Editor's Choice

A poignant anniversary

A poignant anniversary

The 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, and of the Reverend Martin Luther King’s memorable “I have a dream” speech, is a time for reflections — some inspiring, and some painful and ominous.

At the core of Dr. King’s speech was his dream of a world in which people would not be judged by the color of their skin, but by “the content of their character.”

Judging individuals by their individual character is at the opposite pole from judging how groups are statistically represented among employees, college students or political figures.

Yet many — if not most — of those who celebrate the “I have a dream” speech today promote the directly opposite approach of group preferences, especially those based on skin color.

How consistent Martin Luther King himself was as he confronted the various issues of his time is a question that can be left for historians. His legacy to us is the “I have a dream” speech.

What was historic about that speech was not only what was said but how powerfully its message resonated among Americans of that time, across the spectrum of race, ideology and politics. A higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted in Congress for both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

To say that that was a hopeful time would be an understatement. To say that many of those hopes have since been disappointed would also be an understatement.

There has been much documented racial progress since 1963. But there has also been much retrogression, of which the disintegration of the black family has been central, especially among those at the bottom of the social pyramid.

Many people — especially politicians and activists — want to take credit for the economic and other advancement of blacks, even though a larger proportion of blacks rose out of poverty in the 20 years before 1960 than in the 20 years afterwards.

But no one wants to take responsibility for the policies and ideologies that led to the breakup of the black family, which had survived centuries of slavery and generations of discrimination.

Many hopes were disappointed because those were unrealistic hopes to begin with. Economic and other disparities between groups have been common for centuries, in countries around the world — and many of those disparities have been, and still are, larger than the disparities between blacks and whites in America.

Even when those who lagged behind have advanced, they have not always caught up, even after centuries, because others were advancing at the same time. But when blacks did not catch up with whites in America, within a matter of decades, that was treated as strange — or even a sinister sign of crafty and covert racism.

Civil rights were necessary, but far from sufficient. Education and job skills are crucial, and the government cannot give you these things. All it can do is make them available.

Race hustlers who blame all lags on the racism of others are among the obstacles to taking the fullest advantage of education and other opportunities. What does that say about the content of their character?

When the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was pending in Congress, my hope was that it would pass undiluted, not because I thought it would be a panacea but, on the contrary, because “the bitter anticlimax that is sure to follow may provoke some real thought in quarters where slogans and labels hold sway at the moment.”

But the bitter anticlimax that did follow provoked no rethinking. Instead, it provoked all sorts of new demands. Judging everybody by the same standards was now regarded in some quarters as “racist” because it precluded preferences and quotas.

There are people today who talk “justice” when they really mean payback — including payback against people who were not even born when historic injustices were committed.

The nation has just been through a sensationalized murder trial in Florida, on which many people took fierce positions before a speck of evidence was introduced, basing themselves on nothing more than judging those involved by the color of their skin.

We have a long way to go to catch up to what Martin Luther King said 50 years ago. And we are moving in the opposite direction.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.

Sign Up
  • AgTrotter

    When self-loathing white liberals like Margaret Carlson claim that race relations are worse today than 50 years ago, it offers us a sad glimpse into the mental illness that is liberalism. It’s too bad that Dr. King is not still with us to give a second version of his famed speech aimed squarely at white liberals and black race-baiters.

  • Kent_Pittsburgh

    Let’s not allow the present administration and its racist friends take away from celebrating MLK and one of the greatest speeches ever. Listen to it in its entirety: he was talking about everyone.

    Martin Luther King Jr, Abraham Lincoln, and George Washington represent sea changes in America for each of three centuries. All three were gifts from God to this country.

    Don’t let anyone take that away.

    http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/08/-i-have-a-dream-speech-full-text–93226.html

  • rebelyell4

    Again with the semantics. A wonderful tactic. Though in my simple conservative mind, there are no progressives from the right. Anything or anyone that is “progressive” is a danger to conservative beliefs and either a socialist or more likely a communist without admitting it.
    To accept folks like McCain as being from the right is very dangerous indeed. It is much the same as not admitting that terrorism exists and the failure to put the correct label on our enemies will cloak them from view. Identify them correctly and you won’t have to look for ways to defend them.

