Johnson: MLKJr Was A Republican

37 comments on this post so far. Add yours!

• 

  Sisyphus on January 18 at 10:34 a.m.

  Ofergodsake. What won’t Republicans change to fit a talking point? The revise science, they denigrate education, they omit inconvenient facts in reading the constitution, they are constantly changing reality and now they wanna again revise history.

  http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2011/jan/17/raging-elephants/houston-group-says-martin-luther-king-jr-was-repub/

• 

  hmoffsuite on January 18 at 10:56 a.m.

  Sis. Spin to win. Nice try. Are you talking about that climate crap that you guys with Al Gore dreamed up? Try to do a little better on your MLK research. Most sources support the fact that he was a republican and here is why…….

  “It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism”

  http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=16500#

  .

• 

  Phaedrus on January 18 at 11:44 a.m.

  “In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans…”

  So, you cite an opinion piece from a right-wing website that cites no FACTS, but premises their entire argument on an assumption made to fit their conclusion? I see that intellectual laziness continues unabated.

• 

  idahogie on January 18 at 12:27 p.m.

  Exactly, Phaedrus. Which is why hmoffsuite breathlessly and deceptively attacks global warming. It’s always obvious when a person is a pure ideologue. He isn’t interested in truth. Just in defending his tribe.

• 

  Sisyphus on January 18 at 12:30 p.m.

  Like he’d know a credible source. Its pure and simple trolling. Why that’s allowed is beyond me.

• 

  toadman on January 18 at 12:42 p.m.

  But MLK was a Republican. It’s true. Most southern racist white’s were Democrats at that time. Hell, my Evangelical Conservative parents were registered Democrats until they voted for Ronald Reagan in 1980, when I remember them saying something like “the democrats have changed.” ;-)

  Seems to me, some time in the 70s, something changed. Everything switched, in a manner of speaking.

  I daresay, back then, Sisyphus would have been a republican.

  Politics is weird that way, you know? It’s less about lables, as it is about ideas.

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 18 at 12:44 p.m.

  Call him whatever name you want, he sure has your number.

  and Phaed,
  “but premises their entire argument on an assumption made to fit their conclusion? I see that intellectual laziness continues unabated.”

  That sounds too much like a description of AGW science, you might want to rephrase that.

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 18 at 12:46 p.m.

  Toadman, what are you doing sticking logic in a political discussion. I thought the flip in the 70-80s was pretty well known. But sheesh, if it paints a bad light on your party, better deny and start spinning. (not you Toad)

• 

  Phaedrus on January 18 at 12:47 p.m.

  That sounds too much like a description of AGW science, you might want to rephrase that.

  Actually, CB, if you did research in places other than the right-wing blogosphere you’d not belittle the climate change—and mankind’s contribution to it.
  BTW, do you believe in evolution?

• 

  toadman on January 18 at 12:52 p.m.

  @Cabbage - from my perspective, it paints a good light on the democrats…like they finally saw the light… ;-) but hey, that’s just me.

  I thought that flip flop was pretty well known as well. The republican and democrat platforms of the time MLK was alive, would be unrecognizable in today’s world.

  But for me, again, it’s about ideas, not lables.

• 

  toadman on January 18 at 12:55 p.m.

  Phaedrus - I have it on good authority that CB is not a believer in evolution. Surprising? No.

  I, however, am a devotee of evolution, and of global warming. I am, indeed, a believer in the scientific method.

• 

  hmoffsuite on January 18 at 1:05 p.m.

  Sis >> “Like he’d know a credible source. Its pure and simple trolling. Why that’s allowed is beyond me”

  Actually, you threw the first punch when you said republicans were trying to ‘revise’ science. I was merely responding by suggesting that republicans simply reject junk science that is manufactured to create a benefit to those promoting the idea of human caused global warming. It was a fantasy of the democrats and Al Gore, and the junk was brought to light rather brilliantly. And, Phaedrus, If you are so intellectually athletic, rather than merely attacking me or sources I mention, why don’t you provide some information to suggest MLK was something other than a republican. When you guys are presented with an argument you don’t care for, first you attack the poster and then the source. Would be better if you provided some actual valid information or data to refute the argument. Stick with the matter at hand, fellas. Don’t always take the oblique and go on to other issues, that really aren’t the issues at hand. That, btw, is beiing intellectually lazy.

• 

  Sisyphus on January 18 at 1:19 p.m.

