or Leftist determination of the civil rights icon.

I disagree. Barack Obama is stunningly similar to Martin Luther King, Jr., but to see this similarity we must relinquish the false, reconstructed memories of perfection we currently project onto King.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a political philosopher and dedicated freedom fighter, but he was also a pragmatic political strategist. Seen through the perfecting lens of martyrdom, King appears to be to be an uncompromising progressive leader, undeterred by seemingly insurmountable challenges, willing to risk all to achieve the goals of his movement.

To see King exclusively in these terms requires active, willful revision of history. In his political work, King was surprisingly like President Obama. And I don't mean the oratory.

Consider this. Martin Luther King Jr. turned his back on Bayard Rustin. Rustin was his dear friend and trusted advisor. Rustin was the architect of the March on Washington. A fierce, lifelong pacifist, Rustin shepherded a young King through his first non-violent, direct action protests. Without Rustin there would have been no March on Washington and no national audience for the articulation of King's great dream.

Yet when he was pressed, Martin Luther King Jr. eventually disavowed Rustin and ejected him from the movement. Rustin asked King for his support, but King turned his back on Rustin. King rejected Rustin because Rustin was gay and socialist.

Faced with the political realities of homophobia and America's red scare, King chose to silence Rustin. King decided defending Rustin would distract the movement from its central goal of achieving an end to racial segregation.

Consider this. Martin Luther King, Jr. undercut the Mississippi Freedom Democratic party.

Black, rural laborers in Mississippi endured brutal beatings, death threats, loss of property, and exile from their homes because they wanted to vote. Despite these dangers, they formed the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party. Under the leadership of Fannie Lou Hamer they brought a delegation to the Democratic National Convention in 1964. There they demanded to be recognized and seated in protest of the racial disfranchisement in their state. Hamer's testimony before the DNC credentials committee remains a powerful witness to the brutal conditions black Americans faced in their struggle for first class citizenship.

It was Martin Luther King, Jr. who brokered a deal with the Democratic leadership that cut Hamer and the Mississippi Freedom Democrats out of the Mississippi delegation. King knew that Johnson still needed the Southern segregationists to hold the majority. King needed Johnson to pass civil rights legislation. Johnson needed the Southerners to get elected. So King undercut Hamer. It was a strategic calculation.

Consider this. Martin Luther King, Jr. worked closely with many African American women, but staunchly refused to address gender equality as part of the larger movement for civil rights.

Women like Ella Baker, Diane Nash, Daisy Bates and Fannie Lou Hamer are dimly remembered compared to the shining beacon of King's legacy. This invisibility of women activists is neither accidental nor inevitable. Despite his sweeping, visionary, social theorizing, King had surprisingly little imagination about how the extraordinary women in the movement could share leadership and accolades with the male leaders. He often relegated his women peers to supporting roles and backstage efforts. King refused to publicly address gender discrimination and often argued that women's issues were distracting to the work of civil rights.

Deriding King and his legacy is not my goal in retelling these stories. We must remember that Martin Luther King was no earthbound deity, fearlessly pursuing an uncompromising agenda; he was a strategic political leader. He was a realist whose choices were often upsetting and unpalatable to those on his left.

Martin Luther King Jr's charismatic, audacious, courageous leadership dramatically altered the trajectory of American history. His leadership lasted just over a decade. In that decade he helped bring to fruition more than a century of struggle first inaugurated when black persons became free people in the United States. No personal or political shortcoming can erase or even tarnish King's contributions.

Remembering King's own strategic choices is not an apologia for President Obama. Barack Obama's legacy will ultimately rise and fall on the strength of his own accomplishments, not primarily on his comparative skill relative to other leaders. But a more clear-eyed assessment of King should make us more careful about how we judge our own imperfect President as he navigates his own complicated historical moment.

Barack Obama is not the leader of a progressive social movement; he is the president. As president he is both more powerful than Dr. King and more structurally constrained. He has more institutional power at his disposal and more crosscutting constituencies demanding his attention. He has more powerful allies and more powerful opponents.

