Good point. Think he would be happy about Chicago, Detroit, Philly, St. Louis, Los Angeles, DC, etc.? I think not. He probably would have been on par with Allen West, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell and such.
To a poster above: Yeah, I know King was a socialist, but his message about "content of character" rang true and I still believe in that ideal. When's the last time you heard that from a liberal/socialist/communist? Hell, when's the last time you heard it from a Republican elite?
But when we say, “I know he was a socialist, BUT”-—what does socialism entail?
The answer includes these things: hatred of and blaming America; vilifying our troops as criminals; income redistribution; radical economic policies; and the cozying up to Communist governments. ALL of which were characteristics of MLK.
“Content of character?” The content of his character seems pretty clear, doesn’t it? Believing in ideals is one thing, but when it clouds your judgement and prevents you from seeing reality, well...
John Kerry also denigrated American troops, just like MLK. Kerry was rightfully vilified for it.
Bill Clinton has a history of abuse of women, just like MLK (Ralph Abernathy wrote about an incidence at a “sex party” in which King hit a woman and knocked her across a bed). Clinton is rightfully denounced for such abuses.
Yet with all we know about King, even some conservatives refuse to do the same with him.
Why is that?
He was a leftist, through and through. He does not deserve to be held up as a hero.