Is KellyAnne Conway correct? That MLKJr. wouldve opposed impeaching this White President?

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I saw about a DOZEN serious abuses of a dead corpse on Monday with desperate politicians channeling MLK in his afterlife... I think he probably just shuts off the noise every MLK day and wishes for some BBQ from Memphis...

 

[IM2]

If he had lived, I do think he would have helped create the economic development you say is needed today. It stands to reason that many things would be different and it may have been King instead of Obama who would have been the first black president in 1972 and would have served 2 terms and Reagan very well may not have been able to rise into prominence which means this current type of "conservatism" probably would not have taken hold. That would mean we'd not be talking about a president trump.

But looking at what actually happened, he probably would have done better to adopt Malcolm X's economic nationalism. Your opinion is correct in this regard.

As long as this alternate scenario got rid of Nixon faster -- I'm all for it...

BTW -- His religious faith and convictions TODAY would be a real conundrum for the Dem team.. Don't think that would fly very well...

No it wouldn't. You really need to unlearn your radicalization.

You're just naive if you think Dr. King could be a "secular humanist" to fit into today's Dem Party... Having prayer breakfasts not ONCE a year but maybe once a week would be VERY PROBLEMATIC to your political clan today...

Because it removes one of their LARGEST WEDGE ISSUES... And all those "bible thumping Christians" would no longer be just deplorable Repubs....

Having a REVEREND as president?? According to the official diversity scoring guide, (LOL ---I stole a copy) his NEGATIVE points on JUST that would put him out before Cory Booker in the primaries...

Fool, every democrat is not a secular humanist and when King lived there was word going around in 1968 that King might possibly be Kennedys running mate. You don't seem to understand the difference in the way liberals and conservatives see God. The conservative god is a draconian angry god waiting to punish everyone for sin. He's the god who says starve if you don't work. Rev. Jackson and Rev Sharpton have ran for president in the democratic party and Rev. William Barber is a leader in the Democratic party.

You really need not clown diversity then lie about how you aren't a racist. Stop listening to Rush Limbaugh son, because you are all the way wrong.

There is a difference between an angry god and a god who allows every vice there is to its maximum detriment. Especially when people are taxed for it. Biblical scripture tells you what happens. Lets face it we don't need many reasons to have wars. And all of those vices to the max, cause them.

I understand what the bible says and that's exactly why I said what I did. For example you have right wingers who have committed adultery telling liberals how ungodly it is to be tolerant of gays. Both sins are equal but you don't see the push to make marriage after divorce illegal.

 

[22lcidw]

As long as this alternate scenario got rid of Nixon faster -- I'm all for it...

BTW -- His religious faith and convictions TODAY would be a real conundrum for the Dem team.. Don't think that would fly very well...

No it wouldn't. You really need to unlearn your radicalization.

You're just naive if you think Dr. King could be a "secular humanist" to fit into today's Dem Party... Having prayer breakfasts not ONCE a year but maybe once a week would be VERY PROBLEMATIC to your political clan today...

Because it removes one of their LARGEST WEDGE ISSUES... And all those "bible thumping Christians" would no longer be just deplorable Repubs....

Having a REVEREND as president?? According to the official diversity scoring guide, (LOL ---I stole a copy) his NEGATIVE points on JUST that would put him out before Cory Booker in the primaries...

Fool, every democrat is not a secular humanist and when King lived there was word going around in 1968 that King might possibly be Kennedys running mate. You don't seem to understand the difference in the way liberals and conservatives see God. The conservative god is a draconian angry god waiting to punish everyone for sin. He's the god who says starve if you don't work. Rev. Jackson and Rev Sharpton have ran for president in the democratic party and Rev. William Barber is a leader in the Democratic party.

You really need not clown diversity then lie about how you aren't a racist. Stop listening to Rush Limbaugh son, because you are all the way wrong.

There is a difference between an angry god and a god who allows every vice there is to its maximum detriment. Especially when people are taxed for it. Biblical scripture tells you what happens. Lets face it we don't need many reasons to have wars. And all of those vices to the max, cause them.