  • rebelyell4

    If you’ll leave out the totalitarian Mr. Lincoln, I’ll take the other two. Lincoln destroyed our Constitution. The basic belief before Lincoln was that the states created the union for their convenience and common defense. Basically they were of the belief that it was an organization they were allowed to leave. There is no “punishment” assigned in the Constitution for those who do not wish to be in the union.
    The states thought they were in charge and had rights. Mr. Lincoln didn’t save the union, he created a monopoly of power for the federal government. Recent events have shown that since Lincoln the workings of our government have been geared towards making the president the single most powerful person in the nation. All the checks and balances are now gone and Mr. Lincoln would be proud of his achievement.
    The single item that held our original union together was a wish to be together. Now it would rather be apart in many areas of the country and the feelings toward that attitude grow stronger the more power lands at the executive.
    No; Mr. Lincoln was no hero. He was a dictator and created the dictatorship we see today.

  • Dustoff

    Wow… what a strongly worded retort. You still didn’t touch on the fact. It’s an opinion piece and nothing more

  • therealguyfaux

    When the unspoken message from liberals re: the King speech is, in effect, “Hey, he wasn’t REALLY serious about all that ‘content-of-character’ jive, that was all just window dressing,” you have to wonder what that says about them and their devotion to the cause of Dr King, assuming they ever really had any.

    Their best rhetorical shot appears to be “How dare you quote King’s words!” as if we were the proverbial Devil-quoting-scripture, who lack any moral authority to quote him. To which tactic I usually retort, “How dare you ignore and betray them by your actions!”, telling them they have no moral authority to claim him.

    Make no mistake. Had he lived, King would have continued to agitate for a conception of social justice most if not all on the Right would have found uncongenial. He may not have morphed into Professor Sowell. But one cannot dispute that, absent his murder to have occurred, there wouldn’t have been as much racial cynicism as his murder engendered, which is where we are today. One assumes he would have sternly advised (however hypocritically perhaps with respect to his private life) the necessity of blacks to uphold their part of the civil-rights bargain and continue to work on raising the content of their characters– possibly eventually becoming almost more of a Malcolm X figure, a man whose advice to the black community (and to the white as well) was to inspect your basic assumptions about race relations, and for the black people of this land to take responsibility to improve their own lot, and not go shufflin’ to Marse all the time, just playing games, letting the HNIC’s conduct shakedowns that enrich only themselves and the duBois 10% at the expense of the black community.

  • Borghesius

    And an opinion piece from “Mother Jones” no less.

    I found a glowing one page feature on the original Mother Jones in our homeschooled cousin’s common core approved history textbook and nearly choked, then spent about 10 minutes of quick and easy liberal bomb disarmament. Liberalism relies on imposed ignorance.

  • publius

    Booker T Washington’s autobiography, “Up From Slavery,” was a poignant expression of his struggle to help others overcome dire circumstances to become self reliant and rugged individualists. Today’s so called “black leaders” and liberal white politicians are more interested enslaving blacks than liberating them. They are indeed the new slave masters determined to maintain a permanent underclass to justify their socialist agenda. They have no shame.

  • The_Heretic70

    I daresay, those race-baiters who find racism in everything are going to create racists out of people who otherwise would not be. They are promulgating a race war by creating racists. Not racists that hate blacks, racists that hate race-baiters and racist thugs.

  • The_Heretic70

    Of course liberalism relies on ignorance and propaganda. Those stupid and/or gullible enough to believe are called constituents.

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    “We have a long way to go to catch up to what Martin Luther King said 50 years ago. And we are moving in the opposite direction.” And “thinkers” like Mr. Sowell are working diligently to see that it keeps moving that way.

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    I would encourage you to read his last speeches beginning with the Riverside Church address in April 1967. The meme of personal responsibility makes no sense in an unjust society living under an unjust economic system waging unjust wars around the world.

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    Lincoln made a colossal and costly mistake by not permitting the southern states to secede. No doubt we would have had some skirmishes over westward expansion between the Union and Confederacy but they would have probably been small by comparison to the bloody Civil War.

    The result would have been two nations on this continent, one conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal, and another conceived in slavery and dedicated to the proposition that some men are merely animals. I doubt the latter would have survived long.

    What Lincoln did do, probably inadvertently, was pave the way for modern corporate capitalism through the massive industrialization required for the war. He created a power center in the steel, railroad and other industries that the government was no longer able to control.

  • Cranios

    Reagan said that, not GWB. GWB was communication impaired and could not have said something that eloquent.

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    You might need to convince the 80% of blacks who think the nation is still racist as well. That might be more difficult. (recent CBS News poll). The mental illness here is the denial of the obvious by conservatives who are unwilling to examine the inevitable results of their policies.

  • AgTrotter

    And, what policies might those be? Never mind your obvious confusion of Conservative versus GOP policies, I would still ask which GOP policies are you referring to? Or, are you merely being intellectually lazy and parroting the MSM meme?

  • AgTrotter

    Actually, I believe Michael Gerson was the first to coin the phrase. Of course, he coined it in a speech prepared for President Bush. Don’t fall into the left’s stereotype of Bush being communication impaired. Compared to President Umm/Uh, he was a tremendous orator.

  • leenimela@yahoo.com

    Thomas Sowell’s comments should be read, and reread, in schools throughout our country, but never will. He makes too much sense for the schools, inundated with liberal teachers who care more about pensions than teaching, to try and implement real standards that reflect what is actually being learned. It
    is not all teachers, to be fair, but a majority of them, relying on a tenure system that does not reward success in the classroom.

    Where do we find people who truly care, as
    Martin Luther King did, about every child getting the best, useful education
    that will encourage them to be the best they can be? Wherever they are,
    please step to the front, and lead.

  • AgTrotter

    “And “thinkers” like Mr. Sowell are working diligently to see that it keeps moving that way.”
    Sorry, but I must call bull-reid on that statement. Unless you are asserting that by pointing out the obvious is somehow to blame, you have wrongly libelled Dr. Sowell.

  • AgTrotter

    “The result would have been two nations on this continent, one conceived in liberty”

    So, you’re claiming that the nation that committed the overt violation of liberty would have been the nation of liberty? Okay, gotcha. Whew.

  • Cranios

    Actually, neither of us is correct, it turns out. I remembered Reagan saying it before there was a President Bush, but after 30 years I had failed to realize that what Reagan actually said was “the soft tyranny of low expectations” which was then parroted by Bush (with one word changed). So it was hardly a unique turn of phrase by the time Bush said it.
    I voted for GWB, twice. I don’t think he is a bad guy, but he didn’t ever try to explain what he was doing, or why, which is a critical failure for a leader. Especially is a failure if what you’re doing is controversial, which his actions were. Remember that GWB paved the way for President Obozo, who only had to run as “I’m not Bush” to win office. We still don’t know the full cost of GWB’s legacy. Ironically, BO is correct when he blames Bush for disaster, because we wouldn’t have our biggest disaster (Obama) if it hadn’t been for GWB.

  • AgTrotter

    The “soft tyranny” phrase actually stemmed from Moynihan.

    BTW, how can one be wrong by being right? Words mean something, however nuanced the differences.

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    One of them was systematically denying liberty to hundreds of thousands of people, remember? That was the overt violation of liberty. States don’t have liberty, they can merely protect it or destroy it.

  • Cranios

    “We’ll have those [n-words] voting for us for the next 200 years!”
    - Lyndon Baines Johnson,
    architect of the Great Society, and successor to the one who had MLK Jr under surveillance (i.e., Jack Kennedy)

  • AgTrotter

    So, Lincoln’s complete denial of Constitutional liberty meant nothing? Again, okay.

  • Torcere

    ‘Never Heard of That’: College Students Unaware of Chris Lane Murder — But They Know About Trayvon Martin
    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/08/27/never-heard-of-that-college-students-unaware-of-chris-lane-murder-but-they-know-about-trayvon-martin/
    Many students are informed about the Trayvon Martin shooting, but unaware about last week’s murder of Australian student Chris Lane, a new YouTube video uploaded on Tuesday appeared to reveal.

    In the video, Caleb Bonham, a video reporter for Campus Reform, asked students at the University of Colorado — Boulder for their thoughts on both the Trayvon Martin shooting and murder of Australian student Chris Lane.

    Students question Obama’s statement on Trayvon Martin, silence on Chris Lane shootings
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=5p4Bw9SOQVw

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    That was a consequence of his decision to start a war. It was certainly wrong and he should be condemned for it, however was it as gross a violation of human liberty as slavery? I think not.

