Martin Luther King would not have voted for Barak Obama.

The Priestly Pugilist ^ | 1/19/2009 | Priestly Pugilist

[Balt]

02:37 PM 1/19/2009 - In all humility, your PP has always known he had a better understanding of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King than did the average white guy. In recent years, he's come to understand he has a better grasp of the man than the average black person, as well. This could stem from the fact that he spent his high school years in that heretofor undiscussed middle-class, interracial bubble that was North East Washington, DC, in the 1970's and early 80's. My two best friends in the whole world were black (one of whom initially went to the same seminary as your PP). My Senior Prom date was black. None of this raised an eye-brow, since our parents successfully shielded all of us from whatever racial tension that supposedly was whurling around outside our own little idylic universe.

That's why the specticle of Barak Obama "preaching" on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on the day before Martin Luther King Day was particularly disturbing for me—and not just because of that unfinished crypt-like caverin underneath it which the Park's Dept. routinely failed to lock and which served as a convenient make-out spot (oh, how I miss those pre-9-11 days of lax security—though my fondest memories are sneaking into the perpetually dark Statuary Hall underneath the Captitol rotundra during lunch, since it was the only cool place around in those pre-airconditioned days).

Everybody thinks they know what Dr. King was about; but how many of them have read his collected sermons (particularly the pre-Mobile ones)? I have; and it raises my dander (whatever dander is) when I hear some moron "forgive" Dr. King for just happening to be a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ in his less enlightened days. As I've said before (not here, though, so I'm not sure where else you would have heard me say it), the worst thing to happen to the civil rights movement was when the leadership of it was allowed to pass from the hands of the Christians into the hands of the psudo-Moslems (a.k.a., that poor imitation of Islam made up of black people who were raised in the rich tradition of pre-1960's black Baptist Christianity, but turned away from it for purely political reasons).

Let's be perfectly clear: Dr. King was not a civil rights advocate who happened to be a minister of the Gospel. He was a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, who believed in equal rights as a consequence of his belief in the Gospel he preached. He was pro-life for the same reason; and he would have never voted for Barak Obama!

And if the Park's Dept. ever decides to give tours of that crypt under the memorial, you're on your honor not to look for my initials until the statute of limitations runs out on vandalism of public property.

[nickcarraway]

Unfortunately, he didn’t get to vote.

[Unassuaged]

Well, I am sure ACORN tried.......

[RKV]

Nope. He’d have done a Colin Powell and voted for Barry Soetoro. No doubt about it. Besides, he was a preacher who a) cheated on his doctoral dissertation b) cheated on his wife pretty regularly and c) hung out with known communists. He knew that white America wouldn’t buy his real agenda, so he did a good job of hiding that stuff. One step at a time like the tool that he was... What he said about equal rights was good as far as it went. For the rest of the story see how his pals Jesse and others now use the grievance industry to get rich.

[ArrogantBustard]

This sort of metaphorical "conjuring of spirits" is never useful.

WE DO NOT KNOW for whom Martin Luther King would have voted in 2008. WE DO NOT KNOW if he would still be pro-life. Je$$e Jacka$$ was, once. No longer. Association with the demoncRat party corrupted him. So ... let the man rest in peace.

[sickoflibs]

He would have voted for BoB and so would his whole family. Don't be silly. Now he probably wouldn't appreciate BoB’s promises to gays, those were not unimaginable till recently. But the redistribution stuff would have been agreed with, remember Johnson and great society and welfare state. Those were all considered rights in the late 60s, like abortion now.

[HereInTheHeartland]

King said all should be “judged on the content of their character, not the color of their skin”.

I very much agree with this.

The problem is, that is not what is is wanted right now.

We have quotas, affirmative action, and it's ilk. Those things are very divisive and racist.
They seek to judge someone only by the color of their skin.

[FLDemocracker]

Too bad he didn’t live the Gospel that he preached.

If “Dr” King really lived the word of God do you think that: he would have been a plagiarizer?
An adulterer? A communist??

The message of equality and civil rights for all was great and noble, but the messenger was not all that they make him out to be.

[Jubal Madison]

I’m not sure I agree that MLK wouldn’t have voted for BO. I know a lot of Blacks who are very socially conservative,but their social views were overridden by their desire to see a black elected POTUS.

[andy58-in-nh]

Dr. King was a complex and very flawed man. There's no way of telling how his thinking might have progressed, had he lived. At the time of his death, the civil rights movement had been radicalized and perverted by the influence of groups like Black Panthers and also by the Left's appropriation of the Vietnam War as an issue with which to advance their radical agenda.

On the one defining issue of his life, however, the man was absolutely right: equal rights under the law for African-Americans was a moral imperative; his efforts were instrumental in making the achievement of those rights, and ultimately cost him his life. As President Lincoln might have said, it is altogether fitting and proper that we honor him.

As for Barack Obama, he has done nothing yet of substance to share even a fraction of the respect we annually pay Dr. King. My hope for his Presidency is that he grows and learns and does so in a damned hurry.

