• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Black History Month [W:34]

Status
Not open for further replies.
I see, you are just going to deflect by posting images.
Figures.
 
Interview after Release from Georgia State Prison at Reidsville

Author:
King, Martin Luther, Jr.

Date:
October 27, 1960


"On 26 October, Massachusetts senator and presidential candidate John F. Kennedy telephoned Coretta Scott King from Chicago and expressed his concern about her husband's imprisonment.

Kennedy's brother and campaign manager Robert initiated a series of calls to Georgia officials, including Judge J. Oscar Mitchell, reportedly to inquire into King's right to bail. The following day, King was released on a $2,000 appeal bond after eight days imprisonment.

In this interview, King concedes that Kennedy “served as a great force in making my release possible.” While King maintained a nonpartisan stance in the presidential race, his father publicly announced he was switching his support from Nixon to Kennedy in light of the Democratic candidate's call to his daughter-in-law.
This transcript is drawn from television news footage.

[King]: I understand from very reliable sources that Senator Kennedy served as a great force in making the release possible. ...

[Film shows King's release from the Georgia State Prison at Reidsville]

[Interviewer]: Dr. King, have you heard anything from Vice President Nixon or any of his supporters?

[King]: No I haven't. I've been confined for the last eight days and I haven't talked with anybody actually from Washington or from the campaign[SUP].[/SUP]

[Interviewer]: Do you know whether any efforts were made on behalf of the Republican headquarters to help you?

[King]: No I don't. I haven't heard of any efforts being made and I don't know of any personally.

[Interviewer]: Do you know of any efforts made on behalf of the Kennedy group?

[King]: Well, I understand that the Kennedy group did make definite contacts and did a great deal to make my release possible. I don't know all of the details of this just coming out of [gap in film]
[Interviewer]: [words inaudible] urge you to vote for Kennedy?

[King]: Well, I would not like to make a public statement concerning the person for whom I will vote because I follow a non-partisan course and heading a non-partisan organization, namely the Southern Christian Leadership Conference [film interrupted]


<cont>
 
<cont>


[SUP]1.[/SUP] Coretta Scott King later recalled that Kennedy had said: "I want to express to you my concern about your husband. I know this must be very hard for you. I understand you are expecting a baby, and I just wanted you to know that I was thinking about you and Dr. King. If there is anything I can do to help, please feel free to call on me" (My Life With Martin Luther King, Jr., p. 196).


[SUP]2.[/SUP] Following King's release, Kennedy campaign headquarters confirmed Robert Kennedy's call to the judge but insisted that "any suggestion that interference was involved is untrue" (Charles Moore and Gene Britton, "King Freed on $2,000 Bond, Flies Home from Reidsville,"Atlanta Constitution, 28 October 1960; see also Bruce Galphin, “His Call Misinterpreted, Robert Kennedy Says,” Atlanta Constitution, 1 November 1960). For further discussion of Robert Kennedy's efforts on King's behalf, see Introduction, pp. 38–40.


[SUP]3.[/SUP] Harold Ross, owner of the Fulton Bonding Company, provided the money for King's release (John Britton, “Minister Flies Back to Atlanta From Reidsville,” Birmingham World, 2 November 1960).


[SUP]4.[/SUP] Moore and Britton, “King Freed on $2,000 Bond.” In a second interview, King acknowledged that he was “deeply indebted” to Kennedy for his help (King, Interview on John F. Kennedy's role in release from prison, 27 October 1960). For more on King and the presidential election, see King, Statement on Presidential Endorsement, 1 November 1960, and King to Ray A. Burchfield, 5 November 1960, pp. 537–540 and 542–544 in this volume, respectively.


[SUP]5.[/SUP] Following reports of Kennedy's role in King's release, Republican nominee Richard Nixon was criticized in some circles for his silence. Gloster B. Current, an NAACP official, commented at a conference that “Vice President Nixon may have thrown away a large segment of the Negro vote by his failure to speak out on the King arrest” (“NAACP Says Nixon Hurt in King Case,” Atlanta Constitution, 31 October 1960).

