Politicizing another funeral...

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Midnightrider said:
Maybe that means C.S.King was a good person, and Bush should have homored her with a speech instead of attending the funeral. But it sure sounds to me like "Bush deserved to get his ass handed to him because he was hanging out with those unapreciative blacks"
Well, I cannot help what you "hear" in my posts.

Remove the "hanging out with unappreciative blacks" part and the quote is pretty much what I did say. I can't help it you hear "unappreciative blacks" when I didn't say or even infer that.
 

LexiGirl75

100% Goapele Head!
vraiblonde said:
Why should I admit that my opinion is wrong? It's my opinion!

The fact is that Bush showed up at her funeral and was insulted for his effort. It's my opinion that he shouldn't have gone in the first place and that the only reason he did it was to appeal to blacks. If you can prove to me that this is not the case, I'll gladly admit I was wrong.

I don't think he was insulted for his efforts to attend the funeral. I think he was sucker-punched by Lowery who knew it would be aired and like someone mentioned he wanted to have his 15 mins of fame in the political arena by any means necessary. Maybe I am just a different kind of black person but I rather enjoyed seeing the four presidents there politics aside.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Midnightrider said:
don't know farrakhan's
Khadijah - the First Lady of Islam.

BTW, MLK and Farrakhan aren't comparable, you might want to read up a little
Maybe YOU should read up a bit. Farrakhan has been compared to MLK many many times by other civil rights activists. Remember the Million Man March?
 

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
if i was the only person to hear that in your post, you wouldn't have gotten so many different people saying you were sounding just that way.
 

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
vraiblonde said:
Khadijah - the First Lady of Islam.


Maybe YOU should read up a bit. Farrakhan has been compared to MLK many many times by other civil rights activists. Remember the Million Man March?
what ever makes you feel good
 

duzzey1a

New Member
vraiblonde said:
Terrorists kill people. I've never heard of MLK doing anything like that and I highly doubt even LBJ or Hoover thought he was. In any event, I've never heard of MLK being called or compared to a terrorist until Jimmy Carter did it.

That's why I made the remark that I made. The FBI at that time thought of King and others as "trouble makers" and "revolutionaries". Inciting uprisings in the form of marches and sit-ins. This was seen by some folks on capital hill as aggressors to the state. So....they got Hoover involved. Later on in history, COINTELPRO was flourishing. The government saw these groups as potential "terrorists" inciting terror in out nations streets...AND yes, it's documented. See Mcarthyism(sp?)
 
Last edited:

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
duzzey1a said:
So Vrai, lets consider this honor to the pope - "overkill", to the Columbia astronauts, "overkill", to the dead Katrina victims, "overkill"..

I think flying the flag at half-mast for the tsunami and Katrina people was inappropriate, too.

The space shuttle is one thing - they were on a mission for the US government and that was more of a national tragedy, as was 9-11. The Pope - well, he was a religious leader for millions in this country and all over the world, so why not.

But having the flag flown at half-mast is supposed to be a high honor and when you do it for just any ol' one, you diminish it's importance and meaning.
 

LexiGirl75

100% Goapele Head!
vraiblonde said:
Terrorists kill people. I've never heard of MLK doing anything like that and I highly doubt even LBJ or Hoover thought he was. In any event, I've never heard of MLK being called or compared to a terrorist until Jimmy Carter did it.

I'm sorry didn't you see the hyphen and the word type. All terrorists don't kill. Churches were bombed if no one died is it not an act of terrorism. Anyway, my point was that MLK was seen as someone who threatened the "natural" order of things or what was considered a peaceful life.

In the 60's those who opposed him saw him as a trouble maker for speaking out on what he believed in. While I do feel that he is not comparable to terrorists I do believe back then he would have been categorized as a threat to this country.
 

LexiGirl75

100% Goapele Head!
vraiblonde said:
Well, I cannot help what you "hear" in my posts.

Remove the "hanging out with unappreciative blacks" part and the quote is pretty much what I did say. I can't help it you hear "unappreciative blacks" when I didn't say or even infer that.

I actually got the same message in your words that Midnight got.
 

LexiGirl75

100% Goapele Head!
vraiblonde said:
Khadijah - the First Lady of Islam.


Maybe YOU should read up a bit. Farrakhan has been compared to MLK many many times by other civil rights activists. Remember the Million Man March?

That one March does not put him on the level of King. Stop the madness.
 

LexiGirl75

100% Goapele Head!
vraiblonde said:
I think flying the flag at half-mast for the tsunami and Katrina people was inappropriate, too.

The space shuttle is one thing - they were on a mission for the US government and that was more of a national tragedy, as was 9-11. The Pope - well, he was a religious leader for millions in this country and all over the world, so why not.

But having the flag flown at half-mast is supposed to be a high honor and when you do it for just any ol' one, you diminish it's importance and meaning.

Any ol' one is that like a rookie cop?
 

duzzey1a

New Member
vraiblonde said:
I think flying the flag at half-mast for the tsunami and Katrina people was inappropriate, too.

The space shuttle is one thing - they were on a mission for the US government and that was more of a national tragedy, as was 9-11. The Pope - well, he was a religious leader for millions in this country and all over the world, so why not.

But having the flag flown at half-mast is supposed to be a high honor and when you do it for just any ol' one, you diminish it's importance and meaning.

Any ol' one, eh? You remember the phrase "Behing every good man, is an even stronger woman"?

