Every Year, We Get Closer To The Dream
Tweet
Getting there, Dr. King. Getting there.
52 Responses to “Every Year, We Get Closer To The Dream”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
Not there yet.
But let’s get as many good people to keep pushing. We’ll get there.
Definitely not there yet (via Cesca):
Keep pushing.
If someone here could credibly claim there is a white guy in America more obsessed with seeing the n-word spelled out as much as Indeed here does, I’d never believe it.
Nope:
Yep:
If someone here could credibly claim there is a white guy in America more obsessed with seeing the n-word spelled out as much as Indeed here does, I’d never believe it.
Beer
Not everyone here wants to see that word in print, even if you are quoting someone.
Maybe you could support his dream for a change?
Remember, “judge me by the content of my character, not the color of my skin”?
Perhaps the democrats could refrain from their incessant race-baiting for a while, in honor of Dr King.
Pointing out racism is not race-baiting.
Maybe the Republicans need to actually behave honorably for once, tell the racist voting block to take a hike, and agree to lose a couple of elections without them, in the name of actually doing something to reduce the continuing tragedy of racism in this country, instead of whining about having the racists in their midst pointed out to them.
KC go read the wash post article about the Beck rally.
It talks about the predominant race at Beck’s rally, but has no mention of the predominant race at the “counter” rally.
The Beck rally people are talking about liberty and returning to the Constitution, the “counter” rally people are saying things like “if there wasn’t a black president, do you think these people would be here at a rally?”
The left wing in this country has the last of the institutional racists. Every time someone disagrees with the POTUS, they are branded “racist”.
I remain constantly surprised at how easy it seems to be for leftists to completely ignore MKL’s call to ignore the “color of their skin”, and instead use it as a cheap political tool with which promote an agenda that can’t stand on it’s own merits.
Pointing out racism is not race-baiting.
Maybe the Republicans need to actually behave honorably for once, tell the racist voting block to take a hike, and agree to lose a couple of elections without them, in the name of actually doing something to reduce the continuing tragedy of racism in this country, instead of whining about having the racists in their midst pointed out to them.
That would be counter productive. Far better to help them see the truth about liberalism. I suggest reading Lisa Fritsch to start.
http://soapboxblogger.com/387/liberals-need-to-keep-black-people-poverty-stricken/
I remain constantly surprised at how easy it seems to be for
leftistsBeck and his supporters to completely ignore MLK’s call to ignore the “color of their skin”, and instead use it as a cheap political tool with which promote an agenda that can’t stand on it’s own merits.Fixed that for ya.
That was a BRILLIANT rhetorical comeback!
Now if you can just explain how the leftists support of preferences based on skin color for work and school supports MLK’s ideals.
Or perhaps how screaming “racist!” every time someone disagrees with the president ISN’T racist in itself……..
The left wing in this country has the last of the institutional racists.
Yeah, yeah. White people are the real victims in this country.
Go soak.
Inverse, perhaps you can explain how MLKs own support for “preferences based on skin color for work and school,: as you describe it, supports the conservative attempt to co-opt MLK as a “conservative”:
Once you’ve done that, then maybe you can explain why conservatives need to have this explained to them every year, year after year, again and again, at this time. Why is that?
So, what you’re saying, Fafaroo, is that either a bad idea was supported by Dr King all along, and he had no conservative values of equality of opportunity, or that someone (presumably, you) has appointed Dr King the Grand Arbiter of what the white man owes the black man.
I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character
I think only MLK himself can explain this particular paradox.
For myself, I prefer to believe in true equality, not equality that depends on party apparatchiks and politicians.
As George Orwell once opined: “some animals are more equal than others….”
So which kind of equality do you prefer?
sorry….
So, what you’re saying, Fafaroo, is that either a bad idea was supported by Dr King all along, and he had no conservative values of equality of opportunity, or that someone (presumably, you) has appointed Dr King the Grand Arbiter of what the white man owes the black man.
Critical overload on teh crazy there, Franklin.
I’ve seen conservatives try to claim ownership of all kinds of things, but equality of opportunity?
And then after you try to hijack the King legacy, you opine that someone has “oppointed [him] the Grand Arbiter of what the white man owes the black man”??