  Uh, did everyone just gloss over the politifact link I placed in the very first comment?

  Thanks for the history lesson Toad. I’m well aware that Senator Byrd filibustered the Civil Rights Act, a tactic he regretted. I’m also well aware that civil rights was President Kennedy’s cause celebre championed by LBJ and shoved down segregationist’s throats by Democrats in 1964 becoming the law of the land. I’m further aware that this divided the Democratic party regionally and laid the groundwork for Nixon’s southern strategy which successfully transitioned most segregationist southern Democrats into Republican hands. And they can have them. They were only Democrats because Lincoln was Republican. Since I have a degree in history your efforts were mostly unnecessary.

• 

  toadman on January 18 at 1:24 p.m.

  You’re welcome Sis.. but you flatter me.. I rarely put in much effort at all. ;-)

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 18 at 1:26 p.m.

  Yeah Sis, speaking of revision

  “He told us that Alveda King’s description of the Republican Party’s history was on the mark. “The Party of (Abraham) Lincoln defended black rights most vocally in the 1860s and 1870s, then abandoned the cause when the Democrats and the (Ku Klux) Klan defeated Republican state governments in the South. Blacks started their historic switch to the Democrats during the New Deal,” which were economic programs implemented in the 1930s under President Franklin Roosevelt in response to the Great Depression.

  But Jackson said that he would not consider King a Republican, calling him instead a ” ‘tax and spend’ democratic socialist.”

  Without reading the rest of that windy essay, I would say technically the label would have fit at the time. So this guy tries to do some spinning and revisions.

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 18 at 1:29 p.m.

  In the Theory of Evolution? Yes I am a believer in the theory. As gosh-darn-it-we-have a-consensus fact? Not really.

• 

  Sisyphus on January 18 at 1:38 p.m.

  You mean this Alveda King?

  http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/alveda-king-speaks-glenn-becks-dc-rally/story?id=11504453

  The Alveda King that equated gay marriage with genocide? The one who is cut off from the King family because she has made a career out of trading on the King name while peddling views that are diametrically opposed to those held by Martin Luther King Jr.

• 

  idahogie on January 18 at 1:39 p.m.

  But that’s what “theory” means in science. So you’re admitting that you don’t accept science.

  Kind of sheds light on your pronouncements about AGW.

• 

  idahogie on January 18 at 1:42 p.m.

  Back to the topic. Everyone knows that many southern Dems did not support desegregation and civil rights. They became Republicans as a result.

  The entire point of the “MLK was a Republican” fraud is that right-wingers want to imply that MLK would agree with Republicans TODAY. That’s obviously and embarrassingly false.

  He might not have been a Democrat today. But if he were denouncing the Dems, it would be because they were too conservative, and too much like the detestible GOP.

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 18 at 2:06 p.m.

  Yeah Idahogie, what has happened to the now abandoned step child of AGW? Couldn’t get much of a draw down in Cancun after Wikileaks exposed some of the “persuasion” Obama and friends used in Copenhagen.

  Btw, Theory is not Law. There is a difference. Law of Gravity, Theory of Evolution.

• 

  idahogie on January 18 at 2:34 p.m.

  Theories are more important than laws. If you knew anything about science, you’d know that. Laws are relationships between variables (i.e., equations). Theories are larger, more encompassing. Theories can include laws. Not vice versa.

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 18 at 2:48 p.m.

  “Theories can include laws. Not vice versa.” That sez a bit more than you may think it does.

  The Theory of Evolution can’t include the Law of Entropy. But with your condescending arrogance, I am sure you knew that.

  Now you can prattle on about closed systems versus open systems and laymen not understanding Entropy. Go ahead. It is expected among the “enlightened”.

  Show me proof of macro evolution to prove the Theory. Show me the missing link. Trouble is all the links that are found show less order, not more.

• 

  toadman on January 18 at 2:51 p.m.

  well said idahogie.. but you’re putting too much effort in…it’s not worth it, even though cabbage is himself a transitional form..as are we all, in a sense.. CB will never believe in Evolution unless a woman gives birth to a child with gills because she lives near the ocean and swims a lot. That will never happen and actually doesn’t even fit in with the way evolution works, so I’d move on to something else, if I were you. ;-)

• 

  toadman on January 18 at 3:00 p.m.

  Oh CB - you’ll be talking about Thermodynamics soon enough…is there an anti-evolution refudiation handbook or something? It’s always the same arguments over and over and over..