I understand what the bible says and that's exactly why I said what I did. For example you have right wingers who have committed adultery telling liberals how ungodly it is to be tolerant of gays. Both sins are equal but you don't see the push to make marriage after divorce illegal.

You are correct. But without adultery you would never have seen gay marriage get a sniff. Frankly hetero marriage is hard work. And staying married while having children is becoming a sucker in today's climate. The costs to raise children are massive. We have promoted a do anything society for fifty years. The results are massive revenues needed for our ways of vice. A lot of government outlays are used to keep people alive with a roof over their head and food along with medical help. And the costs will keep on rising and rising until the system collapses. Just saying. The Bible tells people how they ph uk up. And we learned nothing from it. So if the worse ever happens and all help from government and pensions are cut in half will we still be bright eyed and bushy tailed about all of this? You may be optimist, but I am not.

 

[IM2]

You don't know shit ...

Well, I do know that in my 5 weeks on USM so far, I've yet to post flagrant remarks to you.


skinny: Proceed with caution.

So when you learn more than that one sentence white racists use to defend their racism we can talk.

I invited you to talk about many sentences I have posted about Trump's several deeds which exclusively uplifted Black people. You have refused to.

I invited you to talk about links that you posted. But you refuse to. Then even when I start to list your link's issues here, one at a time to discuss --- your reply is that I should learn more than that one sentence white racists use to defend their racism

lol

I think you and I both can see the irrationality reeking here.

And you are incorrect, according to my posts. I cited more than a couple of instances, to deny false claims about Trump being a racist toward negros.

And when I see how you approached the truth about Trump and the HBCU funding ---with your article that abandon the facts from May 2017-today--- then I can't wait to see if you will ever show that you respect your own argument enough to discuss your claim about 150 racist judges appointed to federal benches and him Taking white supremacist groups off the terrorist watch list and him creating a category called black identity extremists that designates black protest groups as terrorists and him Gutting civil rights

You refuse to use logic re President Trump, but you make sure that you're using the Dem's playbook. And I really do hope you desire a discussion between us ---so I can expose that playboo, page by page, when it comes to veracity of Trump not being racist toward Negroid people.

trump has not uplifted black people. You don't seem to understand that. Signing a bill for HBCU's don't do anything for the majority of blacks that don't attend HBCU's. You run to the shiny object then try using that to claim trumps not racist. trump signed the bill because he knew that would have people like you arguing with blacks about how he's not racist. So I am going to be very blunt here and you can take it any way you like.

I am black, you appear not to be. I think I know what is done that uplifts blacks better than you do. Black unemployment continues to be double that of whites. On top of that, black unemployment had been on a downward trend for 7 years before trump took office. So both of these statements shows is that trump has done nothing for blacks. If trump makes it so black unemployment is the same 2.8 percent it is for whites, then I will say that trump has uplifted blacks. If trump makes it so black owned businesses are 13 percent of all American businesses instead of 7, then I will say that trump has uplifted blacks. If trump makes it so black businesses earn 13 percent of all business receipts in America instead of 1/2 of 1 percent, then I will say that trump has uplifted blacks. If trump makes it so blacks have 13 percent of the wealth in America instead of 2.6, then I will say that trump has uplifted blacks.

So don't come trying to argue with me about how you think trump has uplifted blacks because he signed a bill that only applies to 11 percent of all black college students.

 

[toobfreak]

Kellyanne Conway Says MLK Would Oppose Trump Impeachment

What say you, Dems?

MLK would have opposed most EVERYTHING the Democrats have been doing for years! He was about unity and people coming together, not rank partisanship and perpetually sewing the seeds of division and hate for pure political gain.

 

[flacaltenn]

Fool, every democrat is not a secular humanist and when King lived there was word going around in 1968 that King might possibly be Kennedys running mate

Exactly.. But today's Dem party is NOWHERE NEAR the party of Kennedy... That was BEFORE your party invented the "cancel culture" tool... And all of those "old timey values" are now regressive baggage belonging only to "bible thumping, gun toting, racist" Repubs...;

Secular humanism is built on arrogance of man's ability to control morals and culture... In that sense, MOST LEADERS of the Dem party today ARE secular humanists and that is what matters...