[Matchett-PI]

Others in MLK’s family didn’t vote for B.O.:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2123207/posts

[Balt]

Andy, your points are well taken, and dove-tail with ArrogantBustard’s in that there’s just no way to know what Dr. King would do today, or how he would have been influenced by the radical forces that began to hijack the civil rights movement even within his life-time (though I would shy away from the rest of Arrogant’s remarks, his point about the “conjuring of spirits” is a good one). It is possible, presuming he saw the danger, that he felt the cause was too important to “squable” over such matters; though I don’t want to believe it since the protection of innocent huuman life (just as an example) cannot be trumped by any cause—even the cause of equal rights. If that represents a blind spot on my part, so be it.

[andy58-in-nh]

I am quite certain that I am not alone in believing that to be a consistent champion of civil rights, one must first respect the humanity that defines the boundaries of such rights, and that in doing so, one must eventually conclude that all human beings are endowed with them from the time of their conception to the time of their return to their Creator.

[Zionist Conspirator]

It would be nice if the statement made in the title of this thread were true, but I am afraid I do not believe it is.

Martin Luther King Jr. was never a Fundamentalist chr*stian at all. And aside from desegregation (something that should have been done a hundred years earlier) he was neck deep in the most radical causes of the time (he even received an award from Planned Parenthood, I believe).

King was not pro-abortion only because abortion had not yet been legalized. He was not pro-homosexuality only because that perverted cause had not yet risen out of the sewer (though his widow and most of his family championed both these causes). He was, however, pro-Communist when it came to Vietnam.

It is an almost supernatural situation. The Black masses of the country, who on the outside appear to be very similar to the rednecks (ie, religious fundamentalists, not too terribly intellectual, and been here longer than anybody else) have for over forty years accepted as a leadership only people who hold the most radical positions across the board. Their beloved "leaders" (like Obama) endorse homosexuality and abortion and they don't hear a word. Their atheist and homosexual "friend" ridicule the religion which Blacks allegedly practice and they are deaf, dumb, and blind to it. Liberals poke fun at Sarah Palin for allegedly speaking in tongues and Black Pentecostals apparently could care less. Is it possible that they are that ignorant? I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe. If the Black community were not as a whole complicit in across the board radicalism then there would here and there be a Black politician who, however liberal on race and poverty issues, would be conservative on social and moral issues. But no such politicians exist (and those who become Republicans or identify as conservatives and then get pilloried for it only prove this).

I have come to believe that most Black preachers, despite their wannabee-hillbilly-snake-hander preaching style, are just a bunch of Jim Joneses who are nothing but atheists. As Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson has said (and I don't agree with Rev. Peterson on everything), most Black preachers have no relationship with G-d and are leading their congregations to hell. And as another FReeper observed a while back, most Black churches aren't churches at all; they're racist societies that preach "the gospel of black" while posing as churches.

During the late Forties Stalin forced Ukrainian Catholics into the government-controlled Russian Orthodox Church (the Moscow Patriarchate, not the Church Abroad). As Bishop Ware admitted, in that instance Orthodoxy benefited from the persecution of fellow chr*stians. For forty years Black "chr*stians" have benefited from the radical secularization and demoralization of America and from a war raging against their own supposed religion. In G-d's Providence this cannot and will not go unpunished (and it won't be by any "rednecks" either).

There was a time when I would have been willing to believe that most Blacks are still religious fundamentalists who are misled by authorities they trust. But there is no freaking way they cannot be aware of the hideous things the politicians they support stand for. There is such a thing as collective guilt. After all--and I say this in all sincerity--the very situation which I am describing and complaining about can only be G-d's justice against American white "chr*stians" for their shameful attitudes of past centuries. So there is no escaping G-d. And one day His wrath will be turned from one community of hypocrites to another.

In the meantime, perhaps we should offer to collect all the Bibles from Black churches so they can replace them with Origin of the Species. After all, it's only logical that Blacks celebrate Charles Darwin as well as homosexuality and atheism!

I wish you were here, Widey.

[Salvation]

Second Black Pro-Life Leader Urges Barack Obama to Oppose Abortion (Dr. Alveda King)
Dr. Alveda King stumps for Pro-life
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr's Niece{Dr. Alveda King]: Abortion Means Obama Doesn't Fulfill Dream
Dr. Alveda King to Pro-Lifers: Forward, March

[Zionist Conspirator]

The message of equality and civil rights for all was great and noble, but the messenger was not all that they make him out to be.

I agree with this 100%.

Beware those who either say that because the fight for racial justice was noble that all other causes King and his heirs champion are equally noble. And beware those who say the radicalism of the "civil rights" movement automatically means the fight for racial justice was wrong. If it had been done a hundred years earlier we wouldn't be in this mess.

[Cindy]

MICHELLE MALKIN.com - blog: "FEEL THE POST-RACIALISM: "My president is black, but his house is all white"" (Note: Video included.) (January 19, 2009, 11:29 pm)