E. Frederic Morrow, the first African American appointed to an executive position in the White House, similarly recalled that Kennedy's phone call “won the election” and that the newly elected president “had keen, intelligent Negro advisers” that “he obviously listened to” (Morrow, Black Man in the White House [New York: Coward-McCann, Inc., 1963], p. 296)."


https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/...after-release-georgia-state-prison-reidsville
 
"King’s reluctance to take a formal stand was soon overshadowed, however, by Daddy King’s announcement that he had switched his allegiance to Kennedy,
despite his earlier concern that the candidate was Catholic. “I’ve got all my votes, and I’ve got a suitcase, and
I’m going to take them up there and dump them in his lap,” the elder King was quoted as saying.


Over the next several days, Kennedy campaign workers distributed thousands of flyers at black churches all
over the country contrasting “‘No Comment’ Nixon” with the “Candidate With a Heart.”

The pamphlet featured quotes from King, Abernathy--“it is time for all of us to take off our Nixon buttons”--as well as from
King’s wife and father.

These efforts among black voters may have given Kennedy his slim margin of victory
over Nixon on 8 November.

The following day the chairman of the Republican National Committee
explained that Nixon’s defeat came about because the party “lost the Negro vote by a larger percentage”
than in previous elections.

President Eisenhower grumbled that a “couple of phone calls” made the difference,
and the Atlanta Journal dubbed Judge J. Oscar Mitchell “president-maker.”

https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/vol5intro.pdf.
 
Paperview said:
"King’s reluctance to take a formal stand was soon overshadowed, however, by Daddy King’s announcement that he had switched his allegiance to Kennedy,
despite his earlier concern that the candidate was Catholic. “I’ve got all my votes, and I’ve got a suitcase, and
I’m going to take them up there and dump them in his lap,” the elder King was quoted as saying.


Over the next several days, Kennedy campaign workers distributed thousands of flyers at black churches all
over the country contrasting “‘No Comment’ Nixon” with the “Candidate With a Heart.”

The pamphlet featured quotes from King, Abernathy--“it is time for all of us to take off our Nixon buttons”--as well as from
King’s wife and father.

These efforts among black voters may have given Kennedy his slim margin of victory
over Nixon on 8 November.

The following day the chairman of the Republican National Committee
explained that Nixon’s defeat came about because the party “lost the Negro vote by a larger percentage”
than in previous elections.

President Eisenhower grumbled that a “couple of phone calls” made the difference,
and the Atlanta Journal dubbed Judge J. Oscar Mitchell “president-maker.”

https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/vol5intro.pdf.
Click to expand...
Still deflecting.
 
Paperview said:
Great opportunity to pull out a quote:

"The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism.

All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
Click to expand...
Still waiting for you to show the accuracy of the above characterization.
 
Excon said:
1. That does not say MLK was disappointed in Nixon.
Click to expand...
Actually, it clearly does.

As we are speaking about MLK Jr. you could at least endeavor to get the person being spoken about correct.
Click to expand...
This is one of the dumbest things I have ever seen you post, I sure as hell ain't talking about MLK Sr. or MLK III.
2. At no point did your article say MLK Jr. was disappointed, let alone "very disappointed".
Click to expand...

“I always felt that Nixon lost a real opportunity to express … support of something much larger than an individual, because this expressed support of the movement for civil rights in a way. And I had known Nixon longer. He had been supposedly close to me, and he would call me frequently about things, getting, seeking my advice. And yet, when this moment came, it was like he had never heard of me, you see.”

I would say that expresses deep disappointment, in light of their past relation....and again, in the context of not supporting him in '60 or '68.


3. Nothing you have provided refutes what I said.
Click to expand...
I can see that nothing will convince you of the fact that MLK was not a Republican after 1960.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Actually, it clearly does.
Click to expand...
Actually it doesn't.
As already pointed out, that is about MLK Jr., not MLK.


Gimmesometruth said:
This is one of the dumbest things I have ever seen you post, ...
Click to expand...
Your reply is right up there with the stupid **** I have seen you post.
Accuracy matters. Maybe you not realizing that is why your postings fail so many times.