The HUMILITY and non violence of Dr King is DERIVED from the humility of religious faith. That died with the Anti-Facist Facists that roam the streets *whose streets -- OUR streets" and the "cops are pigs -- fry them like bacon" crowd...

HUMILITY is one of things that Dr King understood.. And most EVERY Civil movement in history that has ever produced fruit was at its core "faith based"...

Maybe YOU should "shut up about Dr. King" until you understand that YOUR politics and the party you worship TODAY would be ALIEN to him.....

 

[IM2]

Fool, every democrat is not a secular humanist and when King lived there was word going around in 1968 that King might possibly be Kennedys running mate

Exactly.. But today's Dem party is NOWHERE NEAR the party of Kennedy... That was BEFORE your party invented the "cancel culture" tool... And all of those "old timey values" are now regressive baggage belonging only to "bible thumping, gun toting, racist" Repubs...;

Secular humanism is built on arrogance of man's ability to control morals and culture... In that sense, MOST LEADERS of the Dem party today ARE secular humanists and that is what matters...

The HUMILITY and non violence of Dr King is DERIVED from the humility of religious faith. That died with the Anti-Facist Facists that roam the streets *whose streets -- OUR streets" and the "cops are pigs -- fry them like bacon" crowd...

HUMILITY is one of things that Dr King understood.. And most EVERY Civil movement in history that has ever produced fruit was at its core "faith based"...

Maybe YOU should "shut up about Dr. King" until you understand that YOUR politics and the party you worship TODAY would be ALIEN to him.....

I know what the democratic party stands for today and what King was about. Unlike you, who lies about the republican party and what king stood for. Your definition of secular humanism is exactly what republicans are doing and what they stand for. I really don't much listen to lectures about what King stood for from members of the race that murdered him. He was murdered by a white man because of the color of his skin. The content of his character was never considered by many whites then and now. Including you. Because if you did you'd understand that what you are saying is way off.

You have humility and docility confused. King was about non violent DIRECT ACTION. Not quiet passivity.The racist republicans have no values, they are the continuation of the racism, sexism, etc., etc., that has been part of this country since the beginning

 

[IM2]

Kellyanne Conway Says MLK Would Oppose Trump Impeachment

What say you, Dems?

MLK would have opposed most EVERYTHING the Democrats have been doing for years! He was about unity and people coming together, not rank partisanship and perpetually sewing the seeds of division and hate for pure political gain.

No he wouldn't.

 

[flacaltenn]

Your definition of secular humanism is exactly what republicans are doing and what they stand for

The "religious right" Repubs are secular?? You know the definition of secular or humanism??? I'm outta here. Enjoy your fantasies....

 

[flacaltenn]

You have humility and docility confused. King was about non violent DIRECT ACTION. Not quiet passivity.

No I don't.. Quit lecturing me...

 

[Ethos Logos Pathos]

Mlk got a pay load from the left to switch ideology.. so it would depend who was paying more

Yes actually, you are part correct. It was not the world-famous MLKJr.

It was his dad. MLKSr.

Yes. He's the culprit who turned Black America over, to the Dems, about a year prior to the 1960 Presidential election ---after several meetings with RFK and a few meetings with JFK.

 

[Ethos Logos Pathos]

trump has not uplifted black people. You don't seem to understand that...

You can't erase history and its facts, is what you clearly do not understand.

Altho ... You do seem to understand that you can run here to say Trump is racist, all you want, but his deeds I listed are going to remain real life plus they will continue to verify that he can't possibly be racist ---in order to go risking his reputation among legion of White Supremacists that way.

I listed several acts by Trump, recently, that uplifted Black citizens ---and then you posted no facts/no evidence to dispute any of them.

So yeah, sure, you can sit here playing pretend about your irrelevant, emotions-based reply to my list of those 7-8 recent Trump deeds. Deeds that sent a msg of love to Black America. Your reservoir was empty, you had no fact-based ammo to counter any of those acts I listed from Trump. And the list is longer, I simply just refused to flood you with proofs ---until I can see the real you.

Now, I see.

So I'll leave you be, on this issue, at least until you start to show that you have some respect for your own opinion ---which might be exactly why you continue to circumvent addressing where you were asked about discussing those links you posted. Yes sir. You see what I did to your first link, from May 2017, therefore it makes total sense if you do not want to risk it/me shining a veracious spotlight on your other links there.

