I don’t doubt what you say about MLK. But we need to pick our battles, and now is certainly not the time to fight MLK. Anyone who does will quickly be branded a racist, not just by the liberal media, but by many (poorly informed) conservatives as well. I don’t normally believe in backing down from phoney charges of racism, but in this case it’s just a losing proposition. Sure, we can talk about MLK’s major flaws among ourselves, but if the Republicans went national with it they would get creamed. We need to just focus on his positives at this point. His message of nonviolence did save a lot of pain after all.
As for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, I am honestly not very familiar with the details in it, but my impression is that it was generally a very positive development. What in particular didn’t you like about it?
That bill enabled ideological meddling in large areas of American life. Some of its results include Quotas. Racial set asides. Minority preferences. Employment requirements being reduced or eliminated to assure equality of result. Reverse discrimination. Prosecution of businesses and property owners using statistical arguments. School districts being taken over by activist judges.
It doesn’t just deal with race. The bill includes sections for women that empowered the feminist agenda. It has been used to advance other agendas including ‘gay marriage’. It’s been a marvelous tool for allowing a power grab by activists inside government agencies set up to enforce the act, and for those who use the courts to force their agenda on the rest of society. Whenever there is some sort of great social change being forced upon an unwilling American public you won’t have to look far to find the 1964 Civil Rights Act involved. As the “rights for illegal aliens” movement progresses just watch what the legal argument uses.
It’s a great bill if you like an ever larger and more intrusive government wielding power in the name of diversity and equality, making sure that the little people are politically correct.