Gimmesometruth said:
“I always felt that Nixon lost a real opportunity to express … support of something much larger than an individual, because this expressed support of the movement for civil rights in a way. And I had known Nixon longer. He had been supposedly close to me, and he would call me frequently about things, getting, seeking my advice. And yet, when this moment came, it was like he had never heard of me, you see.”​

I would say that expresses deep disappointment, in light of their past relation....and again, in the context of not supporting him in '60 or '68.
Click to expand...
What you think is irrelevant. It does not say that he was "disappointed" let alone "very disappointed", as I already told you.


Gimmesometruth said:
I can see that nothing will convince you of the fact that MLK was not a Republican after 1960.
Click to expand...
Oh great, another stupid reply.
Why are you trying to convince me about something that applies to someone I was not speaking about? Huh? Really, why?
Do you really not understand the stupidity of that?

Again; MLK was a Republican.


Gimmesometruth said:
Um, it is from his own AUTOBIOGRAPHY!

Good grief.

https://books.google.com/books?id=p...bs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=cow&f=false
Click to expand...
Ah, hello?
Why don't you follow this whole conversation to see exactly why your jumping into it with your absurd reply is stupid?

Again.
Excon said:
Yes it is black history that he said that.
The accuracy of it is in question though.
Click to expand...

Did you not understand that part where I acknowledged he said it?

So again; Still waiting for you to show the accuracy of the above characterization.
Do you not understand that someone can say anything they like whether it is accurate or not?
You really do not understand that?

So do you care to try and prove his characterization of what he said was accurate? Never mind, I already know you can't, just as the other person couldn't either.
 
Excon said:
Actually it doesn't.
As already pointed out, that is about MLK Jr., not MLK.
Click to expand...
Again, who in the hell do you think I am referring to? EVERYONE understands "MLK" refers to MLK Jr., not MLK Sr. or MKL III.


Your reply is right up there with the stupid **** I have seen you post.
Accuracy matters. Maybe you not realizing that is why your postings fail so many times.
Click to expand...
Yer gonna base a debate on the pedantic point that "Jr." was not included in references to the man? Gawd, that is REALLY dumb.


What you think is irrelevant. It does not say that he was "disappointed" let alone "very disappointed", as I already told you.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying YOU said anything, I said he was disappointed in Nixon, following up on the point of NOT being a Republican.


Oh great, another stupid reply.
Why are you trying to convince me about something that applies to someone I was not speaking about? Huh? Really, why?
Do you really not understand the stupidity of that?

Again; MLK was a Republican.
Click to expand...
Again, he wasn't after 1960, he never again supported a Republican after his disappointment with Nixon in 1960.

Ah, hello?Why don't you follow this whole conversation to see exactly why your jumping into it with your absurd reply is stupid?Again.Did you not understand that part where I acknowledged he said it?So again; Still waiting for you to show the accuracy of the above characterization.[/I][/FONT][/COLOR]Do you not understand that someone can say anything they like whether it is accurate or not?You really do not understand that?So do you care to try and prove his characterization of what he said was accurate? Never mind, I already know you can't, just as the other person couldn't either.
Click to expand...
Oh, your ambiguous language skills smacks up against your demands for total accuracy from us! So since you can't make clear what you MEANT even after you have seen a misunderstanding, I'm still required to guess on this "point" of yours. So I'm NOW assuming you expect us to PROVE that the "accuracy" of how MLK viewed the relation between the KKK, the GOP and the RW? Is that what you want, for us to decide if his view was 100% accurate?

PS, what are you doing to quotes of mine to cause them to NOT show up as a notification? If you know, knock it off, if you don't, I'll inform the mods.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Again, who in the hell do you think I am referring to? EVERYONE understands "MLK" refers to MLK Jr., not MLK Sr. or MKL III.


Yer gonna base a debate on the pedantic point that "Jr." was not included in references to the man? Gawd, that is REALLY dumb.


I'm not saying YOU said anything, I said he was disappointed in Nixon, following up on the point of NOT being a Republican.



Again, he wasn't after 1960, he never again supported a Republican after his disappointment with Nixon in 1960.