We remember King as the beloved and revered leader of a nation-changing movement. We forget that King was widely criticized during his life. The American media derided this Nobel Peace Prize recipient for speaking out against the Vietnam War. Many argued King had overreached and had little right to weigh in on international matters. Despite braving vicious attacks, unfair incarceration, and attempts on his life, many young leaders mocked King for being insufficiently radical, overly tied to existing institutions, and inadequately brave in the face of racial attacks. One of the most gifted speakers of any age, in the final months of his life, Martin Luther King Jr. had trouble filling an auditorium for a public address.

I have criticisms of President Obama. He has not sufficiently championed the basic civil rights of LGBT Americans. He has escalated rather than ended our country's war effort. His health care initiative is not going to include a public option. But I am grateful that extraordinary change can be achieved even through imperfect leadership.

I see King in Obama: a leader who is imperfectly, but wholeheartedly groping toward better and fairer solutions for our nation.

[Emperah]

There is not even a miniscule of mlk in obama. All I know is it would nevah hapm pan any a dem yt hero holidays.

[blugiant]

There is not even a miniscule of mlk in obama. All I know is it would nevah hapm pan any a dem yt hero holidays.

mii waitinn fe de mixxed race man supporters fe cum defend imm ann show mii wat mii missinn cah maybe mii missinn sintinn

“We must learn that passively to accept an unjust system is to cooperate with that system, and thereby to become a participant in its evil.”
― Martin Luther King Jr.


“The first principle of value that we need to rediscover is this: that all reality hinges on moral foundations. In other words, that this is a moral universe, and that there are moral laws of the universe just as abiding as the physical laws. (from "Rediscovering Lost Values")”
― Martin Luther King Jr.

[Emperah]

1.20.2013

Inauguration 2013: Why I think President Obama should be sworn in on a motel Bible instead on Dr. King's

by Brother Jesse Muhammad

This morning I was watching the news and saw how elated members of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King’s family are about President Barack Obama’s plans to take the oath of office on two bibles, one belonging to Abraham Lincoln and the other one Dr. King’s.

It’s being called “symbolic,” “historic,” and potentially “inspiring,” since the 2013 Inauguration falls on the country’s observance of Martin Luther King Day. I agree it’s symbolic alright. Symbolic of hypocrisy instead of honor; it’s symbol without a grain of substance.

I’ll let the present-day Lincolnites deal with why they feel Pres. Obama shouldn’t use the bible of the Great Liar, oops, excuse me, I mean the Great Emancipator.

Instead, I want to delve into why Pres. Obama would be better off using the Gideons Bible found in the local motel. Trust me it would carry the same weight.

Though pleasing to the eye, I still don’t really think Dr. King would hardly care about a monument being erected in his honor on the Washington Mall. To most, that statue and memorial was a fitting tribute in recognition of this strong voice of the poor, but he probably would have rather that money be spent helping the poor. But hey, who really cares, right?

I agree with Minister Farrakhan when he said, “If in honoring Dr. King the government does nothing for the poor and the weak of this nation and continue to perpetuate war, their hearts are as cold as the granite used to make the statue of Dr. King.”

Pres. Obama visited that monument with his family. However, what did he do once he returned to the Oval Office? Did he change his course of leadership to address the issues of the poor that Dr. King fought for? Nope. It’s all about the middle class these days. Heck, he’s barely used the B-word since he’s been in office; “Black” that is.

Now, a man in Atlanta was hired by the King Center to rehabilitate Dr. King’s personal King James Bible, one he used in preparation for the delivery of God’s Word and serve as inspiration while on the road. I read that adhesive was used to attach the loose leather cover along with other patchwork before the Bible was eventually shipped to D.C.

Maybe they should have also FedEx’ed Mr. President "a bottle" of Dr. King’s backbone to fight, will to stand against injustice and the consciousness to do what’s right even in the face of serious opposition.

The younger generation may not even know why I’m saying this and it may come across as me attacking Pres. Obama. That’s not the case. However, he’s about to start his second term and now he should man up in some other areas of his presidency that can lift the poor.