That’s really out there.
FDS, read the whole article, not just fafaroo’s summary. it’s a hit job on conservatism, and a public lynching of MLK. Epstein is a racist.
I think only MLK himself can explain this particular paradox.
For myself, I prefer to
believe in true equality,cherry-pick the part I like and ignore the rest.UrWlcm!
Baloney. Most call them idiots, especially when Obama makes a solidly conservative statement and they still disagree with him.
Affirmative action, which Libertarians despise, is in reality an equalizer to the well established white old boy network. Sometimes the best and brightest really do make it, but anybody with experience who’s been paying attention knows how the system really works.
So is Obama now the new “old boy” in the network? Cause last time I checked, there was a black guy running the “system”.
So can we stop judging people by the color of their skin NOW?
IL, I think we decided to judge people basted on religion now.
based*
Great job, IL, now I’m hungry.
So is Obama now the new “old boy” in the network? Cause last time I checked, there was a black guy running the “system”.
He was voted in. Corporate old boys are also voted in, but by a much smaller “democracy”.
So can we stop judging people by the color of their skin NOW?
Yes, you can.
I think only MLK himself can explain this particular paradox.
So you read somewhere the only sentence in all of MLKs speeches, interviews and writing that conservatives ever quote followed by some version of the statement, “See? MLK opposed affirmative action so suck on that liberulz!!!” and then you went off into the world repeating it without ever bothering to find out if this particular interpretation of MLKs these particular words was at all accurate.
And now you’re blaming MLK himself for being confused.
You guys are too fucking stupid for words.
What’s with all the trolling here, this is Beck’s historical moment.
this is Beck’s historical moment.
It’s all about him and his drug addled overinflated sense of self worth. This pitiful rally was pretty much a flop. The crowd was way under projection, 99.4.% White (just like Ivory) and they looked rather bored and underwhelmed. Where were all the young people, besides those poor kids dragged by their parents. You just know the kids wanted to go to Nags Head instead of some stupid ‘spiritual’ rally on the mall.
I wonder who the entertainment was. Ted Nugent and Kid Rock?
The Beck rally people are talking about liberty and returning to the Constitution …
Except for Americans of Muslim faith. Oh right, “feelings,” I almost forgot.
Critical overload on teh crazy there, Franklin.
I’ve seen conservatives try to claim ownership of all kinds of things, but equality of opportunity?
And then after you try to hijack the King legacy, you opine that someone has “oppointed [him] the Grand Arbiter of what the white man owes the black man”??
That’s really out there.
A typical “fafaroovian” construction: “You are crazy because you say crazy things, as indicated by my opinion that you say crazy things. See? I have proven myself correct !”
Now that we’ve had our fun, Quaker , would you mind telling what in the h-e-double hockey sticks you are talking about?
Steps back:
Leap forward:
Here’s to leaping forward.
Did that one slip through the wickets, Frank?
Let’s see if we can be more direct. Faffer made a post which you (quite dishonestly) rephrased as a dilemma: either King lacked the “conservative value” of equality of opportunity or someone has decided that King is the go-to authority for “what the white man owes the black man.”
Now normally, the way to deal with a false dilemma is to attack one of the horns. That leaves me with a tough choice because both horns are entirely wack as is the initial premise.
Let’s break it down.
1) Valuing equality of opportunity is not a conservative value. Equality of opportunity has been a bedrock principle for progressive initiatives for, oh I dunno, the last 70 years or so. From the creation of Social Security to the recent Lily Ledbetter Act, that’s our ball and you can’t have it.
2) Conservatives have long fought equality of opportunity. From the days of Gov. Wallace blocking the entrance to the U. of Ala. to the phony, lying noise about death panels, conservatives have been and continue to be the servants of wealth and power.
3) The proposition that Dr. King did not support equality of opportunity is blisteringly crazy. I do hope you meant that to be obviously wrong in an attempt to give your second option a veneer of plausibility.
4) Not that it worked. “The grand arbiter of what the white man owes the black man”? Let me put this as gently as I can, Frank: What the fuck? Dr. King was beaten, thrown in jail, had his house firebombed, and was eventually assissinated. For what? To become “the arbiter of what the white man owes…blah, blahty, blah?”