  • Cranios

    “BTW, how can one be wrong by being right?” Fair question. The only sense in which you were wrong was saying that this clever idea was first uttered by GWB. It’s pretty clear that he lifted the idea from Reagan (or Moynihan or whoever), changing only one word. To use an example, I could say “Soft! What light through yonder window shines” and claim it as an original, poetic creation – but it would still be a ripoff of Shakespeare. So yes, you were right about which President first used the exact phrase, but certainly the idea and thus also the phrase, was in no way original by the time he said it.

  • AgTrotter

    I don’t disagree with your last sentence. But, by admitting that the “northern” nation would have been born from a denial of freedom makes your “nation of liberty” statement completey meaningless. We’re not as bad as the next guy is a hardly a positive statement.

  • AgTrotter

    Not to be the ultimate provocateur, but if we are to quibble over the alleged borrowing of words, Dr. King’s speech would be at the top of the list.

  • Ackerjax

    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” – MLK
    Much Thanks to those like Thomas Sowell who still try to educate us all.

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    OK I would agree there.

  • Culture_Warrior

    It it utter nonsense that Dr. King would redirect blame “squarely at white liberals and black race-baiters.” It is true that de jure Jim Crow is gone and there is a growing black middle class. But there is still a huge racial divide between blacks living in poverty and the mainstream society.
    The right continues to make stuff up about how “race-baters” and “the liberals” are the root of today’s difficulties. That kind of self serving and misleading BS is intended to confuse the issue and redirect blame. The problem is much more complex with plenty of culpability to go around, left and right.
    If Republicans and conservatives are so much closer to the truth, why is it that blacks have fled the party? Why is it that Republican controlled states are trying to invoke voter suppression measures to limit their votes? Why does the GOP have such a bad reputation among blacks? Is it the race-baters? Nice try.

  • AgTrotter

    Wow, hysterical much? And yet, still no examples of GOP policies that supposedly have negatively impacted race relations. On the other hand, we have almost on a daily basis white liberals and minority race-baiters continuing to decry some ethereal increased racism. Okay, where is it coming from? To deny the damage that white liberals and minority race-baiters are doing to race relations is this country is to be willfully ignorant.

  • AgTrotter

    Don’t worry, Stan. CW has merely perfected the Cllintonesque technique of accusing others of doing what they in fact are doing. Note that CW doesn’t actually provide any substantive proof of what he/she/it is bloviating about.

  • Borghesius

    No, the meme of personal responsibility makes even more sense in an unjust society. Otherwise, there is no hope, we are trapped in a dystopia forever.

    Your motivation has to be what is good, not how the society does or doesn’t reward you.

  • Cranios

    I didn’t know that he had borrowed the phrase “I have a dream” but he could have. I think it was the words that came after it (what the dream was) that are generally thought of as being noteworthy, though. Of course, there’s nothing truly new under the Sun, nothing said that has not been said before, no matter who the orator is.

  • Cranios

    Exactly, Borg. Lots of people are born into adversity, through no fault of their own (which is unjust) and overcome it all to succeed… mostly through personal effort, also known as personal responsibility. Charles is quoting something he was told in college and never questioned, I’d guess.

  • jesus6667

    That is a Faux News statement.

  • jesus6667

    Jesus is a liberal!

  • therealguyfaux

    Explain how MLK railing against the American war machine tells some black person that that black person cannot be righteous in his/her own life, because now the focus has been taken off the civil rights struggle and is now focused on the Vietnam war.

    At one point in the speech, King in effect says that it’s one thing to be a Good Samaritan and help those in need, but what is more important is that there be no need. I’ll hazard a guess and say you think that that comes about only by redistribution, where I might say that that comes about only when real economic opportunity, and not set-asides for poverty-pimp cronies (a crony system every bit as bad as the fixed crony-capitalist system), is developed in minority communities which make the effort to build them. We may be in conflict over this– you say A and I say B– but here is what King, in the Riverside Church speech, said about conflicts:

    “…[L]ife and history give eloquent testimony to the fact that conflicts are never resolved without trustful give and take on both sides…”

    Now if you can’t see that it takes a sense of personal responsibility for bettering their own situation, and for that of the world at large, for someone to engage in trustful give and take, I despair for your ability ever to achieve whatever it is you hope to accomplish in this world.

  • 21Palms

    DR. King is not with us today precisely because it became clear that had no intention of becoming a race hustler. His juniors like Jackson, Sharpton and the ilk as well as LBJ and the Democrats saw King as a threat to all they expected to accomplish through the ‘Great Society’ legislation.

