He did the same thing I did; he went to church with his family. His church is the Zion Baptist Church in Washington, DC. Here’s an official White House photo by Pete Sousa.
I assume the stiff-looking guy is Secret Service. What a jaundiced view the birthers hold that they have to trash everything to do with the President instead of celebrating what is good.
Worse, someone may take this photo and say that it’s photoshopped, didn’t happen and write a post capable of convincing the hateful and naive.
http://theobamadiary.com is great site to see our most transparent president to date… or a “huge collection of selected and photoshopped photos made by the Muslim usurper.”
It all depends on the audience.
I should have mentioned that that’s where I found the photo.
The church is not that of the Obamas (it was their first visit there), but they were honoring a tradition of attending a service at an historic Black church the weekend of the MLK holiday. Upon reading that information, I ended up finding this interview with the erudite doctor. I was spellbound. I don’t believe President Obama (or any famous persona in recent times) has the charisma, the ability to express so much, as this man. I feel any one quote is inadequate to convey the essence of Dr. King. I do, though, want to quote a segment: :
http://www.playboy.com/magazine/playboy-interview-martin-luther-king
King: About 50 billion, actually — which is less than one year of our present defense spending [I wonder what he would say now?]. It is my belief that with the expenditure of this amount, over a ten-year period, a genuine and dramatic transformation could be achieved in the conditions of Negro life in America. I am positive, moreover, that the money spent would be more than amply justified by the benefits that would accrue to the nation through a spectacular decline in school dropouts, family breakups, crime rates, illegitimacy, swollen relief rolls, rioting and other social evils.
The closest analogy is the GI Bill of Rights. Negro rehabilitation in America would require approximately the same breadth of program — which would not place an undue burden on our economy. Just as was the case with the returning soldier, such a bill for the disadvantaged and impoverished could enable them to buy homes without cash, at lower and easier repayment terms. They could negotiate loans from banks to launch businesses. They could receive, as did ex-GIs, special points to place them ahead in competition for civil service jobs. Under certain circumstances of physical disability, medical care and long-term financial grants could be made available. And together with these rights, a favorable social climate could be created to encourage the preferential employment of the disadvantaged, as was the case for so many years with veterans. During those years, it might be noted, there was no appreciable resentment of the preferential treatment being given to the special group. America was only compensating her veterans for their time lost from school or from business.
***
I agree that his point is well-taken for that particular time. The Black population had been so suppressed that they needed a jump start so to speak (and Dr. King believed that ALL disadvantaged should be helped) and the laws were not being applied equally, nor would they be for some time to come. At this point, money has been appropriated over a period of years and yet to quote Dr. King, the ‘school dropouts, family breakups, crime rates, illegitimacy, swollen relief rolls, rioting and other social evils’ remain’ although the rioting dissipated from the turbulent 60’s. Having worked as a teacher in a disadvantaged community, I saw too little taking advantage of the tremendous opportunities that were never available to King and his generation. There is a cycle of poverty, and too many students remained uneducated with no motivation to change the status quo. Just one more thought and then I HIGHLY recommend reading the interview if you have never seen it; you will be enriched. I believe that Dr. King would have defended Herman Cain and his non-involvement in the Civil Rights sit-ins:
Playboy: In conspicuous contrast, according to a recent poll conducted by Ebony, only one Negro in ten has ever participated physically in any form of social protest. Why?
King: It is not always sheer numbers that are the measure of public support. As I see it, every Negro who does participate represents the sympathy and the moral backing of thousands of others. Let us never forget how one photograph, of those Birmingham policemen with their knees on that Negro woman on the ground, touched something emotionally deep in most Negroes in America, no matter who they were. In city after city, where S.C.L.C. has helped to achieve sweeping social changes, it has been not only because of the quality of its members’ dedication and discipline, but because of the moral support of many Negroes who never took an active part.
***
He did go on to express disgust as those who were apathetic or even those who took advantage in some way. I give Cain the benefit of the doubt that his parents wanted to protect him and that they were morally supporting the movement.
That is no doubt true. My impression of Dr. King is that he did not criticize those who didn’t participate physically. He was certainly supportive of those who did, and he did need the biggest number possible, and he encouraged big turnouts. But he was aware that some people simply found it impossible, for what ever reason, to do so.
On the other hand, I cannot believe that he would defend Cain’s opposition to the Clinton Health Care plan in 1993.
Sorry, I should not have contributed to the attempted hijacking of the thread.
Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.
No one was biting on this thread. Technically, my comment should be on the open thread, though.
I read your MLK post. I didn’t have any problem with what you said or anything else to add to it, nor any criticism of it, so I felt there was nothing to respond further to, as it stood on its own.
No bites doesn’t mean it was ignored. Simply that there was nothing requiring follow-up challenge or commentary. It generally stood on its own.
I hope that makes sense.
I meant that it didn’t seem like a high-jacking to refer to the interview, not that I was being ignored. I just felt inspired after reading it. I felt like I could hear him speaking. I certainly don’t agree with his entire mindset, but I agree with many points.
Gotcha. Thanks for clarifying.
There are articles where I put in a lot of effort (e.g., Expert witnesses in Georgia) and think I have said something worthwhile and I welcome discussion. I get really bent out of shape when people don’t respect the integrity of those threads. There are others, like this one, where nothing profound is being said, and I don’t get bent out of shape if the discussion wanders.
Always- well… most always ;)- good to toss around ideas.
Take care!
You too! I hope your holiday’s were great! I always enjoy getting to hear from you on here! Wishing you and your family a happy and healthy 2012, Charo! 🙂