Isn’t this a fire hazard?

The big straw man Al Sharpton sets up here, that is:

“They have a right to rally. But what they don’t have the right do is distort what Dr. King’s dream was about,” the Rev. Al Sharpton declared Friday. He called the tea party assembly an anti-government action and has organized a counter rally also near the site of King’s historic speech.

So the tea partiers are anarchists now? I don’t mean to say there’s anything particularly wrong with anarchism, but I don’t understand why Al Sharpton can’t at least tell the undistorted truth about what the tea party is about — SMALLER government, NOT no government at all — other than, of course, the fact that Sharpton is an inveterate demagogue.

Speaking of inveterate demagoguery, how about this?

“As an experienced politician, I know that things do not happen by accident. If they happen, somebody planned it. And I say that someone planned to hijack the site and the message of Martin Luther King Jr. in an effort to use it against the very principles of inclusion that we talk about in America,” said the Reverend Walter Fauntroy, who marched with King and was by his side during the speech forty-seven years ago.

“Fast forward now to August 28, 2010, and one has to admit that those who oppose our nation’s vaunted ‘universal value of inclusion’ have seized the hallowed ground of the Lincoln Memorial on the 47th anniversary of that watershed moment in time to promote their universal values of exclusion,” (Fauntroy) says. “Their purpose is to turn the clock back to a time when, in America, black people and women, and native Americans and non-white immigrants had no rights to jobs and freedom that white men were ‘bound to respect.’

I don’t see how Glenn Beck’s and Sarah Palin’s smaller-government message promotes any value of exclusion. That’s quite a message Fauntroy’s promoting to American blacks, i.e., “Only a big, powerful, overreaching government can protect you.” Talk about inclusion on his part — that’s insulting to damn near everyone, no matter his or her race.

It’s insulting to blacks because it implies they can’t look out for themselves and their own best interests — it implies that they need government to do it for them.

It’s insulting to whites, Hispanics and everyone else because it carries the implication that we are as blinded by racial hatred as we were 45 years ago.

And it’s insulting to all those — black, white or whatever other color — who gave their freedoms or their lives to see to it that blacks were treated better in this country, because it implies their sacrifices were all for nothing, when an honest look at American society in 2010 clearly shows that not to be the case.

I don’t mean to say that things are quite where they should be, but I don’t think there’s any question we have come a very long way in terms of race relations in this country. We still have a way to go, but I think Dr. King would be proud, even as he saw and observed the need for more. And I honestly don’t think he would see a Leviathan federal government as the only thing ultimately standing between American blacks and firehoses, lynchings, etc. I think he might well have agreed with Thomas Jefferson that “a government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you have.” And I really think he would have liked what Beck and Palin were promoting because the idea of smaller government is ultimately all about personal responsibility and accountability. I mean, I’d really like to think MLK would have seen those properties as integral to the freedom he sought for blacks, because it could never be fully possessed any other way.

And, again, you will note there is not a word about King’s niece speaking at Glenn Beck’s event. You’d think any journalist truly worthy of the craft would have asked the good Reverend Fauntroy about that. I’m sure he has an opinion about it that he’d be more than willing to voice.


One Response to “Isn’t this a fire hazard?”

  1. southtexaspistolero Says:

    Mattexian (
    I’m thinking, that if the media mentions Rev. King’s niece at all, she’ll be explained away as Beck and Palin’s “token n!@@&r” and a fool blinded by their bull$#!+. I’ve pretty much given up on watching “mainstream media” for anything close to objective news anymore. They’re still in denial that “That One” is pissing on them and telling them it’s raining.
    August 28, 2010, 1:44:10 PM CDT – Like – Reply – Edit – Moderate

    Boomer Lad (
    I picked this one up in the Joburg airport. Sharpton and his pals should read it and learn something. Got me serious bad looks because of title from the colored flight attendants on my ride home, though

    Damn good book about how they should stop blaming people and get on with it. Like Eddie Haskell in Leave it to Beaver: “Come on Moe! Pick up the Hoe!”

    Feeling sorry for yourself and blaming other people never improves your lot in life.

    But making lame but serviceable migas and listening to the Meat Puppets really Loud at 10am on Sunday cos you didn’t go to church, that can improve your lot in life.
    August 29, 2010, 10:11:12 AM CDT – Like – Reply – Edit – Moderate

    Mattexian (
    Back when Ken Hamblin, AKA “the Black Avenger,” was on radio, I bought his book “Pick A Better Country”. He’s a strong proponent of “get off your lazy butt and do something!” and he included a copy of his “Certificate of Absolution” in his book. That “certificate” absolves any white person of “white guilt” for anything done by their ancestors. Sounds like an important lesson to be learned, but 45 yrs after Rev. King’s rally on the Lincoln Memorial, noone seems to have really learned it.
    August 29, 2010, 5:35:41 PM CDT – Like – Reply – Edit – Moderate

    Boomer Lad (
    Rev. King rallied at the Lincoln Memorial and Lincoln said, among other things,

    “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”


    Abraham Lincoln
    (1809-1865) 16th US President

    Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858
    (The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume III, pp. 145-146.)

    August 30, 2010, 10:02:36 AM CDT

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: