Stealing Coretta
Conservatives are going batshit crazy because of this statement at the funeral for Coretta Scott King by Rev. Dr. Joseph Lowery :
We know now there were no weapons of mass destruction over there. [Standing Ovation] But Coretta knew and we know that there are weapons of misdirection right down here. Millions without health insurance. Poverty abounds. For war billions more but no more for the poor.
Pity the poor conservatives who hate being reminded that they’ve been on the wrong side of every civil rights struggle in our nation’s history. And in case there’s any doubt about whether these sentiments were in line with the beliefs of Mrs. King, here’s part of an interview she gave shortly before the Iraq war began :
BLITZER: Mrs. King, thank you so much for joining us. Let’s talk a little bit about the legacy of your husband. How much has the racial situation in our country improved since his death, if you believe, indeed, it has?KING: Yes, I think it certainly has improved tremendously, but we still have much more to be done. Martin defined the evils and the injustices in our society in three areas — poverty, racism and war. And he said that we cannot solve one problem without solving the other, working to solve the other one. And I think we have remnants of all of those. We’ve made some small progress in some areas more than others, but we still very much have poverty. We still very much have racism. And we still very much have a threat of war.
. . .
BLITZER: You raised the issue earlier of war. Where do you think [your husband] would come down on the whole issue of possibly going to war with Iraq?KING: You know, my husband always believed that there should be peaceful negotiations, and he believed in nonviolence. He was committed to it totally, and he believed that conflict should be handled through the United Nations, so strength in the United Nations, and let the United Nations take the leadership. And I believe that Martin would, if he were [alive] today — although I don’t normally speak for him, but I know what he was saying at the time of his death — is that war cannot serve any lasting good toward bringing about peace. If you use weapons of war to bring about peace, you’re going to have more war and destruction. You cannot have peaceful means — peaceful means will have to be used to bring about peaceful ends. If you use destructive means, you’re going to bring about destructive ends.
Face it conservatives, Coretta Scott King was a liberal. While civil rights heroes like the Kings were leading a non-violent struggle for equality, your political heroes were finding new ways to court southern racists away from the Democratic party. The Republican journey to victory was fueled by the votes of bigots, so it’s a little late in the game to start acting like you have the right to speak for the leaders of a movement you fought against.
14 comments
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Crowds Pay Respects to Coretta Scott King
Thousands of mourners filed past the casket of Coretta Scott King on Monday, paying their respects t
Trackback by Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator — February 8, 2006 @ 12:03 am
During one of the NPR broadcasts (All Things Considered?) of the memorial, they played a bit of Jimmy Carter speaking, in which he made mention of the government eavesdropping on MLK’s phone calls. Funny that I didn’t run across this in any of the other accounts I heard/read.
Comment by Siobhan — February 8, 2006 @ 10:33 am
NPR’s Juan Williams had some interesting observations about the funeral oratory. He actually found President Carter’s sniping political comments more troubling because they were not in the traditional vein of the “powerful word” that inheres in the religious conventions of the reverend’s faith. As President Clinton pointed out, “There’s a woman in that casket.”
Comment by Geggy — February 8, 2006 @ 10:35 am
Jinx!
Comment by Geggy — February 8, 2006 @ 10:41 am
This is so obviously wrong historically that it is laughable. Can anyone with even a cursory knowledge of our nation’s history truly believe this? I imagine it is possibile if one engages in a tortured bit of lefty redefinition and revisionism, which is I am sure what will follow.
Comment by El Blogero — February 8, 2006 @ 11:12 am
Are you serious? How can anyone argue otherwise? It has always been the Left and its predecessors fighting for social change, change that we now (almost) all look upon favorably. Racism, sexism, etc. – pick one, we’ve been fighting against it. And “lefty revisionism”? Boy, where to begin? Tell me how an antiwar social activist fighting against racism, war, and poverty was somehow conservative, or not liberal, or whatever it is you’re claiming.
Comment by Ben — February 8, 2006 @ 12:42 pm
Ben,
As predicatable as the sun rising from the east . . .
Thanks for playing to type and at least bringing some no-doubt-unintended humor to the day. The “anti-war social activist” element in that statement alone is priceless for its disregard or perhaps ignorance of history and war.
Comment by El Blogero — February 8, 2006 @ 1:35 pm
EB,
I don’t know which is worse: your ignorance or your arrogance. Either way, you’ve yet to make an actual argument, preferring to hide behind ad hominems and high-minded sneering. Therefore, it seems kinda pointless to continue. Do you have a reason why you disagree with what I’ve said? If not, then nothing can be accomplished here.
Comment by Ben — February 8, 2006 @ 1:57 pm
Please, El Blogero, we’d love for you to grace us with some examples to back up your assertion…
Comment by mona — February 8, 2006 @ 1:59 pm
Would you care to explain, then, the conservative roots of abolitionism, the labor movement, universal sufferage, civil rights, religious tolerance, and the current struggle for equal rights for gays and lesbians? And don’t pull the “Lincoln was a Republican” card either, “anyone with even a cursory knowledge of our nation’s history” knows that the dividing lines between the two main parties are hardly set in stone. This is an ideological discussion, not a partisan one.
Comment by greg — February 8, 2006 @ 2:17 pm
You guys are killing me with your self-parody. But then again, I did predict that you would engage in redefinition and revisionism.
Nonetheless, I will now return to my high-minded sneering, but thanks for giving me so much to sneer about.
Comment by El Blogero — February 8, 2006 @ 2:46 pm
Wow. I was going to mention that the abolitionist cause was taken up by our first Republican president – whether or not he qualified as a liberal. But that El Blogero just came jumping in with his fact-free shouting. Oof! Why do you have to be such a putz when you can simply make a point on the facts. That said, how do you like my new slogan for the DNC: “On the losing side of the civil war — AGAIN!”
Comment by Eric Farnsworth — February 8, 2006 @ 2:59 pm
It’s always amusing when the anti-elitist, anti-educated-liberal types pick out a word or phrase (such as “revisionism”) that they’ve been seeing a lot on the internets and try to use it in a sentence for themselves.
Big boy, now…BIG boy, now.
–Pere Ubu
Comment by freq flag — February 11, 2006 @ 8:56 pm
Excellent blog. This is my first time here, haven’t seen this one before but saved to my favorites. I can’t see McCain getting in. His last bid to run failed and it was “poof” his campaign ended. The press now reports that Hillary is dropping in the polls as folks think she is “too mean” when she acts agressive.
We have all noticed that the candidate that runs the most positive campaign always seems to win. Here are some examples.
Carter vs Ford Carter had positive message he won
Bush vs Carter Bush won (thousand points of light)
Clinton vs Bush Clinton way more positive with his campaign than Bush
Bush W runs again Gore Bush had more positive message he wins
Kerry vs Bush Kerry talks mostly about Vietnam and his voice reminds us of the donkey from Winnie the Pooh what’s his name “Eeore”? So Bush wins.
Just you wait and see you guys, whoever has the most positive message wins. Here’s another good site, it’s not a blog but it’s a non partisan pro America video page. Enjoy
http://www.turnyourspeakerson.com/powerofamerica.html
Comment by Chris — February 14, 2006 @ 12:30 pm