Jump to content



Photo

JFK's wife: Martin Luther King was "tricky" "and phony"


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#16 mudslag

mudslag

    I live in your head

  • 8,047 posts
  • Joined: 16-September 06
  • Location: Northwest Chicago burbs

Posted 12 September 2011 - 23:32

how long until we start discussing how the USA faked the moon landing, or 9/11?




Give him a week or so, he just joined earlier this month.

So, the man could speak, read, or write eloquently. That makes people elevate one to sainthood?

Oh right, I forgot about our current president. Guess that's all it takes after all.

Anyhoo, King was a notorious rabble rouser and carouser. This was well documented through his life. Yes, he had a message and optimized the views of a newer culture of the time, but honestly, not a saint in the least... yet people seem to worship at his feet. As time passes, people have less of a view of the real man, and more of this rosy fantasy about how they envision him to have been.

I remember doing a report on him long time ago... and reading the historical and first hand accounts were shocking to say the least. Not that it took away from the message, but it was almost a 'I am going to say one thing on the national level, while 'cashing' in and acting another in day-to-day life' attitude that dripped from everything he did.



Who said anything about elevating him to anything? Nothing in that quote you have there hinted to anything like that. No one argued that he wasnt human and made many mistakes. None of that changes the FACT that he played an integrate part of the civil rights movement, regardless of his misdoings. And what does Obama have anything to do with this topic?


#17 Skin

Skin

    Neowinian

  • 1,097 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 07

Posted 12 September 2011 - 23:44

Who said anything about elevating him to anything? Nothing in that quote you have there hinted to anything like that. No one argued that he wasnt human and made many mistakes. None of that changes the FACT that he played an integrate part of the civil rights movement, regardless of his misdoings. And what does Obama have anything to do with this topic?


It shows a pattern. people that read and speak and write well seem to have more of a free pass at icon status in general... whether they were 'good' beyond their words doesn't seem to matter. It's the classic case of hear what I say, just don't look at how I live.

While the quote itself doesn't suggest elevating him, the pattern of the comments of the thread in general seem to indicate that very little people have even read a thing on King, other than the speeches or what they hear in February while watching a special on him. So, he was an 'integrate' part of the civil rights movement, yet people that knew him as a person seemed to describe him a lot differently than the masses that only heard his words. Eloquent words yes, but how does his work forgive his misdoings?

Is not a man measured by his actions, and not his words alone?

As for Obama being mentioned, it was an analogy to how what a person says in the lime light and on the national landscape is a far cry from the actions that are seen and done. Humans by nature are more stirred by poignant words than by caring to study the man behind the mask.

Does anyone suggest king wasn't involved in the process of change and hope for that culture and time? No. However, his actions speak louder than his words ever did. Or at least they should to someone that would crack open historical books.

#18 +Nik L

Nik L

    Where's my pants?

  • 33,984 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 03

Posted 12 September 2011 - 23:50

So it's wrong that we equate a well-educated person to be someone who is eloquent? Oh no, the shame!

Your Obama reference serves as nothing more than betraying your agenda.

#19 Skin

Skin

    Neowinian

  • 1,097 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 07

Posted 12 September 2011 - 23:52

So it's wrong that we equate a well-educated person to be someone who is eloquent? Oh no, the shame!

Your Obama reference serves as nothing more than betraying your agenda.


Troll more, or if you aren't, at least make an attempt at comprehension of what you are reading.

#20 +Nik L

Nik L

    Where's my pants?

  • 33,984 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 03

Posted 12 September 2011 - 23:57

I love it. I disagree, argue with you and am labelled a troll. Pathetic...

#21 Skin

Skin

    Neowinian

  • 1,097 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 07

Posted 13 September 2011 - 00:01

I love it. I disagree, argue with you and am labelled a troll. Pathetic...


You didn't argue at all, actually. You twisted and misrepresented what was originally posted, and offered some hidden slap at an agenda with no supporting focus or cohesive thought.

IF that isn't trolling, it is either a case of poor comprehension of what you read, or rather poor arguing skills. Followed by a shift of focus off of you and back to me with a 'Pathetic'.

Age old way of distracting from something one cannot counter.

#22 +LogicalApex

LogicalApex

    Software Engineer

  • 6,153 posts
  • Joined: 14-August 02
  • Location: Philadelphia, PA
  • OS: Windows 7 Ultimate x64
  • Phone: Nexus 5

Posted 13 September 2011 - 00:14

I'm not sure I understand why this is even a news story...

So she called MLK a bunch of things regarding him having a questionable moral compass (cheating on his wife, among other things). These comments were made prior to her finding out her own husband had the same questionable moral compass. So it is news? I'd imagine most women, and even men, would make pretty much the same comments when they first learn someone they see as representing a high moral fiber (like a minister) as acting in an opposite manner.

I just don't see the newsworthy point of the story...



#23 +Nik L

Nik L

    Where's my pants?

  • 33,984 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 03

Posted 13 September 2011 - 00:20

You didn't argue at all, actually. You twisted and misrepresented what was originally posted, and offered some hidden slap at an agenda with no supporting focus or cohesive thought.

IF that isn't trolling, it is either a case of poor comprehension of what you read, or rather poor arguing skills. Followed by a shift of focus off of you and back to me with a 'Pathetic'.

Age old way of distracting from something one cannot counter.


Or rather, I have argued your points many times on this forum and am quite frankly bored. Every few months someone signs up, posts the same old rhetoric with the same old air of elitism for "Knowing what we all ignore" or "Saying what others are afraid to"...

Your posts are neither new nor insightful. Your suggestion that we "crack open history books" stinks of the same attitude that every Johnny-come-lately exhibits in such threads. I have read up on MLK Jr, I am not American (nor black) so I do not feel the sense of idolisation that some do. Yes I m very much aware of his suggested double-standards.

But the point being made is that you bring up Obama. In a wholly unrelated thread. Without merit.

#24 +McCordRm

McCordRm

    http://richardmccord.com

  • 3,198 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 06
  • Location: Dallas, TX

Posted 13 September 2011 - 02:43

Here's what I absolutely know about MLK:
People wanted to kill him, and he knew it. And unlike the Pope, who supposedly
has God to watch over him, MLK didn't get a bullet-proof batmobile to keep him safe.
And STILL the man took the stage and spoke out for peace. That's balls, man.



Click here to login or here to register to remove this ad, it's free!