Dr. King was assassinated 10 years before I was born. As an elementary, middle and high school student, I learned about him once a year, like most, through plays, books, lectures and his ever-quoted “I Have a Dream” speech delivered on August 28, 1963 during the March on Washington. However, like many of my classmates at that time, I did not truly understand Dr. King because all we heard was that he was the dreamer, the dreamer, the dreamer, the dreamer.

When I got to college I discovered that we had been robbed of the true essence of this man and his evolution that took place before his last days among us. I learned more about a wide-awake Dr. King that rallied against the Vietnam War to call on America to take care of its poor at home. Do you think Dr. King would have joined Occupy Wall Street? How has America and its intelligence agencies treated its anti-war groups?

I learned about a Dr. King that delivered an anti-war speech titled “Breaking the Silence” in 1967; a Dr. King that said, “I’m tired of marching for something that should have been mine at birth”; a Dr. King that was spied on and plotted against by J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI COINTELPRO from 1961 to 1968; the Dr. King that was lied on by the government; the Dr. King that met one-on-one with the Honorable Elijah Muhammad of the Nation of Islam in 1966; the Dr. King that many in America did not like, yet, his face adorns a U.S. postal stamp. Even Black people started distancing themselves from him and many pastors banned him from their pulpits. These were men who held the Bible in their hands, yet in another instance opposed a man who was striving to walk the path of Jesus in the highways and byways.

My eyes came open to a different Dr. King than the one my teachers gave to me. This disturbed me, because I wondered why we were not taught these things about Dr. King early on in school. Unfortunately, this cycle continues in 2013 with schools force-feeding our young people a watered-down Dr. King by omitting his post-”I Have a Dream” years.

This man wanted an end to what he called the “triple evils of racism, economic exploitation, and militarism.” What policies from the era of George W. Bush has Pres. Obama continued that are diametrically opposed to what Dr. King wanted an end to?

“Celebrating” Dr. King’s birthday has even become a lucrative business for corporations, ahem, The 1%, and for those today that so-call “praise” him, but never would have been with him post-”I Have a Dream.”

The Dr. King of 1963 was not the same man in 1968. His life was cut short just as he was evolving. We all evolve as human beings, but it seems as if we want to only minimize his impact to one speech, one march, one moment. This is not to say I don’t think the speech was and is powerful—because I do.

Yes, Dr. King cared about the condition of Black people and called on us to do something for self, get better organized, build economically and grow in political power. Read this and more in his 1967 speech “The Black Power Defined.” I’m sure some will be quick to call this “separatism”, “Black nationalism” or “racism.”

In 1968, Dr. King and the SCLC organized the “Poor People’s Campaign” to address issues of economic justice and take a stand for the poor of all races in America. How much more could you and I do for the poor in our communities, cities, states and country?

If Dr. King were here today, I believe he would still be beating the drum of the anti-war movement and would not be silent. I believe he would oppose the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and any moves being made to go to war with Iran. I believe he would oppose what is being done by Israel and the billions of dollars in aid being given to them by America. Furthermore, I can’t honestly think he would be encouraging our young people to join the military to go and fight unjust wars. Matter of fact, Dr. King would be a conscientious objector.

Dr. King would be condemning the death penalty and he would have cared just as much, if not more, about the mass shootings taking place in Chicago as the ones in Tucson, Aurora and Newtown. Sadly, we can’t say the same about Pres. Obama and he’s from Chicago.

Let’s be clear: Dr. King would want us to honor him; not with just parades, floats, songs, dance, plays, speeches, t-shirts, street signs, statues, a national day off from work or even just a 12-hr feel good day of service. How about we teach more than the “safe version” of Dr. King? How about we fight for the poor every day?

If we’re not doing the works of Dr. King then the dream is dead. Isn’t it time to move pass just dreaming? It takes more than dreaming. It takes action by all of us. And it takes more than just putting your left hand on his Bible.

Mr. President, respectfully, if you’re not going to live Dr. King, just go down to the local motel in D.C. for one of their Bibles. Otherwise you’re just toying with the emotions of the people and making mockery of a man’s legacy.

P.S.—Now I’m going back to focusing on doing my part.

