Hey Ops, you're asking someone to address someone else's WORDS when you're unwilling to address Nixon's ACTIONS. It's too damned easy to remain comfortable in that cocoon of hate than to step outside it and realize that the 'Racist GOP' did more for blacks in the 60's and 70's than LBJ and his 'Great Society'.
MLK was a registered Republican.
Ok, those "words" were from Lee Atwater who was: Harvey LeRoy "Lee" Atwater (February 27, 1951 – March 29, 1991) was an American political consultant and strategist to the Republican Party.
He was an advisor of U.S. Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush and Chairman of the Republican National Committee. I think that's a PRETY CREDIBLE CITATION. The next citation was from;
Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman. The next one was from Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele. What's wrong with those citations?
Which MLK are you referring to and where's your proof? That said, I wouldn't doubt if he was a republican when he had to face the southern democrat bigots of his time.
Let's address those "good things" about Nixon;
"Richard Nixon kicked off his historic comeback in 1966 with a column on the South (by this writer) that declared we would build our Republican Party on a foundation of states rights, human rights, small government and a strong national defense, and leave it to the “party of Maddox, Mahoney and Wallace to squeeze the last ounces of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice.”
In that ’66 campaign, Nixon – who had been thanked personally by Dr. King for his help in passing the Civil Rights Act of 1957 – endorsed all Republicans, except members of the John Birch Society.
In 1968, Nixon chose Spiro Agnew for vice president. Why? Agnew had routed George (“Your home is your castle!”) Mahoney for governor of Maryland but had also criticized civil-rights leaders who failed to condemn the riots that erupted after the assassination of King. The Agnew of 1968 was both pro-civil rights and pro-law and order.
When the Â’68 campaign began, Nixon was at 42 percent, Humphrey at 29 percent, Wallace at 22 percent. When it ended, Nixon and Humphrey were tied at 43 percent, with Wallace at 13 percent. The 9 percent of the national vote that had been peeled off from Wallace had gone to Humphrey.
Between 1969 and 1974, Nixon – who believed that blacks had gotten a raw deal in America and wanted to extend a helping hand:
•raised the civil rights enforcement budget 800 percent; (Isn't that more "big government"?
•doubled the budget for black colleges;
( Isn't that supporting racial hiring quotas that you republicans seem to rail against on a daily basis??) 
I hear PLENTY of mordern day republicans crying about this on a daily basis.
•appointed more blacks to federal posts and high positions than any president, including LBJ;
( Isn't that supporting racial hiring quotas that you republicans seem to rail against on a daily basis??) 
I hear PLENTY of modern day republicans crying about this on a daily basis.
•adopted the Philadelphia Plan mandating quotas for blacks in unions, and for black scholars in colleges and universities;
( Isn't that supporting racial hiring quotas that you republicans seem to rail against on a daily basis??) 
I hear PLENTY of modern day republicans crying about this on a daily basis.

[/B]
•invented “Black Capitalism” (the Office of Minority Business Enterprise), raised U.S. purchases from black businesses from $9 million to $153 million, increased small business loans to minorities 1,000 percent, increased U.S. deposits in minority-owned banks 4,000 percent;( Isn't that supporting racial hiring quotas that you republicans seem to rail against on a daily basis??) [/B]

I hear PLENTY of modern day republicans crying about this on a daily basis.
•raised the share of Southern schools that were desegregated from 10 percent to 70 percent. Wrote the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights in 1975, “It has only been since 1968 that substantial reduction of racial segregation has taken place in the South.”
Aren't modern day republicans against such "quotas"???