    Jackson has a net worth in excess of $30M and he’s never done a productive day of work in his life. He wasn’t going let King screw that up.

  • 21Palms

    “Lots of people are born into adversity, through no fault of their own (which is unjust)”

    If it were unjust it could be addressed but it’s only unfair. That’s a big difference and impossible to address.

  • 21Palms

    Have you read Sowell’s “White Liberals and Black Rednecks.” Awesome history lesson.

  • 21Palms

    You sir must be a product of the public schools. What conservative policies could you possibly be referring to which have created the yawning chasm of despair which has swallowed the black community over the past 40 years.

  • Culture_Warrior

    How ironic that even right wing extremists today are willing to give lip service to grant MLK statesman status and how today he would turn his guns (pun intended) on “the race-baters.” The irony is, when he was still alive, the same extremists of his day used the same race-bater charge against him.

  • StanW

    Sorry CW, but that was the Liberal Democrats that were against King.

    You really need to learn how to tell the truth!

  • Culture_Warrior

    Sorry StanWad, different party, same extremist mentality.

  • popseal

    It’s a miracle, not a single day’s work was lost during the commemorative events.

  • Chris Behme

    The civil rights message of today : white people owe us.

  • Chris Behme

    For the race baiters like Sharpton, Jackson and Obama, the ‘debt of slavery’ must be repaid and repaid and repaid, but it can never ever be paid off.

  • Chris Behme

    I have a dream that blacks wake up and realize that voting for liberal Democrats is one of the biggest obstacles to their success.
    The democrat party exists to keep blacks “in their place”.

  • therealguyfaux

    The rule of thumb is that “fair” connotes even-handedness whether good or ill. The Government can oppress all its citizens in a fair and impartial manner, not favoring or disfavoring any one particular segment over another. Something tells me this is not the “fairness” we think we all would strive for.

    A government “fairly” oppressing all its people would nonetheless not be a just one. “Justice” connotes that one get what one deserves, again, good or ill, at least from the standpoint of the person on the receiving end. For you to receive no benefit from something you never contributed to is not unjust. For you to be punished for something you didn’t do is clearly unjust. It is the variations on those two statements about justice — converse, inverse, opposite, call them what you will– where the trouble lies. We’re all looking for a free lunch if we think we can get one. Since free lunches are never really “free,” it’s then a question of whether Joe Average next to you is paying as much for his lunch as you are for yours in some ultimate sense. That’s where the fairness comes in; is he being treated better than you without deserving to be? And who decides, and by what standard?

    Fairness and justice may be elusive concepts and trying to measure them properly (Fairly? justly? It begs the question) may be like trying to measure mass at the same time as velocity. Good Luck.

  • garysvent

    Only another 150 years to go!

  • Sweet

    And it’s mindless drones like you and your man-child president Maobama that are destroying it.

  • 21Palms

    Faux,

    You’ve done a masterful job of conflating the concepts of justice and fairness… and I mean that as a compliment. However, this trope does not serve anyone.

    I can agree with your suggestion that equal oppression is just but oppression is a ‘top down’ concept implying that government is a monolithic and entirely ‘just’ mechanism for achieving ‘fairness.’

    In reality government is an assembly of individuals with their own agendas. Some are sincere but all are corrupted by the leverage that such a concentration of power provides.

    Since “free lunches are never really free” as you say, shouldn’t we remove these levers of power from our relationships with each other and interact as free people with no encumbrances.

    20% of the black community rose above the poverty line prior to the “Great Society.’ Since then it’s been all down hill for them. Let’s let free people and free markets do the job without government skewing the relationships.

  • 2shinyshoes

    So impressive…not! Three Presidents, one who was a one term failure Peanut Farmer, another who was Impeached, and the third, a pathological Liar with a “King” complex. A full array of Psychotic men. And all those “adoring” racist followers. Really gives one pause…..

  • 2shinyshoes

    It’s sad that Sen.Robert Byrd wasn’t here to give a Speech to the Crowd. He could really formulate the difference between the 50s and 60s, and how fortunate, yet ungrateful the masses are with their Opportunities they have now, yet choose to suck off the system. Generation, after generation. Why didn’t they have Dr. Ben Carson speak, or Alan West? Because, they tell the truth, and set an example of what hard work can do. Pathetic “celebration”, all brought on by the zimmerman trial.

  • myrna652

    My Uncle Tristan just got an almost new Audi TTS Coupe by working part time online… navigate to these guys w­w­w.K­E­P­2.c­o­m

  • Toastertreat

    There is no such thing as right wing extremism. That is a projection of the left. Conservatives are merely holding steady against the onslaught of subversive progressives. There is nothing extreme in that. It’s rather more heroic.

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    No, I didn’t miss that irrelevant piece of information. I lived in the deep south back then and am quite aware that the Democratic Party was dominated by segregationists. I am also aware that after the passage of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, Republicans made a strong and successful bid to extract those segregationist voters away from the Democrats who had betrayed them. If we are going to discuss history, let’s discuss all of it.

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    I think you can very easily compare the number of Americans in poverty and the levels of income disparity in America during the administration of our last liberal President (Nixon), and those today to see that conservative policies have failed miserably.

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    The operative term here is “both sides”. If one side is blamed and upbraided for its lack of “personal responsibility” and the other side ignores the systemic failures that are the root causes of their poverty, then we cannot resolve anything.

    King wisely said “There are forty million poor people here, and one day we must ask the question, ‘Why are there forty million poor people in America?’ And when you begin to ask that question, you are raising a question about the economic system, about a broader distribution of wealth. When you ask that question, you begin to question the capitalistic economy. And I’m simply saying that more and more, we’ve got to begin to ask questions about the whole society…And you see, my friends, when you deal with this you begin to ask the question, ‘Who owns the oil?’ You begin to ask the question, ‘Who owns the iron ore?’ You begin to ask the question, ‘Why is it that people have to pay water bills in a world that’s two-thirds water?’ These are words that must be said.”

    And, “Now, when I say questioning the whole society, it means ultimately coming to see that the problem of racism, the problem of economic exploitation, and the problem of war are all tied together. These are the triple evils that are interrelated.”

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    Personal responsibility is good, but we cannot cure poverty or racism or imperialism through personal actions. Some problems cannot be surmounted by individual effort and we need to address them as a community, society and nation before we complain that our neighbor isn’t being responsible enough.

  • globalcrap

    Type in Chicago murders 2013.

  • globalcrap

    Not enough “Free Stuff”" from the American party.

  • Borghesius

    Community, society, nation actions are the sum of individual actions. Think globally, act locally. If there is not the ethos of responsibility, the culture as a whole will reflect that, unless you can get a strong enough leader to drag opinion his/her way.

    MLK was that kind of leader. BHO isn’t.

  • Borghesius

    Water bills with 2/3′s water: the water has to be made potable, and transported to the right place.

    Perhaps King’s answer is related to his status as a minister, were Jesus’s call was to ALL people. The triple evils are all interrelated, and all related to the lack of love for your fellow man (inclusive). You will not resolve the systematic failures if you don’t address this. It is the root cause.

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    It’s a conundrum. Systemic failures COULD be fixed if those who run the system had a moral conversion and decided that the health of the community and nation were more important than their profits, but that is a utopian dream. It is asking the very people who benefit most from the system to do something counter to their own self-interest. The message of Jesus has never been adopted by ALL people, not even by many Christians. If the people who do love their fellow men and women rise up and through the agency of democratic government force those who persist in supporting the system that fails the majority, they might be successful.

  • ITTTY IT

    —-From MLK’s genuine figure
    ———-to the Tavistock engineered
    —————-’Cosby Show’ FAKE OUT
    ———————CFR Globalist front
    ————————————–’Presidency’. . .

  • 21Palms

    My lord Charles what a case of selective memory. Our last ‘liberal’ president was Clinton and he was handed a boom economy on a platter from Reagan.

    The salient point in this conversation is that liberal intervention destroyed the black community while it enriched a handful Democrat operatives.

  • http://democracylover.blogspot.com Charles D

    Liberal presidents don’t end welfare or pass NAFTA agreements. Those are conservative policies.

    As for your salient point, I cannot even imagine a program where government hands out money to businesses or organizations and expects them not to enrich their leaders with it. Whatever negative you can say about the Great Society (and you could say a lot), the plight of the poor in the mid-1970′s was a heck of a lot better than it is today after 3 decades of conservative economic policy.

  • ITTTY IT

    —From MLK
    ————–to this current
    —————–CFR front op
    ——————–’Cosby Show’
    —————————-FAKE OUT ‘Presidency’.

    This is the 11th hour.

    REALLY