Comments on: Obama Doesn’t Fulfill Martin Luther King’s Dream

By: Fred

Fred — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:03:53 +0000

Obama and King compared?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha …….oh, my side hurts…….ha ha ha ha ha

By: alex

alex — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:10:31 +0000

I think everyone can see hear you have raised a good point. This could be true that he has used the colour of his skin to encourage the votes to him, but i would have voted him no matter what colour of his skin, but Politicians have done much worse, this is nothing on the crap Bush has produced over the last 4 years. McCain couldnt say speeches even close to the quality of Obama’s. No-one was unsure of the promises Obama was making, and as soon as he steped into the office he started at his promises. I cant believe everyone here believes Obama’s use of propaganda was a terrible thing after all america has been through over the past 100 years. He looked a strong president in the campaigns, probably one of the most honest and well headed we’ve seen in a long time. All for Obama.

By: Deb

Deb — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:49:31 +0000

I agree with Ms Attitude. Blacks only voted for Obama cause he is black (Half Black). And the main stream media and their obama orgasms make me want to puke. And now with this pork package that he signed yesterday will be stripping more money from our wallets. and dont you love the way the democrats dont want to take any of the blame for the financial collapse of our country. No, Obama in NO WAY is comparable to MLK.

By: Don Rhudy

Don Rhudy — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 18:39:16 +0000

King was an honorable man, a small-r republican. Obama is a small-r radical socialist. This is a difference similar to day and night. Obama the fascist versus a freedom- and liberty-loving republican.

By: view from afar

view from afar — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:45:43 +0000

Steve P you are an idiot. You are a mis-informed idiot. Do you know what a sare-cropper is? Obviously not. Do you realize that here were white “slaves”? Most of the white Europeans came as indentured slaves, meaning they had their “fees” paid to travel to the US, and then needed to work off those fees, usually five years and then when the five years were up, they had to work off their room and board, which meant another five years, were then “freed” to be share-croppers, meaning they did the work, growing crops (not cotton, the cash crop for the plantation owner, which was the black slaves’ job) for food, wheat corn and such, but was split with the landowner, who generously allowed the share cropper the right to work the owner’s land…that is a half step above the black slave, but not much better. It’s a shame that Song of the South, a Disney film isn’t allowed in the USA any longer, it shows the whole Southern class system, which was a very sad thing indeed. Anyway the black slaves were kept because they tolerated the sun better than whites, and were good workers, and cheaper than the indentured slaves as the Europeans brought the slaves over in their empty ships, and condemned the practice when they could no longer earn enough money by selling slaves. ( Living in Europe really opens your eyes, when you know a bit about history…like the colonial )

Cedarford, I don’t really doubt you, but I also have a really hard time believing you, after all of your anti Jew, anti Catholic, anti lots of different rhetoric you have left in your wake all over Pajamas… You seem to be someone who reads a great deal, and knows alot of stuff, but what’s with the hate all the time? It really makes your stuff hard to decipher, what is venom and what is real, and needs to be heard?

I do agree though that the only good thing about Obama-black thing is that it may be the difference needed, JFK actually helped the Catholic Irish American cause ( although I DO NOT consider him a role model for Irish Americans, more of a ink blotch for us), just something to think about.
Finally, I also think that even though the author has missed some of the finer parts of MLK’s life etc, take a step back and look at the bigger picture folks, and there I think that the author makes his point.

By: Steve P.

Steve P. — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:11:51 +0000

Ms. Attitude: “JackT, as a white southerner I take offense to what you said. It is a racist remark and you should be ashamed! My ancestors did NOT own slaves, they were the sharecroppers who busted their butts and fought in the civil war for state’s rights. They were the Southern Whites who had land taken from them to be given to freed slaves. And for the past 200 years my family has had to watch more and more being taken from them and given to those who think they deserve something for nothing. Now you have a president that wants to take from us again! Where are my rights, sir? Or do you only see this from your point of view?”

Somebody call the whhaaaaaaaambulance for the poor oppressed white woman! Your family benefited from a society that supported itself with slave labor. Even if they didn’t own slaves, your family was part of the disgusting system simply by living in a slave state. Where do you think the money came from to build your roads? Provide your social services? Make sure the trains ran on time? Money generated from slave labor. Please tell me why I should sympathize.

By: Steve P.

Steve P. — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 15:56:37 +0000

The Conservative movement has no right to take any credit whatsoever for any aspect of the civil rights movement in this country, unless you’d like to take credit for obstructing it.None of you drooling morons have even the slightest bit of credibility on this issue. Most of you are outright racists. The rest of you are just closet bigots who are just too spineless to share your true feelings, so instead you make some poor feeble argument about how President Obama bought the election, how he benefited from white guilt, or how he has not “fulfilled King’s dream”, as if you truly have an understanding of what King’s vision was. If any group is obstructing us from moving towards a “post-racial” society, it is obviously cretins like those on this board who seek judge President Obama’s election as illegitimate because of reasons associated with his race.

By: J Charles

J Charles — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 07:32:52 +0000

You need to read Beau Toxx blog on this subject written two months age. Beau Toxx is way out in front of everyone on what’s going on. http://www.beautoxx.com

By: dancingnancie3

dancingnancie3 — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:51:29 +0000

I think this article is right. Obama claims to live out Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream of colorblindness, but his race has been the main focus, and basically the reason he won. Race should be insignificant yet it is being used to accomplish an end. Definitely the opposite of what MLK had wanted.

By: Ms. Attitude

Ms. Attitude — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:47:37 +0000

30. David S: Race is not an issue for the left??? You are joking, right? Black Americans who have never voted in their entire lives voted for Obama because he was black. During the election a large number of black voters couldn’t even state one of Obama’s points. The voted because he was black…nuff said!