 

[IM2]

Your definition of secular humanism is exactly what republicans are doing and what they stand for

The "religious right" Repubs are secular?? You know the definition of secular or humanism??? I'm outta here. Enjoy your fantasies....

The religious part of that is a joke. They are trying to get people to fill the courts with conservatives in order to
control morals and culture. You will be "lectured" about King as long as you misstate what he stood for.

 

[IM2]

Mlk got a pay load from the left to switch ideology.. so it would depend who was paying more

Yes actually, you are part correct. It was not the world-famous MLKJr.

It was his dad. MLKSr.

Yes. He's the culprit who turned Black America over, to the Dems, about a year prior to the 1960 Presidential election ---after several meetings with RFK and a few meetings with JFK.

Why is it whites like you try this? First off, King was no republican. Second, the republican party has never been the friend of blacks. I think I can say this as a black man of nearly 60, whose parents and grandparents explained why blacks left the republican party. The republican party has done things like this:

The term lily-white movement was coined by Texas Republican leader Norris Wright Cuney, who used the term in an 1888 Republican convention to describe efforts by white conservatives to oust blacks from positions of Texas party leadership and incite riots to divide the party.[1] The term came to be used nationally to describe this ongoing movement as it further developed in the early 20th century,[2] including through the administration of Herbert Hoover. Localized movements began immediately after the war but by the beginning of the 20th century the effort had become national.” “This movement is largely credited with driving blacks out of the Republican party during the early 20th century, setting the stage for their eventual support of the Democrats.”


Michael K. Fauntroy - Republicans and the Black vote

 

[IM2]

trump has not uplifted black people. You don't seem to understand that...

You can't erase history and its facts, is what you clearly do not understand.

Altho ... You do seem to understand that you can run here to say Trump is racist, all you want, but his deeds I listed are going to remain real life plus they will continue to verify that he can't possibly be racist ---in order to go risking his reputation among legion of White Supremacists that way.

I listed several acts by Trump, recently, that uplifted Black citizens ---and then you posted no facts/no evidence to dispute any of them.

So yeah, sure, you can sit here playing pretend about your irrelevant, emotions-based reply to my list of those 7-8 recent Trump deeds. Deeds that sent a msg of love to Black America. Your reservoir was empty, you had no fact-based ammo to counter any of those acts I listed from Trump. And the list is longer, I simply just refused to flood you with proofs ---until I can see the real you.

Now, I see.

So I'll leave you be, on this issue, at least until you start to show that you have some respect for your own opinion ---which might be exactly why you continue to circumvent addressing where you were asked about discussing those links you posted. Yes sir. You see what I did to your first link, from May 2017, therefore it makes total sense if you do not want to risk it/me shining a veracious spotlight on your other links there.

No, you can't change the facts of history. That's why I can say trump is a racist. Good riddance.

 

[Ethos Logos Pathos]

... Good riddance.

WISE CHOICE.

lol


And actually you sort of said this already, the other day ... when you tucked your tail and whimpered on out of here after you got called to the carpet about your links that you refuse to standby. LOL.

 

[Ethos Logos Pathos]

... First off, King was no republican. Second, the republican party has never been the friend of blacks...

ahhhhh, I can see that once again, you have a huuuuge problem with accepting the facts ---wherever you cannot fleece them.

Nope, you cannot change the facts about how Black America voted prior to 1960: Why Did Black Voters Flee The Republican Party In The 1960s?

And you can't change history, of how the Black Vote was delivered to JFK by MLK Sr:

In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Brown v. Board of Education that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional. Many southern political leaders claimed the desegregation decision violated the rights of states to manage their systems of public education, and they responded with defiance, legal challenges, delays, or token compliance. As a result, school desegregation proceeded very slowly. By the end of the 1950s, fewer than 10 percent of black children in the South were attending integrated schools.

The pace of civil rights protests rose sharply in response to the Supreme Court's decision. Martin Luther King Jr. led a boycott that ended segregated busing in Montgomery, Alabama. In 1957, National Guard troops under orders from President Dwight D. Eisenhower enforced the desegregation of Little Rock Central High School in Arkansas. But, even after Little Rock, school integration was painfully slow, and segregation in general remained largely untouched.