Am I making any sense to you yet, Frank? Because if I’m not, I’m not sure what else I can do to clear this up for you.
Crowd estimates at 87K and aerial photos really tell the story too.
I’ve been on the Mall when there’s 300K, and you cannot freaking move.
There was plenty of space towards Lincoln Mem in the aerial shots.
Of course Bachman says 1 million showed up.
How pathetic. What a bust of a rally. I’ve read some conservative blogs about it, and the consensus is thoroughly underwhelming.
I bet these teabaggers went there thinking they were going to get some red meat and blood, but all they got was Becks new and improved televangelist act.
And why didn’t Sister Sarah admit her son had to join the military or face jail due to his criminal ways?
They were looking for some massive groundswell movement that roared like a lion, but all they got was a carefully executed fart.
Beckstock was a bust.
Beckstock was a bust.
Well, THAT’S a relief !
MWAhahahahahahahahahahahahaha !!!!
Now that we’ve had our fun, Quaker , would you mind telling what in the h-e-double hockey sticks you are talking about?
Frank, you clearly have no idea what you’re writing at anytime, ever.
Case in point. You wrote in response to me:
And then you accused Quaker of:
Again and again I read your posts and arrive at the same conclusion: You’re brain damaged. Completely brain damaged.
Yes, it is a relief that despite all the crowing and blustering and disproportionate media attention, the Beck/Palin/teabag axis can’t seem to break out beyond the crotchety old white guy demographic.
And thus God spoke through Beck, that he shallst be makin mo money.
Fafaroo, you’re an as*hole. I have lost my patience with all you nitwits. I will no longer explain to grown men what simple things mean.
If you can not understand clear and simple English, then you have brought a knife to a gunfight, and you are S O L.
This is the last time I will ever do this:
What the paragraph says is:
So, what you’re saying, Fafaroo, is that either a bad idea [reparations and affirmative action] was supported by Dr King all along, and he had no conservative values of equality of opportunity [as opposed to "equality of outcome" , the liberal theory], or that someone (presumably, you) has appointed Dr King the Grand Arbiter of what the white man owes the black man [now it has been decided that what all black want and deserve, and is owed to them by the white man, will be decided by what Dr King wanted] .
But. of course, you and Quaker don’t understand that.
Frank, do you think in 1963, without affirmative action, there was any such thing as equality of opportunity? Or 1968?
If so, well, that will take some explanation.
If not, then how is it contradictory to both support equality of opportunity, and a practical method to achieve said equality of opportunity?
Ah. So, anyone mentions race at all, that’s “race baiting”. Anyone points out that a lot of folks don’t get a fair shake in our country, that’s “race baiting”. Got it.
Yes, I’m judging you by the content of your character.
He probably does. He probably thinks that black folks just had to work harder and value education more, or whatever the current rightwing trope is.
Near as I can tell, he wants to believe that inequality of outcome means inequality of people – i.e., he wants to believe that if blacks aren’t doing as well as whites, it means that blacks are inferior.
But he won’t say that – he’ll say that they *could* be doing just as well, if only they were *morally* superior – if only they *worked* harder.
And he’ll insist that it’s not prejudice to say that they’re unwilling or unable to work as hard to make things better. No, he’s just saying that there *can’t* be anything holding them back, because if there was, justice would demand removing the barrier – and he doesn’t want to do that, so the barrier doesn’t exist.
Weirdo, who isn’t getting a fair shake?
Black people? Like, the guy who is president of the united states black people?
Or the race hustler who would have you believe that every black guy who isn’t pulling down 6 figures is a victim of racism?
Actually the sort of race baiting I’m referring to is the the constant screeching of “Racism!” every time someone disagrees with our black president.
I’d like to believe that inverseliberal doesn’t get it because he doesn’t want to (that behavior usually being the major cause of stupidity). But he may actually be that stupid.
A black person being voted POTUS by a democratic majority who believe he will do the best job out of all candidates available is the system Libertarians appear to want.
A black person being excluded from jobs they are qualified for by a few self-interest machiavellians who hold all the keys is not the system Libertarians appear to want.
IMO, Barack Obama offers hope, but Michael Steele knocks that hope back.