Oh, your ambiguous language skills smacks up against your demands for total accuracy from us! So since you can't make clear what you MEANT even after you have seen a misunderstanding, I'm still required to guess on this "point" of yours. So I'm NOW assuming you expect us to PROVE that the "accuracy" of how MLK viewed the relation between the KKK, the GOP and the RW? Is that what you want, for us to decide if his view was 100% accurate?

PS, what are you doing to quotes of mine to cause them to NOT show up as a notification? If you know, knock it off, if you don't, I'll inform the mods.
Click to expand...
He does that a lot.

I've seen other posters complain, and I myself have had it happen to me.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Again, who in the hell do you think I am referring to? EVERYONE understands "MLK" refers to MLK Jr., not MLK Sr. or MKL III.
Click to expand...
All you are saying is that accuracy doesn't matter to you when it comes to your side.


Gimmesometruth said:
Yer gonna base a debate on the pedantic point that "Jr." was not included in references to the man? Gawd, that is REALLY dumb.
Click to expand...
You are the one absurdly arguing against it being pointed out.
Fact: MLK is not MLK Jr. Get used to it.

Btw you know what is really dumb? Being a pedantic grammar nazi.


Gimmesometruth said:
I'm not saying YOU said anything, I said he was disappointed in Nixon, following up on the point of NOT being a Republican.
Click to expand...
An ignorant deflection in relation to what was said.

I clearly stated he did not say "disappointed" or "very disappointed" as you claimed, as I already told you.
Your claim is false.




Again, he wasn't after 1960, he never again supported a Republican after his disappointment with Nixon in 1960.

Oh great. You again don't pay attention to what you are replying and say something totally irrelevant to it.

Again.

Why are you trying to convince me about something that applies to someone I was not speaking about? Huh? Really, why?
Do you really not understand the stupidity of that?

Again; MLK was a Republican. ​


Gimmesometruth said:
Oh, your ambiguous language skills smacks up against your demands for total accuracy from us!So since you can't make clear what you MEANT even after you have seen a misunderstanding, I'm still required to guess on this "point" of yours.
Click to expand...
Oh look another dumb reply.
It was clear the moment I said it, and it has been clear each and every time I pointed it out.

All you are doing is deflecting from admitting that you can not show his characterization to be accurate.
 
Excon said:
All you are saying is that accuracy doesn't matter to you when it comes to your side.
Click to expand...
Who else do you think is being referenced? Yer being pedantic.


You are the one absurdly arguing against it being pointed out.
Fact: MLK is not MLK Jr. Get used to it.
Click to expand...
Yer being pedantic.

Btw you know what is really dumb? Being a pedantic grammar nazi.
Click to expand...
Using MLK to refer to Martin Luther King Jr. is not a matter of incorrect grammar, but using "a" in front of "evil" is a grammar issue. It reveals a deeper issue. Complaining about the truncation of MLK is just REALLY stupid.


An ignorant deflection in relation to what was said.

I clearly stated he did not say "disappointed" or "very disappointed" as you claimed, as I already told you.
Your claim is false.
Click to expand...
I never said that MLK said it, I said he was, as evident in his writings and actions.




Again, he wasn't after 1960,
Click to expand...
He wasn't what? Yer being ambiguous again.
he never again supported a Republican after his disappointment with Nixon in 1960.
Click to expand...
I said that...are you agreeing?

Oh great. You again don't pay attention to what you are replying and say something totally irrelevant to it.
Click to expand...
It is a counter to your claim he was a Republican, he was not after 1960.



Again; MLK was a Republican.
Click to expand...
Not after 1960.


Oh look another dumb reply.
It was clear the moment I said it, and it has been clear each and every time I pointed it out.

All you are doing is deflecting from admitting that you can not show his characterization to be accurate.
Click to expand...
It was accurate to himself, I have no idea what anyone is required to prove TO YOU.

PS, I'm going to ask the mods what you are doing to the VB code to avoid notifications. It is dirty pool, along with the fact that you want to avoid debate by doing so.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Who else do you think is being referenced? Yer being pedantic.
Click to expand...
MLK is not MLK Jr. That is not trivial detail. If folks are unable to get that correct they should be discussig this.