[Emperah]

[blugiant]

1.20.2013

Inauguration 2013: Why I think President Obama should be sworn in on a motel Bible instead on Dr. King's

by Brother Jesse Muhammad

This morning I was watching the news and saw how elated members of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King’s family are about President Barack Obama’s plans to take the oath of office on two bibles, one belonging to Abraham Lincoln and the other one Dr. King’s.

It’s being called “symbolic,” “historic,” and potentially “inspiring,” since the 2013 Inauguration falls on the country’s observance of Martin Luther King Day. I agree it’s symbolic alright. Symbolic of hypocrisy instead of honor; it’s symbol without a grain of substance.

I’ll let the present-day Lincolnites deal with why they feel Pres. Obama shouldn’t use the bible of the Great Liar, oops, excuse me, I mean the Great Emancipator.

Instead, I want to delve into why Pres. Obama would be better off using the Gideons Bible found in the local motel. Trust me it would carry the same weight.

mii wass juss a channel surf ann de funnee oyinbo ooman wass chattinn bout de bible dat dem aggo swear de mixxed race on. shi sed dat bible dem showinn look too bigg fe bee da bible de prez gitt sworn inn pon. cah de lincoln bible iss a real small bible

[blugiant]

mlk was a blakk leader. de mixxed race man iss a leader woo sum peeps cansidar blakk.

racial versus de denile aff race. in other wurdss, racial reasoninn being used cah fe defend de denile aff race yuh affii subsume

blakk leaders serve dem peeps intarests ann advocate fe de upliftment aff blakk peeps. leader woo sum peeps cansidar blakk doan feel no obligation fe uplift blakks cah dem goal iss individualistic, dem lookinn out fe demselves natt blakk peeps as a group. leaders woo argue dat dem ar leaders woo appen to blakks ar appealinn to oyinbo racism by seyinn dem played by oyinbo rules so dem meet de criteria fe achieve oyinbo support

[blugiant]

mlk advocate fe poor peeps ann more equitable redistreebutshan aff wealth. mixxed race man policies increase de wealth aff de wealthy at de xxpense aff de poor

[blugiant]

Martin Luther King Jr.'s Dream Of Economic Equality Still Not A Reality


Today we remember the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr.: the man who laid out his dream for a more equal America nearly 50 years ago. Unfortunately, we haven't made as much progress as King probably would have hoped. Though relevant government statistics are limited and do not go back to the 1960s, available data suggests that black America still has a long way to go before attaining true equality of opportunity.

1. Black unemployment has gotten worse.

A larger share of blacks are jobless now than 40 years ago. The black unemployment rate in December of 2012 was 14 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, up from 9.4 percent in December of 1972. In contrast, the white unemployment rate is 6.9 percent. The percentage of blacks with a job, at 52.6 percent, is lower than it was 40 years ago and far lower than the percentage of whites with a job (59.5 percent).

2. Fewer black men are in the labor force.

A smaller share of black men are in the labor force -- that is, working or looking for a job -- than 40 years ago. Slightly more than two-thirds of black men were in the labor force in December of 2012, down from 78 percent 40 years ago, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In contrast, 73.3 percent of white men are in the labor force.

3. We haven't closed the wealth gap between black and white Americans.

Blacks are staggeringly worse off than whites when it comes to wealth. The median black household had a net worth of $5,217 (in 2012 dollars) in 2010, according to the Census Bureau. In contrast, the median white household had a net worth of $116,588. The median white household is 39 percent wealthier than in 1988, while the median black household has become 36 percent poorer, according to Census Bureau data.

4. Black Americans have a higher incarceration rate than white Americans.

Blacks Americans were imprisoned at a higher rate than whites in 1970 and 1972, according to government statistics. That has not changed. Black males' incarceration rate was six times higher than white males' incarceration rate in 2011, according to government data. Roughly 7 percent of all black males between the age of 25 and 39 were in jail in 2011. Since employment statistics don't include people behind bars, blacks' high incarceration rate makes their employment situation look better than it is.

The bottom line: Martin Luther King's dream has not fully become reality.