Just so I’m not misunderstood in this thread. Instead of removing a “contentious phrase” from the Martin Luther King Memorial remove the whole damned thing. Leaving it there brings the country one step closer to combing religion and government. That, in itself, is a violation of the First Amendment. Don’t expect members of Congress to remove it. They are all philosophically closer to theocratic government than they will ever be to the American people.
The monument turns King into an Oriental-looking white guy; so screw the black racists who are sure to crawl out from under their rocks over my comments. A CHINESE GUY DID IT!
The MLK Memorial is a national disgrace as is the federal holiday honoring King’s birth. Congress gave the country that one, too. Ronald Reagan opposed it but signed it in the face of a veto-proof majority in Congress. The problem then, and now, is that King was a street hustling preacher not much different than the rest of them except that he made the big time.
It’s no wonder Barack Taqiyya looks up to King. Preacher Taqiyya got to be president using some of King’s methods. Happily, few Americans bought his pathetic moralizing the way so many were fooled by King. Had King lived, I’m sure he never would have been able to sustain the image he cultivated. Throughout America’s history many Americans had no use for bible-thumping preachers, yet for some unknown reason the King spin machine got away with selling MLK as being different than bible-thumping race hustlers like Father Divine, Aimee Semple McPherson, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Jeremiah Wright.
The trouble with King is that he was a Christian preacher. Socialists/Communists and limousine liberals hate Christians; so why do they piss their pants at the mention of King’s name? Some actually have an organism whenever they hear the phrase “I have a dream.” Could it be racism? Put it in perspective this way:
Imagine how the Left would react if a holiday was named after Billy Graham or foreign-born Mother Cabrini; two Christians who did a lot more for this country than King ever did.
Bottom line: Nobody, black or white, whose only claim to fame is moralizing should be honored with tax dollar expenditures. If King’s admirers in the private sector want to worship him let them do so out of their own pockets —— AND NOT ON PUBLIC LAND.
NOTE: President Eisenhower’s proposed memorial is a design-disgrace; doubly so because it is not going to be on the National Mall:
If no one told me it is a memorial to Eisenhower, I never would have guessed it from these photos:
Putting Eisenhower’s name to a piece of nothing and calling it a memorial is nice work if you can get it. Dare I say this one is about money. The Gehry monstrosity:
Ike’s memorial is scheduled to open in 2017 if the opposition, including the Eisenhower family, can’t stop it.
Where was the ACLU when King’s Memorial was put on the National Mall? Liberals, usually led by the ACLU, scream bloody murder every time they find a Christian symbol in a government building, or on public land. King’s monument is the latter; so where is the Left’s outrage?
Even if King’s monument is dedicated to him as an individual rather than to his religion it does not belong on public land. Honoring individuals on public land should be restricted to individuals who contributed to all Americans. Before King, presidents and veterans were honored with a spot on the National Mall; so one would think members of Congress would want to stick with the tradition. King did not qualify. He was a dirty little moralist whose racist message was not as obvious as is Jeremiah Wright’s; nevertheless, it was racism wrapped in pretty words much like Barack Taqiyya’s campaign rhetoric.
Incidentally, Smithsonian Museums are located on the National Mall. I read a headline that said the Smithsonian will display Trayvon Martin’s hoodie. In the interest of fair and balanced, I suggest the knife Lorena Bobbitt used to cut off John’s pecker’s also be displayed. I would suggest the pecker itself, but I don’t think it is available.
Being a news story appears to be the Smithsonian’s only criterion. Bobbitt’s little blow for feminism was of national interest, while every television network turned the Zimmerman case into a national story. Had the networks not given the entire case so much coverage, it would have remained local news. I doubt if the Smithsonian would display any item reported in a local story.
Leader?
Nine out of ten stories about MLK refer to him as one of America’s greatest leaders. MLK was not a national leader by any stretch of the imagination. Leader implies he led the nation. He might have been a spiritual leader to some, but he was still an opportunistic street hustling preach to a substantial number of Americans. I suppose that will be forgotten in the fullness of time.
No preacher, or spiritual leader if you prefer, belongs on the National Mall because not a one of them leads everybody. Hell, King did not lead anywhere near a majority of Americans.
The only possible good that can come out of keeping King’s Memorial on the National Mall is that future visitors might compare him to the others who are honored there. Once the comparison is made the obvious question will be “What the hell did this guy ever do?”
Hypocrisy reigns supreme
Barack Taqiyya slobbered all over MLK’s memorial, but he objected to a prayer at the WWII Memorial —— a prayer by FDR no less!