You should have acknowledged your error and moved on. But obviously you can't and have to keep absurdly arguing like you were not incorrect when clearly you were.

That issue and the continuance of it is all your fail. No one else's.

And btw, if I was going to be pedantic I would be using his name as it appears on his BC.


Gimmesometruth said:
Using MLK to refer to Martin Luther King Jr. is not a matter of incorrect grammar, but using "a" in front of "evil" is a grammar issue. It reveals a deeper issue. Complaining about the truncation of MLK is just REALLY stupid.
Click to expand...
Holy ****, not only a grammar nazi, but unable to comprehend as well. I didn't say the grammar nazi behavior applied to this argument about MLK vs MLK Jr., did I? Of course I didn't, yet obviously that is what you absurdly think.
How in the world you thought, "Btw you know what is really dumb? Being a pedantic grammar nazi.", somehow applied to the relevance of the accuracy between MLK and MLK Jr. is beyond rational thought. It is a sign of an inability to comprehend.

Hmmm? That inability may just be the reason why you couldn't understand that I was talking about the accuracy of his "characterization" even though it was clearly and repeatedly stated.


Gimmesometruth said:
I clearly stated he did not say "disappointed" or "very disappointed" as you claimed, as I already told you.
Click to expand...
I never said that MLK said it, I said he was, as evident in his writings and actions
Click to expand...
And again you show you are unable to follow or comprehend.
Do I really have to phrase "as you claimed" to "as you claimed he was" for you to be able to follow even though I clearly stated "as you were already told"?
Which of course to anybody who can follow and comprehend refers back to what you were already told in relation to the argument.
And what you were already told in relation to this argument was made in my first reply to you @post# 115.

1. That does not say MLK was disappointed in Nixon. As we are speaking about MLK Jr. you could at least endeavor to get the person being spoken about correct.
2. At no point did your article say MLK Jr. was disappointed, let alone "very disappointed".​

As to #1, acknowledge your error, stop ridiculously arguing otherwise and move on.
As to #2. Does that say you said he said it? Or does it say that the article you provided does not say that? I know the answer but apparently you don't by the reply I quoted.​

Then again in post #138 when I stated. "It does not say that he was "disappointed" let alone "very disappointed", as I already told you."
"It" being the information you provided.


Gimmesometruth said:
He wasn't what? Yer being ambiguous again. I said that...are you agreeing?
Click to expand...
Hilarious.
1. I have not been ambiguous in my replies at all. So you saying "again" is just more of your bs.
2. There is that comprehension problem again.
Clearly that sentence was yours, and that which followed it was the reply.

Yet somehow, even though you were able to recognize your words, you were unable to comprehend that I neglected to place the quote tags around them. Especially after reading what followed, as it reads as a reply to them. Doh!


Gimmesometruth said:
It is a counter to your claim he was a Republican, he was not after 1960.
Not after 1960.
Click to expand...
Wrong.
1. He was a Republican. That statement on it's own is accurate. Le long. Registered even.
2. Your statement that he was not after 1960 is nothing but an assumption, and as the definitive you made it out to be, is false.
Voicing support for a Democrat one time does not make one a Democrat.


Gimmesometruth said:
It was accurate to himself, I have no idea what anyone is required to prove TO YOU.
Click to expand...
This line of argumentation is nothing more than deflection, and also ignores what was said in that initial reply to another in which you chose to interject. It was a statement of fact that didn't require anybody to do anything at that point.

But no, some folks want to come along and absurdly interject and then the whole thing evolved into what followed.

So, to what it evolved into ...
It doesn't matter if it was accurate to himself or not.
Whether it is objectively accurate though is relevant. If you do not understand that, that is your failure.
 
Well since our no good Congress just past a bill to sue other nation's. I wonder who will sue us 1st for some of the horrors we have done in the past to people. How about we start with slavery. And I'm sure other nation's peoples would like to sue us for all kinds of wars we have been involved in. Congress just go home.
 
Jaygodmedia said:
Well since our no good Congress just past a bill to sue other nation's. I wonder who will sue us 1st for some of the horrors we have done in the past to people. How about we start with slavery.
Click to expand...

Good luck with suing over a legal institution. :lamo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom