I know I have innate ability to grasp and communicate ideas. If someone is more qualified then by all means. But, I make sure no one is more qualified by working hard.
MLK also advocated class equality. And there is no racial harmony anywhere, so we would not be closer to the goal.
There was it that bad to just let it out that you felt guilty?
Move then.
The actions the Republicans have made from the 1970’s through today to the black people which have had a great negative impact.
If that’s the case, then you deserve it. But affirmative action means to use a quota for some to bypass the most qualified. You get to substitute minority points for ability points. That being the case, people start assuming that minorities could only have gotten the position or whatever because they are a minority. Maybe it ain’t fair, be then it wasn’t fair to begin with.
And so do I, voluntary class equality in the private sector, and legal equality for all in the public. I know it’s a cliché, but in an open competition (business, sports, whatever) the best person will be picked based on talent and drive–and as sports has shown, it happens a lot quicker without quotas. Imagine the NFL with quotas, or the NBA. 
What actions? You weren’t alive back then obviously, or you’d never say that. We aren’t perfect now, but it’s a helluvalot better than back then, and it’d be better still if it hadn’t been for the freedom killing Great Society.
Christ!
The opening post is simply a propaganda piece. It is pure partisan revisionist spin. Why doesn’t it mention how Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson pushed civil rights bills through Congress? What about the GOP pursuit of the racist “Southern strategy” to win white voters for the last forty years? Why doesn’t it discuss how Republicans led the fights against affirmative action and the creation of a national holiday honoring Martin Luther King Jr.? What about Reagan’s attempt to reverse a long-standing policy of denying tax-exempt status to private schools that practice racial discrimination and grant an exemption to Bob Jones University? Clearly, this is a whitewash job.
It’s complicated. It was passed by the larger majority Republicans that voted for it than the Democrats in Congress.
[b]By party
The original House version:
* Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
* Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
The Senate version:
* Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
* Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:
* Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
* Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)
By party and region
Note : “Southern”, as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. “Northern” refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.
The original House version:
* Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
* Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)
* Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
* Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)
The Senate version:
* Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%) (only Senator Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
* Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%) (this was Senator John Tower of Texas)
* Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%) (only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the measure)
* Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%) (Senators Bourke Hickenlooper of Iowa, Barry Goldwater of Arizona, Edwin L. Mechem of New Mexico, Milward L. Simpson of Wyoming, and Norris H. Cotton of New Hampshire opposed the measure)[/b]
It was passed during the election, but the only thing people remember is that Johnson favored it and Goldwater, demagoguing the issue in the South, opposed it. Johnson won in a landslide with Goldwater winning only 5 southern states and Arizona. They forgot about the Congressional Republicans that had supported it and the Dixiecrats that had opposed it in the large black population states.
His first speech in the Senate was an attack on Harry Truman’s proposed civil rights legislation that would have given black Americans protection against lynching and discrimination in employment. It would also have made it easier for them to vote. In the speech Johnson argued that Truman’s proposals were a call “for depriving one minority (white people living in the Deep South) of its rights in order to extend rights to other minorities”.
And there was a more sinister keep-em-on-the-plantation programs (the Great Society, the War on Poverty, Medicare and Medicaid) that were so easily enabled after the Civil Rights Bill and the Landslide election. People also forget that Johnson was a very strong pro-segregationist senator from Texas before all this.
Why the giant shift? We can only speculate but this and his sudden decision not to run for re-election by a man with an obvious great love for power, point to some sort of blackmail. He was still a racist to those who observed him out of the public eye.
??? The South was wide open for Republican conquest what with Democrat racism (that exists yet) and Democrat socialism, which you appear to favor, to wit:
I have great respect for MLK, but we don’t even celebrate Washington’s birthday any more, and he and Lincoln were the only ones we ever did. The MLK holiday and renaming streets for him was/is nothing but an exercise of spiteful power. (I’ve already discussed the corruptive effects of affirmative action above.)
I don’t know the details, but even if that is the true gist of it, and if that’s the worst that can be brought up against Reagan, he’d be damn near a saint. Not even Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe or even Lincoln were perfect; and many times their failings can be traced to the regrettable necessity of political compromise–to which we are particularly vulnerable in our legislation.
Yes it’s complicated. The opening post, like all propaganda, intentionally glosses over all the complications to leave us with a distorted picture of what happened.
People remember it because Johnson publically openly, actively and repeatedly spoke in favor of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other civil rights law on TV when it was still controversial. His efforts were important for garnering public support that resulted in getting the civil rights legislation passed.
There has been racism on both sides of the aisle and plenty of blame to go around if that’s what one is looking for. The Republican southern strategy has been to exploit it to win elections since 1968. I favor the truth.
The MLK holiday and other monuments in his honor are ways of celebrating the civil rights struggle which the opening post claims Republicans are for and yet it seems would like to forget.
Affirmative action’s positive accomplishments in diversifying work places and college campuses that would have otherwise remained inaccessible to racial minorities were missing from your account.
Which is often where the devil lurks… 
Cherry pick all you like, God and Truth are in the details.
I don’t guess you’d care to take a stab at why MLK was a Republican?
wow, you’re an ignorant pos
The piece you posted distorts the Republican Party’s record of civil rights in American mainly by omission. So its ironic that now you accuse me of cherry picking. In this case, there is truth in details you seem to wish to deny.
That’s a trick question since we don’t know that MLK was a Republican. His father was a Republican, but to the best of my knowledge, MLK never declared his party affiliation. J. Edgar Hoover accused him of being affiliated with the Communist Party though. If you have persuasive documentation that MLK was a Republican, why not share it?
trustedpartner.com/docs/libr … rticle.pdf
It’s PDF so I can’t cut and paste. Read especially the passage starting in the second column, pg.1, “This one simple act of gratitude…”
Hoover’s vindictive vendetta against MLK was authorized by Attorney General Robert Kennedy.
Maybe above all of this, I think the body language in this photo speaks volumes:
Now, will you answer the question?
P.S. there are 50 of these welcoming Democrats to Denver. Priceless.
The Paineful Truth,
Martin Luther Kuing eschewed party politics. If you have credible documentation that MLK was a Republican, why not share it?
Why is it so hard to believe that MLK was probably a Republican?
He was religious and a spiritual leader – he believed in the “American Dream” for Christ’s sake.
If there’s anything Democrats have taught me, then it’s that they have no souls.
If there’s anything Libertarians have taught me, then it’s that they don’t work together.
Either of these exclude MLK and the purpose of his life… 