Jan 16

How Obama Betrays Martin Luther’s King’s Dream

Tag: Global CommentarySage @ 4:46 pm

From American Thinker.Com

January 16, 2012

By George Picard

President Obama has mocked Martin Luther King by policies and actions that judge people by the color of their skin and not by the content of their character.

Martin Luther King, Junior’s “I Have A Dream Speech” was one of his more eloquent and moving speeches. His words have resonated with all Americans for the past five decades and will do so for many decades to come. Among his dreams was an America where his four children would be judged not “by the color of their skin but by the content of their character”

Of course, he was not just referring to his own children or to children at all. He meant to heighten the disgrace of racism by picturing innocent children as the victims. What he truly meant — as was made clear during the rest of his oration — was that his dream was that all people would “not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

The man who campaigned on the theme that there was no “white America” or “black America” has used his powers as President to practice identity politics on a scale never before seen in America. Barack Obama has overtly chosen top officials on the basis of their skin color and not on the content of their character. Moreover, he has enacted policies that overtly favor “people of color” over “people of pallor” regardless of the merits of the individuals impacted by his programs.

What were we expecting from a man whose moral compass was the race-baiting Pastor Jeremiah Wright, whose views of white people and America would have repulsed Martin Luther King, Jr.?

Has Barack Obama chosen the best people to run America — has he picked people in a color-blind way who would do best in helping all Americans or has he used a color filter to discriminate among candidates for office?

He chose Eric Holder to be our Attorney General, despite a controversial background involving the granting of a pardon by Bill Clinton to the ex-husband of a wealthy donor.  Holder became America’s first black Attorney General. The past three years have seen the Department of Justice tarnished by the Fast and Furious Scandal, incompetency involving whether to try terror suspect in civilian trials in New York City, the Department’s refusal to pursue a “lay-up” case involving violent voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party, and the transformation of the Civil Rights Division into a battering ram against businesses and banks on behalf of minorities.

Perhaps the latter dereliction of duty should not surprise us considering that Holder has amply displayed his own true feelings regarding America and how white people treat black people. He has called us a “nation of cowards” when it comes to discussions of race, has characterized criticism of Obama and himself as being a manifestation of racism since “we’re both African-Americans” and carries in his wallet a card containing language that Holder says represents his views that “there’s a common cause that bonds the black United States attorney with the black criminal.”  Was that a Never go To Jail Card for the New Black Panther Party members?

Holder’s record as Attorney General has been so disgraceful that a growing list of 60 Congressmen, two Senators, GOP presidential candidates and at least two sitting governors have called for his resignation. Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer has called him one of the most incompetent attorney generals in American history.

Yet Obama chose him and continues to support him despite a record of failure. Is Holder serving all the American people? Is there truly no one in the vast ranks of attorneys who could serve in that role? Does Obama care about the content of Holder’s character or the color of his skin?

But this is par for the course for Barack Obama.

He appointed Van Jones to be his Special Advisor for Green Jobs. Jones had a record that came to light after he assumed office that was filled with bigotry towards whites (he accused white polluters of steering poison into the people-of-color community), radicalism, flirtation with communism, and conspiracy theories regarding George Bush and 9/11. According to Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s right-hand woman, they knew all about Van Jones and had been following his career for years.

Van Jones was compelled to resign when the rest of America found out about Van Jones, courtesy of Glenn Beck.

Was he chosen for the content of his character or for the color of his skin?

Lisa Jackson was chosen by Obama to be the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Since assuming office she has been reckless in her war on carbon and in the wake is leaving job losses, slow growth and an uncertain electric energy supply. She has been accused of exceeding the bounds of her regulatory authority to such an extent that businesses are paralyzed by uncertainty-unsure of what she will unleash next. She is blithely unconcerned that Congressmen have taken her to task for performance.

Was she chosen for the color of her skin or the content of her character?

Susan Rice, America’s Ambassador to the United Nations, has kowtowed to dictators, promised that America’s joining the disgraceful UN Human Rights Council would lead to its reform and the end of its incessant America and Israel-bashing (it hasn’t; there was a reason George W. Bush boycotted the council), has missed important meetings and votes, and has heartily criticized our ally, Israel, at that forum of hate. She has been, according to a former spokesman for four previous U.S. Ambassadors at the UN, wildly inattentive at the United Nations because she has been devoting time to the social scene of Washington and the White House.

Was she chosen for the content of her character or the color of her skin?

Then there is Mark Lloyd, the Chief Diversity Officer, a newly created position at the Federal Communications Commission. What are Lloyd’s qualifications? He has spoken publicly of getting white media executives to “step down” in favor of minorities. He also spoke of the limited number of these powerful positions and then expounded,

“… unless we are conscious of the need to have more people of color, gays, other people in those positions, we will not change the problem. But we’re in a position where you have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power”. He added, for good measure, “there are few things, I think, more frightening in the American mind that dark-skinned black men. Here I am …”

Job requirement: Character or skin color?

Most recently, Obama chose Cecilia Munoz to be in charge of his Domestic Policy Council. For the past two decades, Munoz has served as the chief lobbyist for the National Council of La Raza (”The Race”) and has devoted herself to promoting its agenda of in-state college tuition breaks and drivers’ licenses for illegal aliens as well as opposing enforcement of immigration laws and border controls. Obama put in charge of formulating his domestic policy someone who advocated that our laws not be enforced.

Clearly the appointment was well-timed to garner support from Hispanics in key battleground states. This ability to gin up support among Hispanics may also be a factor that led Obama to pick Hilda Solis as his Secretary of Labor (despite a tax scandal involving her husband’s failure to pay tax liens)

Was they chosen for the content of her character or for the color of their skin?

Lest we forget Obama’s pick for Supreme Court Justice, Sonia Sotomayor.  While she attended prestigious schools (like Obama) she was not considered among the top stars of her law school class at Yale . She had a less than stellar record compared to her fellow justices but as a self-characterized “wise Latina” she believed she could often reach a better conclusion than a white male regardless of academic or scholarly skills. When Obama went looking for a Supreme Court Justice is was so obvious that he had a very narrow filter of who would “qualify” that Time’s Mark Halperin wrote that “White Men Need Not Apply.”

Obama seems inclined to make his choices for judges based on skin color. This came back to bite him recently. The ABA’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary delivered very harsh verdicts on Obama’s federal judicial nominees (rejecting them as unqualified at triple the rate of both George Bush and Bill Clinton’s nominees). Fourteen nominees were rated as unqualified to serve as federal judges. Thirteen of them were women, Hispanics or African-Americans. The ABA is famously liberal; clearly Obama was not picking nominees based on merit.

Barack Obama seems to be running a one-man affirmative action program. While all administrations have tried to showcase minorities Obama’s seems to have gone to the extreme. George Bush had leading figures such as Colin Powell and Condi Rice.  However, they had stellar backgrounds and records that fully justified the faith President Bush placed in them when he asked them to serve their nation. While Bush had problems with his pick for Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, they certainly have not risen to the scandals that have plagued Eric Holder’s reign. Did Bush have a Van Jones or Harold Lloyd? Did he have a person in charge of formulating his domestic policy that advocated laws regarding illegal immigration not be enforced? Are Americans being well-served by these officials that Obama has chosen to give vast power?

Barack Obama campaigned on theme that there is not a “white America” or a “black America”.

President Obama is not practicing what Senator Obama preached. Instead of channeling the heroic Martin Luther King’s dream that people be judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin President Obama instead seems to be channeling the views of his moral compass, Jeremiah Wright, Jr.

  Awesome Post:
  0 Vote

Leave a Reply