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 18 at 3:05 p.m.

  No handbook, but after a while you would think a bit might actually sink in for the left bankers. But no, it is always the arrogance and dismissals instead of true debate, “If you knew anything about science, you’d know that.”

• 

  toadman on January 18 at 3:12 p.m.

  Who’s dismissing who? I feel my whole scientific argument is completely dismissed when someone says “God did it.”

  It’s a total let down, man.

  ;-)

• 

  MatthewRoot on January 18 at 3:14 p.m.

  “In the Theory of Evolution? Yes I am a believer in the theory. As gosh-darn-it-we-have a-consensus fact? Not really.” - CB

  That statement shows a misunderstanding and conflation of scientific theories, scientific hypotheses, and scientific fact. (biological evolution is a fact, that it occurs by natural selection is a well-established theory).

  Gravitation is also a theory (the Newtonian law has to do with the acceleration of two objects with mass toward each other in a vacuum).

  Theories can not be “proved,” though they can be disproved. Theories can be supported by experiment and empirical observations. The theory of evolution by natural selection is strongly supported by over 150 years of study, the entire fossil record, and modern studies of genetics.

  The theory of evolution by Lamarckian mechanisms was disproved.

  PS. The idea that Dr. King was a Republican is an old canard. If the Republicans want to claim Dr. King and all that he stood for, great. I doubt that Dr. King would be pushing for repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act as Republicans are doing in congress today.

• 

  toadman on January 18 at 3:15 p.m.

  …and incidentally, I know a few hardened right wingers who are believers in evolution as well, so don’t make this a left/right thing, man…I mean, unless there’s a new “must reject any scientific evidence in support of the theory of evolution” clause in the new republican handbook or something that I’ve not heard of yet?

  ;-)

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 18 at 3:15 p.m.

  “Who’s dismissing who? ” Read the thread.

  Anyway, you could have always asked the question, “How?” :)

• 

  idahogie on January 18 at 3:22 p.m.

  No such thing as a “missing link.” And it’s plain that you have no idea what the link is between entropy and evolution. You make a feeble attempt to pre-empt the answer to your nonsense. Yes, the Earth is an open system, so energy is flooding in. That means that evolution has a power source, and can result in more complex life forms. Your failure to understand that doesn’t make other people “condescending,” “arrogant,” or “enlightened.” It must makes them smarter than you.

  If you don’t want to be talked down to, then you should elevate your knowledge of science.

• 

  toadman on January 18 at 3:25 p.m.

  True.. I could ask how.. which is the whole point of science. The problem is, I don’t take the easy route and say “magic” as some do…because, I don’t believe in magic…and before anyone gets offended, I don’t care if you believe in magic, the supernatural, god, or whatever. Just please allow me to continue to seek the answers in my own way.

  ;-)

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 18 at 3:32 p.m.

  Idahogie, it is obvious why you are a liberal. Common sense and common decency don’t fit in your world.

  Your comments make you condescending and arrogant, nothing I can do about it.

  Again, show me proof. One multi-celled paramecium with multiple functions.

• 

  DFO on January 18 at 3:35 p.m.

  Seriously? … you guys are wasting gray matter discussing evolution here and clogging up the main thread, when you’re not about to settle anything.

• 

  toadman on January 18 at 3:39 p.m.

  ;-)

  I wondered when DFO would cry “THREAD PIRACY!!! ”

  True enough. I’m not talking about evolution with CB anymore. That horse is dead.

• 

  Sisyphus on January 18 at 3:43 p.m.

  That horse is dead.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbt30UnzRWw

• 

  cybermanikan on January 18 at 3:48 p.m.

  On-topic: Martin Luther King, Jr’s status as a previous republican is hardly news and though interesting in historical terms not interesting in any relevant political sense. Now OT:

  Cabbage Boy you are the missing link.

  A paramecium is a single-celled protozoa with cilia. Your statement is absurd. What is else is aburd? Considering that such arguments somehow do something other than deflate the already low estimations of intelligence in the US.

  Another absurd line: “Show me a compact car with a jet engine, wings, a restraunt seating 30 people, all flying at 30,000 feet breaking the wind barrier.”

  Ah well, I figured why not let the thread fully terminate into entropy.

• 

  Cabbage Boy on January 18 at 3:57 p.m.

  @DFO, didn’t you say you knew your base? :)

« Back to Huckleberries Online

• ›Scanner traffic