The Nation: Kirk called MLK an “awful person”, mocked the assault on Pelosi’s husband”, etc

I hate these lefties and their stupid articles. i did not like this article. I encourage everyone not to read The Nation for disrespecting Charlie Kirk:

you stand in support all of that stuff attributed to kirk, then hide behind an avatar of greatness that changed your neck of the woods from the "old south" to the south it is today in the hopes it will fool others into thinking you changed with it.
 
you stand in support all of that stuff attributed to kirk, then hide behind an avatar of greatness that changed your neck of the woods from the "old south" to the south it is today in the hopes it will fool others into thinking you changed with it.
The commie from Conyers is a fraud. Just trash it whenever possible.
 
I'm taking a guess here, but I don't think you kept the same standard you're presenting for MLK when the accused was an orange guy in a suit. I'm sure you gave those women instant credibility. Also, infidelity has to make sense? If it "makes sense", does your opinion of MLK change?
Could it be because we heard it from the actual women's mouths and a couple even sued.
 
Could it be because we heard it from the actual women's mouths and a couple even sued.

So, accusations are good enough for you? I said if they came out and accused MLK, would you believe them? Your response was it depends. At least try and appear to be consistent. I'm going to take that as a no. Because if accusations are good enough for Trump, then it's good enough for MLK. Then again, someone brought up Dorothy Cotton back in 2019, and you went hard defending MLK.
 
Charlie had three things in common with mlk.

1)Both we're very effective, MLK at public speaking and Charlie at debating. Effective for the same reason: both were speaking simple truths.

Their adversaries tried to overcome their simple truths with sophistry, word salads and stubborn refusal to accept the obvious.

2) Both faced adversaries who were primarily Democrats.

3) Both were murdered by individuals who were part of a larger group that hated and feared their truths.
 
So, accusations are good enough for you? I said if they came out and accused MLK, would you believe them? Your response was it depends. At least try and appear to be consistent. I'm going to take that as a no. Because if accusations are good enough for Trump, then it's good enough for MLK. Then again, someone brought up Dorothy Cotton back in 2019, and you went hard defending MLK.
How many black women have sued Dr King in a Court of Law?

You keep talking in hypotheticals, produce these women you claim were kicking it with him.
 
How many black women have sued Dr King in a Court of Law?

You keep talking in hypotheticals, produce these women you claim were kicking it with him.
Ummmm, he died before any could you dipshit. Had been alive today there's no doubt he would have been sued.
 
When it comes to Dr King and women, all we hear is hearsay. So and so said Dr King was with a lot of women, why haven't we ever heard from any of these women?
Why would you? The women were for the most part prostitutes. He liked blonde white women. Why would a prostitute come forward? He paid all of them.
 
15th post
He did, her name was Dorothy Cotton.
I have not heard that. He was such a slime ball it was hard to imagine any woman having more than a commercial interest.
HIs parties were legendary.


 
Sorry but MLK was a truly awful person.
What some people, especially the woke puritans of today, cannot come to grips with is that people have flaws, but they can still be great in other areas. In the area of civil Rights and fighting for equality, MLK Jr was a great man. We can still honor him for the good and meaningful things he did, while still acknowledging his faults.

In the Me Too, cancel culture of the left, MLK would have been savaged during his time. I'm surprised the left have no torn down all his statues because they found flaws in his character.
 
Back
Top Bottom