Is the constant “screeching of ‘Racism!’” a knee jerk response to the constant whining of “Moslem!”, “Socialist!”, “Illegal!”, “hatred for white people”, etc, etc…or liberals simply stringing together a bunch of events and evidence which suggest racism a bit to hastily?
Ahh, now I see where you are missing my argument Timmy.
The difference is, when we say “Muslim” or “Socialist” or “illegal”, we are using these as FACTUAL descriptions. We are describing people who are, in fact, muslim, socialist or illegal.
When you shriek “racist!”, you typically have no evidence of that racism except your own poorly thought out opinion. So you see, words have meaning, you can’t just make them up and use them without some sort of basis in fact.
Hope that clears it up for you……
when we say “Muslim” or “Socialist” or “illegal”, we are using these as FACTUAL descriptions
Oy. I’m going to have to be more specific and less assumptive with my questions. A revision follows which hopefully clarifies.
Was:
Is the constant “screeching of ‘Racism!’” a knee jerk response to the constant whining of “Moslem!”, “Socialist!”, “Illegal!”, “hatred for white people”, etc, etc…or liberals simply stringing together a bunch of events and evidence which suggest racism a bit to hastily?
Is:
Is the constant “screeching of ‘Racism!’” a knee jerk liberal response to the constant conservative whining of “Moslem!”, “Socialist!”, “Illegal!”, “hatred for white people”, etc, etc… targeted against Obama?
Muslim:
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/08/19/obama-is-muslim-poll-says-that-more-people-believe-it/
Socialist:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/14/Obama.socialist/index.html
Illegal:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/04/cnn-poll-quarter-doubt-president-was-born-in-u-s/
hatred for white people:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K8R2PDmbmA
If you can not understand clear and simple English, then you have brought a knife to a gunfight, and you are S O L.
Frank, it’s not the meaning of the words that are the problem. It’s the crackpot reasoning.
Faffer replied to someone who asserted that any sort of affirmative action is inconsistent with King’s belief. Fafaroo snipped from another writer who gave examples of King advocating preferential hiring, quotas, and even reparations.
Your response to Fafaroo makes absolutely no sense, not even when you embellish it with parenthetical explanations. While Fafaroo was countering an assertion about what King believed or didn’t, you went off on a bizarre tangent, declaring that Fafaroo is asserting that King was in favor of a bad idea “all along” [whether you think it was a good idea or not, it is, by all evidence, what King supported--and that alone was Fafaroo's point] or that Fafaroo has decided, against what you regard as common sense, that King is the arbiter of “what the white man owes the black man” [designation as "grand arbiter" aside, King spoke quite forcefully about what was needed for black Americans to become equal citizens--and yes, it is a debt owed by the dominant white culture and power structure of this country. The problem of race in America was not something black folks created for themselves].
If no one can make sense of anything you say, you might be right that everyone else besides you is stupid. Just so you know, though, there is another possibility.
[P.S. Wasn't someone around here complaining about name calling recently?]
Well if it is a knee-jerk response, I sure hope that people like you, Timmy, are explaining to your fellow lefties that it is incorrect, and asking them to stop it.
Now if you are, we sure haven’t seen it here.
Side note.
Frank, just because conservatives oppose a villain of their own creation–”equality of outcome”–that doesn’t mean they support equality of opportunity.
Ah.
I didn’t know that all black people were the same in your world. I thought they were all individuals, and one of them being elected President didn’t mean that suddenly, they were all getting a fair shake.
Anyway, you have fun in that little world of yours. Let me know if you ever want to discuss the real world.
Well if it is a knee-jerk response… yadda you bad me good…
I’ll ask them to stop it when Obama quits being called M, S, I, H… by significant proportions of wingnuts and their leaders… just for the two (or more) of you that goes by the name “inverseliberal”. Discuss.
I have lost my patience with all you nitwits. I will no longer explain to grown men what simple things mean.
Bummer. I thought after you said you had lost patience with all of us you were going to tell us that you were never going to comment here again. Instead, it looks like we’re just going to get more of the same incomprehensible nonsense, only now without the added hilarity of watching you struggle to “explain” yourself while only succeeding in making less and less sense.