In February 1960, four black college students sat down at a Woolworth's lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina, and asked to be served. They were refused service, and they refused to leave their seats. Within days, more than 50 students had volunteered to continue the sit-in, and within weeks the movement had spread to other college campuses. Sit‑ins and other protests swept across the South in early 1960, touching more than 65 cities in 12 states. Roughly 50,000 young people joined the protests that year.

The Election of 1960
By the 1960 presidential campaign, civil rights had emerged as a crucial issue. Just a few weeks before the election, Martin Luther King Jr. was arrested while leading a protest in Atlanta, Georgia. John Kennedy phoned his wife, Coretta Scott King to express his concern, while a call from Robert Kennedy to the judge helped secure her husband's safe release. The Kennedys' personal intervention led to a public endorsement by Martin Luther King Sr., the influential father of the civil rights leader.

Across the nation, more than 70 percent of African Americans voted for Kennedy, and these votes provided the winning edge in several key states. When President Kennedy took office in January 1961, African Americans had high expectations for the new administration.

But Kennedy's narrow election victory and small working margin in Congress left him cautious. He was reluctant to lose southern support for legislation on many fronts by pushing too hard on civil rights legislation. Instead, he appointed unprecedented numbers of African Americans to high-level positions in the administration and strengthened the Civil Rights Commission. He spoke out in favor of school desegregation, praised a number of cities for integrating their schools, and put Vice President Lyndon Johnson in charge of the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity. Attorney General Robert Kennedy turned his attention to voting rights, initiating five times the number of suits brought during the previous administration.

Civil Rights Movement | JFK Library

 

[IM2]

... First off, King was no republican. Second, the republican party has never been the friend of blacks...

ahhhhh, I can see that once again, you have a huuuuge problem with accepting the facts ---wherever you cannot fleece them.

Nope, you cannot change the facts about how Black America voted prior to 1960: Why Did Black Voters Flee The Republican Party In The 1960s?

And you can't change history, of how the Black Vote was delivered to JFK by MLK Sr:

In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Brown v. Board of Education that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional. Many southern political leaders claimed the desegregation decision violated the rights of states to manage their systems of public education, and they responded with defiance, legal challenges, delays, or token compliance. As a result, school desegregation proceeded very slowly. By the end of the 1950s, fewer than 10 percent of black children in the South were attending integrated schools.

The pace of civil rights protests rose sharply in response to the Supreme Court's decision. Martin Luther King Jr. led a boycott that ended segregated busing in Montgomery, Alabama. In 1957, National Guard troops under orders from President Dwight D. Eisenhower enforced the desegregation of Little Rock Central High School in Arkansas. But, even after Little Rock, school integration was painfully slow, and segregation in general remained largely untouched.

In February 1960, four black college students sat down at a Woolworth's lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina, and asked to be served. They were refused service, and they refused to leave their seats. Within days, more than 50 students had volunteered to continue the sit-in, and within weeks the movement had spread to other college campuses. Sit‑ins and other protests swept across the South in early 1960, touching more than 65 cities in 12 states. Roughly 50,000 young people joined the protests that year.

The Election of 1960
By the 1960 presidential campaign, civil rights had emerged as a crucial issue. Just a few weeks before the election, Martin Luther King Jr. was arrested while leading a protest in Atlanta, Georgia. John Kennedy phoned his wife, Coretta Scott King to express his concern, while a call from Robert Kennedy to the judge helped secure her husband's safe release. The Kennedys' personal intervention led to a public endorsement by Martin Luther King Sr., the influential father of the civil rights leader.

Across the nation, more than 70 percent of African Americans voted for Kennedy, and these votes provided the winning edge in several key states. When President Kennedy took office in January 1961, African Americans had high expectations for the new administration.