I guess Barack Taqiyya only respects race hustlers like MLK and hate mongers like Jeremiah Wright.
Let me close by saying “I have a dream.” Call in the Army Corps of Engineers and dynamite that memorial out of existence.
The monument turns King into an Oriental-looking white guy; so screw the black racists who are sure to crawl out from under their rocks over my comments. A CHINESE GUY DID IT!
The MLK Memorial is a national disgrace as is the federal holiday honoring King’s birth. Congress gave the country that one, too. Ronald Reagan opposed it but signed it in the face of a veto-proof majority in Congress. The problem then, and now, is that King was a street hustling preacher not much different than the rest of them except that he made the big time.
It’s no wonder Barack Taqiyya looks up to King. Preacher Taqiyya got to be president using some of King’s methods. Happily, few Americans bought his pathetic moralizing the way so many were fooled by King. Had King lived, I’m sure he never would have been able to sustain the image he cultivated. Throughout America’s history many Americans had no use for bible-thumping preachers, yet for some unknown reason the King spin machine got away with selling MLK as being different than bible-thumping race hustlers like Father Divine, Aimee Semple McPherson, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Jeremiah Wright.
The trouble with King is that he was a Christian preacher. Socialists/Communists and limousine liberals hate Christians; so why do they piss their pants at the mention of King’s name? Some actually have an organism whenever they hear the phrase “I have a dream.” Could it be racism? Put it in perspective this way:
Imagine how the Left would react if a holiday was named after Billy Graham or foreign-born Mother Cabrini; two Christians who did a lot more for this country than King ever did.
Bottom line: Nobody, black or white, whose only claim to fame is moralizing should be honored with tax dollar expenditures. If King’s admirers in the private sector want to worship him let them do so out of their own pockets —— AND NOT ON PUBLIC LAND.
NOTE: President Eisenhower’s proposed memorial is a design-disgrace; doubly so because it is not going to be on the National Mall:
If no one told me it is a memorial to Eisenhower, I never would have guessed it from these photos:
Putting Eisenhower’s name to a piece of nothing and calling it a memorial is nice work if you can get it. Dare I say this one is about money. The Gehry monstrosity:
Ike’s memorial is scheduled to open in 2017 if the opposition, including the Eisenhower family, can’t stop it.
Where was the ACLU when King’s Memorial was put on the National Mall? Liberals, usually led by the ACLU, scream bloody murder every time they find a Christian symbol in a government building, or on public land. King’s monument is the latter; so where is the Left’s outrage?
Even if King’s monument is dedicated to him as an individual rather than to his religion it does not belong on public land. Honoring individuals on public land should be restricted to individuals who contributed to all Americans. Before King, presidents and veterans were honored with a spot on the National Mall; so one would think members of Congress would want to stick with the tradition. King did not qualify. He was a dirty little moralist whose racist message was not as obvious as is Jeremiah Wright’s; nevertheless, it was racism wrapped in pretty words much like Barack Taqiyya’s campaign rhetoric.
Incidentally, Smithsonian Museums are located on the National Mall. I read a headline that said the Smithsonian will display Trayvon Martin’s hoodie. In the interest of fair and balanced, I suggest the knife Lorena Bobbitt used to cut off John’s pecker’s also be displayed. I would suggest the pecker itself, but I don’t think it is available.
Being a news story appears to be the Smithsonian’s only criterion. Bobbitt’s little blow for feminism was of national interest, while every television network turned the Zimmerman case into a national story. Had the networks not given the entire case so much coverage, it would have remained local news. I doubt if the Smithsonian would display any item reported in a local story.
Leader?
Nine out of ten stories about MLK refer to him as one of America’s greatest leaders. MLK was not a national leader by any stretch of the imagination. Leader implies he led the nation. He might have been a spiritual leader to some, but he was still an opportunistic street hustling preach to a substantial number of Americans. I suppose that will be forgotten in the fullness of time.
No preacher, or spiritual leader if you prefer, belongs on the National Mall because not a one of them leads everybody. Hell, King did not lead anywhere near a majority of Americans.
The only possible good that can come out of keeping King’s Memorial on the National Mall is that future visitors might compare him to the others who are honored there. Once the comparison is made the obvious question will be “What the hell did this guy ever do?”
Hypocrisy reigns supreme
Barack Taqiyya slobbered all over MLK’s memorial, but he objected to a prayer at the WWII Memorial —— a prayer by FDR no less!
I guess Barack Taqiyya only respects race hustlers like MLK and hate mongers like Jeremiah Wright.
Let me close by saying “I have a dream.” Call in the Army Corps of Engineers and dynamite that memorial out of existence.
Last edited:
