August 28, 2013
MLK Celebration Was Just Sad: Everything You Once Thought Highly of Has Now Degenerated.
It's unclear who or what the assembled drones and droolers at today's autofornication festival represented, but it certainly wasn't Americans, African or otherwise. Under no circumstances can what was blathered today be thought of as a credit to the once noble and now nefarious "civil rights movement." Like so many other idealistic visions of its era it has now devolved and degenerated into a gelatinous slab of smarm and slime. I suppose that the best that can be said is that nothing said today will matter in another 50 years. Probably in another 50 months.
20,000 Currently Estimated at March on Washington, 100,000 Were Expected The original March on Washington was attended by anywhere from 250,000 to 1 million people. The "I Have a Dream" speech was attended by an estimated 200,000 Americans. By way of contrast, according to the Christian Science Monitor, somewhere between 78,000 and 96,000 attended Glenn Beck's 2010 rally on the Mall in Washington.
Sen. Tim Scott wasn’t invited to event commemorating MLK march on Washington | WashingtonExaminer.com Sen. Tim Scott, R.-S.C., the only African American serving in the United States Senate, wasn't invited to the event commemorating the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King's march on Washington, though a host of Democratic luminaries spoke on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.
When trying to evaluate the inner meaning of the African-American culture 50 years later, "Lowered Expectations" seems about right:
Posted by gerardvanderleun at August 28, 2013 4:59 PM
50 months from now? Forgotten before tomorrow.
"20,000 Currently Estimated at March on Washington, 100,000 Were Expected." -- That's because with the First Black Recovery President on the job, the typical black American can't afford even a bus ticket to get there.
I have a dream...Oh well, never mind.
It's coming down as just another Dem feel-good pep rally, and not much of one at that.
The question is now answered: How long does it take before a Crusade becomes a Racket?
And now I look forward to October-November.
As for MLK’s sexual activities, according to his own long-time lieutenant Ralph Abernathy, he did carry on with a great variety of women more or less continuously. He even was having a very audible sex session with a woman in his hotel room immediately after he delivered the “I have a dream speech,” while his confederates, gathered in the main room of the suite, heard the session going on.
That he behaved in such a manner on that historic day suggests a person who is seriously disordered.
On another occasion, which as I remember was just before his death, as told in Abernathy’s book, King got into sleazy arguments and physical fights with two different paramours on the same evening.
The evidence is established that MLK was not just a man who had an adulterous liaison here and there as he traveled around the country, living and working under tremendous stress, and an object of awe and admiration, a situation that will naturally present sexual temptations, but that he was spectacularly out of control in his sexual life.
A man who is spectacularly out of control in his sexual life is not a person who can properly be seen as a moral leader. Also there is evidence that King was aware of this darkness in himself, was deeply ashamed of it, but felt powerless to do anything about it, and let it continue to control him.
That's it Fred. He talked a very good talk, but like most of us, the walk just wasn't in him. What's left behind? They can't even talk the talk. God help us all.
I have a dream that someday MLK Blvd won't be the most dangerous street in every city.
Looking more and more like "Idiocracy" with each passing day.
A most excellent post-mortem Dr. V!
We DC'ers were told the day before to consider staying home from work or telecommuting. I laughed, shrugged, and came in. No crowds, no issues. I knew it was going to be a sad little bust, and I was right.
Obama's comparison of always horny, wild when unbridled and massively hypocritical Kang to Jesus is no surprise when on the other hand he also reveres Mao and Ho. Obama is as confused as a blind lesbian in a fish market but I don't doubt that he gets a tingle in his leg at the mere mention of their names, too.
King has survived solely as a name for blacks and self loathing whites to chant about, pray to and as a post upon which to hang black grievances. But, without a doubt King was no role model when he was alive and he's not one now, either. He is just a product of The Big Sell.
If Numbers is genuinely interested in an answer to his question, he should peruse Volume I & II of Murray Rothbard's "Conceived in Liberty" in which there are several examples given of settlements in the New World flourishing entrepreneurially with almost a complete absence of the hand of the state. The starkest example perhaps is the Pennsylvania colony from most of 1684 to 1688. (See Volume I, Ch 55 "The Holy Experiment": The Founding of Pennsylvania, 1681-1690, p. 402 ff) The governing Council left behind by William Penn in 1684, hardly met at all over that period, and even when it did, failed to pass any laws, or successfully raise taxes or rents for the furious absentee landlord. As Rothbard notes, "the reality must be faced that the new, but rather large, colony of Pennsylvania lived for the greater part of four years in a de facto condition of individual anarchism, and seemed none the worse for the experience."It's a great read. Here's one of my favourite bits: "A bit of government came in 1685, in the person of William Dyer as collector of the king's customs. But despite the frantic urgings of William Penn for cooperation with Dyer, Pennsylvanians persisted in their de facto anarchism by blithely and regularly evading the royal navigation laws." (p. 406)And in words that bring joy to my almost anarcho-capitalist heart, Rothbard writes: "And when this idyll came to an end in December 1688 with the arrival of a new deputy governor, appointed by Penn, the deputy governor "had difficulty finding the officers of the government. . . . [He] found the Council room deserted and covered with dust and scattered papers. ...""But was the colony hampered in its wealth creation by the de facto anarchism it experienced? Did the colony descend into bloodshed and lawlessness, to the peril of any honest conduct of business? It seems not. By 1690, for example, Philadelphia, founded in 1682, had in a few short years come from nowhere at all to rival New York "in trade and riches", as Governor Fletcher of (a far more intensely statist) New York conceded at the time. There are many other examples across world history of peoples creating peace and order AND wealth themselves in the absence, or de facto absence of a coercive state. The California goldfields in the early 1850s is another that springs to mind. See, for example, Anderson and Hill, 1978: "An American Experiment in Anarcho-Capitalism: The NOT So Wild Wild West". [That article was later expanded into a book: "The Not So Wild Wild West", 2004.]