I'll bet when Dr.King showed his historical bravery and candor during these times he was not alone. When he came home at night, I'm sure they (MLK and Coretta) talked on a personal level about what was happening around them. I'm sure that when they were together, he shared all of his hopes and fears with her.( As all good marriages should!) These conversations we will never know about, but when he was out doing his work, she was the face of the family. She had to endure the hatred of the south at that time. When he was killed. She stood fast. She never lashed out, never cursed or made excuses. She never, to my knowlede bashed the president. She took the pain and pressed on. And her message, one of peaceful resolve, is something that we can darn sure use today. And she (and MLK) defended a right that is granted every American. One of the very same rights that some people in this world hate us for.

..On a very basic level, shouldn't she be respectfully honored just as much as her husband?
 

BuddyLee

Football addict
Ken King said:
Churches can condone and engage in active politics if they give up their tax-exempt status. The same goes for other tax-exempt organizations that are limited on what they can and cannot do in the political arena. Give up that benefit of not paying into the system and they, like the rest of us, are more than capabale of paying to play.
I don't know Ken, although I like the argument something is of a miss. Are there any laws to back this sort of thing up? Even a moral code that is written, something to go by?

I mean, which do you really think puts more into the community for less, your church or your money wasting government?
 

duzzey1a

New Member
vraiblonde said:
Sorry. I do not revere Coretta Scott King. If that makes me a racist, oh well.

That's your opinion and I'm cool with that. That's what makes this forum good. Thanks for the chat.
 
Last edited:
B

Bruzilla

Guest
LexiGirl75 said:
I disagree and am totally offended by this statement and I don't care if you don't care if it does offend me. But, how could you say that this is what he gets for pandering (if this means catering) to blacks by attending the funeral?

Some of us want to get along with other races on this earth. And YOU do not know if all of the blacks at that funeral felt that way. I mean, I can make an equally ignorant and unfair statement about whites being at the funeral, but I seriously don't feel that way, so I won't.

Is it possible to think that some whites and dare I say republicans smiled inside when that statement was said about Bush, weapons and war?

The only thing I agree with is that her funeral and any funeral is an inappropriate place to plug your views on something that could be saved for another time.

I commend both Bush's for attending simply because how Democrats and Republicans don't see eye to eye. While you were thinking W. was a fool, I was thinking it is so nice to see Clinton and Bush (dem. and rep.) together.

I don't get into the black/white thing on the boards too much because I am not interested in harboring on the separation by skin color. But I do see where every time something goes down it's quick to be a black/white thing or Dem/Rep thing. When the hecht are we all going to get along, oh wait, probably when there is no one left.

She can say that if you watched the entire service Bush spoke only of the life and accomplishments of Dr. and Mrs. King, during which he received polite applause and a standing ovation at the end. However, when the leftists in the crowd came out, and started attacking Bush, they got numerous standing ovations.

Bush gets criticized by these same people if he doesn't come, then they attack him when they do come. I think of the old saying of how "I remember the first time I kissed a girl, and the first time I got punched in the mouth, and I needed either to happen twice to let me know which I liked and which I didn't." You can't fault someone for extending a hand, then bite him when he does, and expect him to ever come back. The purpose of the funeral was to honor the deceased, not to make political attacks. The Dems used the Wellstone funeral to directly insult and attack Republicans in attendence, and they did the same thing today.

And don't bother tossing out the :bs: about how both sides are equally guilty. I don't remember any Republican at Nixon's or Reagan's funerals using the occasion to attack Democrats, nor did any Democrats try to use those occasions to attack Republicans, because both knew that in a heavilly Republican grouping that would not have been tolerated. They would have been booed off the stage, not given a standing ovation There's only one side that's commiting these dispicable acts and it's the Democrats.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
LexiGirl75 said:
That one March does not put him on the level of King. Stop the madness.
You might want to clue in the "black leadership":

http://www.cephasministry.com/nwo_nation_of_islam.html

"It is my honor to stand with millions who will represent billions as we stand to fight for families," said the Rev. Walter Fauntroy, a former U.S. Congressman and pastor of New Bethel Baptist Church. Rev. Fauntroy, a close associate of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., also heads the National Black Leadership Forum. "I am pleased to say with some authority that Martin Luther King Jr. dreamed of the day when we as religious leaders would stand together to say now is the time for a Million Family March," he said.

"We should celebrate and embrace his historic call for unity," added the Rev. Dr. Milton Reid, founder of the Martin Luther King Family Life Institute. "I haven't seen an opportunity like this since the days of Malcolm X and Dr. King."

At the conclusion of the press conference, several speakers addressed the media and audience seated in the Salaam Restaurant Grand Ballroom. Host Congressman Danny Davis (D-Ill.) and Congressman Hilliard thanked Min. Farrakhan for his far-reaching vision of bringing America together. The Rev. Fauntroy of Washington, D.C., who was instrumental in Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.s 1963 March on Washington, and a founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus, said Dr. King would have been proud of the Million Family March because it symbolized the "reaching of the mountaintop."

Do you think I just make this stuff up? :rolleyes:
 

LexiGirl75

100% Goapele Head!
vraiblonde said:
You might want to clue in the "black leadership":

http://www.cephasministry.com/nwo_nation_of_islam.html







Do you think I just make this stuff up? :rolleyes:

No, but I am surprised that you think it is ok for Louis F to piggyback on Dr. King, but with his own agenda. I pretty much can ask the next twenty people I see if they believe Farrakhan is the new Dr. King and I believe they ALL would say nope. Farrakhan brought division back in the day amongst blacks and whites whether or not he has changed I don't know but that is all I remember of him. Anyone who brings division among races does not share Dr. King's agenda.
 
Top