But Kennedy's narrow election victory and small working margin in Congress left him cautious. He was reluctant to lose southern support for legislation on many fronts by pushing too hard on civil rights legislation. Instead, he appointed unprecedented numbers of African Americans to high-level positions in the administration and strengthened the Civil Rights Commission. He spoke out in favor of school desegregation, praised a number of cities for integrating their schools, and put Vice President Lyndon Johnson in charge of the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity. Attorney General Robert Kennedy turned his attention to voting rights, initiating five times the number of suits brought during the previous administration.

Civil Rights Movement | JFK Library

I'm not going to argue with someone white trying to tell me how we used to vote because they read something. I'm black, I know when, how and why blacks left the republican party. I know why we are not republicans now and probably won't be for the foreseeable future. I know that King was not republican and certainly would not be republican now.

When whites like you end their paternalism the end of racism will not be far behind.

​

 

[flacaltenn]

... First off, King was no republican. Second, the republican party has never been the friend of blacks...

ahhhhh, I can see that once again, you have a huuuuge problem with accepting the facts ---wherever you cannot fleece them.

Nope, you cannot change the facts about how Black America voted prior to 1960: Why Did Black Voters Flee The Republican Party In The 1960s?

And you can't change history, of how the Black Vote was delivered to JFK by MLK Sr:

In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Brown v. Board of Education that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional. Many southern political leaders claimed the desegregation decision violated the rights of states to manage their systems of public education, and they responded with defiance, legal challenges, delays, or token compliance. As a result, school desegregation proceeded very slowly. By the end of the 1950s, fewer than 10 percent of black children in the South were attending integrated schools.

The pace of civil rights protests rose sharply in response to the Supreme Court's decision. Martin Luther King Jr. led a boycott that ended segregated busing in Montgomery, Alabama. In 1957, National Guard troops under orders from President Dwight D. Eisenhower enforced the desegregation of Little Rock Central High School in Arkansas. But, even after Little Rock, school integration was painfully slow, and segregation in general remained largely untouched.

In February 1960, four black college students sat down at a Woolworth's lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina, and asked to be served. They were refused service, and they refused to leave their seats. Within days, more than 50 students had volunteered to continue the sit-in, and within weeks the movement had spread to other college campuses. Sit‑ins and other protests swept across the South in early 1960, touching more than 65 cities in 12 states. Roughly 50,000 young people joined the protests that year.

The Election of 1960
By the 1960 presidential campaign, civil rights had emerged as a crucial issue. Just a few weeks before the election, Martin Luther King Jr. was arrested while leading a protest in Atlanta, Georgia. John Kennedy phoned his wife, Coretta Scott King to express his concern, while a call from Robert Kennedy to the judge helped secure her husband's safe release. The Kennedys' personal intervention led to a public endorsement by Martin Luther King Sr., the influential father of the civil rights leader.

Across the nation, more than 70 percent of African Americans voted for Kennedy, and these votes provided the winning edge in several key states. When President Kennedy took office in January 1961, African Americans had high expectations for the new administration.

But Kennedy's narrow election victory and small working margin in Congress left him cautious. He was reluctant to lose southern support for legislation on many fronts by pushing too hard on civil rights legislation. Instead, he appointed unprecedented numbers of African Americans to high-level positions in the administration and strengthened the Civil Rights Commission. He spoke out in favor of school desegregation, praised a number of cities for integrating their schools, and put Vice President Lyndon Johnson in charge of the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity. Attorney General Robert Kennedy turned his attention to voting rights, initiating five times the number of suits brought during the previous administration.

Civil Rights Movement | JFK Library

I'm not going to argue with someone white trying to tell me how we used to vote because they read something. I'm black, I know when, how and why blacks left the republican party. I know why we are not republicans now and probably won't be for the foreseeable future. I know that King was not republican and certainly would not be republican now.

When whites like you end their paternalism the end of racism will not be far behind.

​

I think you're chewing on Ebola flavored propaganda there.. Seriously doubting the accuracy of that quote or it's timing...

In fact, MLK was INVITED TO SPEAK at the GOP platform committee for that 64 convention...,

When Martin Luther King Jr. spoke at a GOP convention in S.F.

 

[AveryJarhman]

I think you're chewing on Ebola flavored propaganda there.. Seriously doubting the accuracy of that quote or it's timing...

I'm not seeing quotation marks in the MLK image my good friend IM2 shared.

Peace.