Obama: MLK would not want us to vilify all who work on Wall Street

[Enrique]

of course MLK was not into vilifying anyone, including the worst racists that opposed him. But that really stood out as a giant strawman in Obama's speech just a minute ago.

edit: the full sentence was something like "challenge the injustices of the financial system, without vilifying all those who work on Wall Street."

It's not a major scandal to me, it's just what it is, a strawman. The protesters are challenging the injustices, period. The qualification is unnecessary and imho lame.

[SHRED]

1. Backing Wall St?

I AM SHOCKED I TELL YA!!!!


--

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. That's probably true.

Dr. King sided with the workers nearly 100% of the time.

[ProSense]

3. Thanks for

"of course MLK was not into vilifying anyone, including the worst racists that opposed him. But that really stood out as a giant strawman"

...being the first to attempt to disparage the speech.

[Enrique]

4. thanks for putting random parts of my post in boldface

:shrug:

[ProSense]

6. Oh

"thanks for putting random parts of my post in boldface"

Obama: MLK would not want us to vilify all who work on Wall Street
of course MLK was not into vilifying anyone, including the worst racists that opposed him. But that really stood out as a giant strawman in Obama's speech just a minute ago.

...sorry. Thanks for ...being the first to attempt to disparage the speech. Better?

[yardwork]

7. Let me be the second. Obama put words in MLK's mouth that aren't supported by history.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated when he was in Memphis to participate in a worker's strike.

[Empowerer]

63. He didn't put ANY words in his mouth

Read the speech.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[yardwork]

8. Recced up to zero.

[AngkorWot]

10. unrecced back down to zero

For exploiting MLK in a transparent, sleazy attack against Obama, and an all around shitty thread.

[yardwork]

15. Welcome to DU. Your concern is noted.

[xiamiam]

9. right..does that include the workers who are putting people out of their houses?

or the ones who made multi million dollar bonuses? for bankrupting the middle class?

[tridim]

11. I don't think anyone is vilifying ALL who work on Wall Street

OWS is concerned with the numerous actual villains who work on Wall Street. No additional vilification is needed.

[ProSense]

12. Well

" I don't think anyone is vilifying ALL who work on Wall Street"

...what would a good faux outrage be without a straw man (irony)?

[yardwork]

13. Which is why Obama's comment is a straw man, as the OP points out.

It's amusing to see how even the mildest criticism of Obama results in hysteria here.

[ProSense]

16. Actually

"Which is why Obama's comment is a straw man, as the OP points out. It's amusing to see how even the mildest criticism of Obama results in hysteria here."

...that's nonsense, and what's amusing is the pathetic attempt to characterize shit stirring as "the mildest criticism."

[polichick]

17. Exactly - NOBODY is vilifying everyone on Wall Street.

[PragmaticLiberal]

26. Maybe YOU don't villify everyone on Wall Street but there are many DUers who do.

Granted, I understand why they feel that way.....:-(

[harun]

94. This is about hating rich people or hating WS workers. I see plenty of RWr's on Facebook

making the same false correlation.

This is about the fusion of Corporations and government at the expense of Democracy.

[phleshdef]

42. Stop pretending like you speak for the entire movement. You do not, nor will you ever.

The Naderite left is definately guilty of attacking people in the financial industry with sweeping generalizations. Everytime you've attacked Obama for his donations from Goldman Sachs employees in 2008, you are guilty of doing so.

[polichick]

171. What an irrational response to what I posted. fyi, I did not vote for Nader...

Yank your head out; you obviously need to come up for air.

[MjolnirTime]

14. So, you don't doubt the truth of the statement. You just don't like it when Obama says it?

Got it.

[AngkorWot]

18. He didn't even say it.

[yardwork]

20. I read the OP as pointing out that Obama's statement is a straw man.

OWS is not saying that ALL who work for Wall Street are to be vilified. OWS is quite clear and consistent on this - they're talking about the top 1% of wage earners.

What MLK would say about this is anybody's guess. My guess - based on the historical facts - is that he would be out there with OWS. He was standing in solidarity with the sanitation workers of Memphis when he was murdered.

[Enrique]

21. straw man

suggesting that OWS is "vilifying all who work on Wall Street." Suggesting MLK would admonish the people at OWS, which is very much NOT true. They're not doing ANYTHING that MLK would object to.

[saras]

19. Actually, I have nothing against the janitors that clean buildings on Wall Street

No, it's just the bankers and financial workers who need to be vilified.

[Laelth]

23. Well said. n/t

-Laelth

[Rosa Luxemburg]

73. Yes that's what I was going to say!

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Posteritatis]

24. Asking who MLK would want to villify's kind of like asking who Ghandi'd want to beat up, no? (nt)

[PragmaticLiberal]

30. Exactly.

[yardwork]

33. That's it. A point some here want to obscure.

Why did Obama have to mention OWS at all in his speech about MLK?

[EffieBlack]

87. He didn't mention OWS in his speech

He said "Wall Street" in one sentence in one paragraph of a rather long speech. And since this is not the first time he's mentioned Wall Street and has used that term long before OWS came into being, it's a stretch to insist that he MUST have been talking about OWS.

[Evergreen Emerald]

25. MLK would have been walking right along with the ows protestors

and against those who continue to profit on the backs of the middle and working class.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

27. What a shamefully opportunistic thing to say. N/T

[polichick]

28. I wouldn't go THAT hard on the prez - he's just being a politician.

[Jakes Progress]

31. Really? He calls on MLK? Really?

[phleshdef]

34. Yea, why in the hell would he call on MLK in a SPEECH ABOUT MLK???

Its unfucking imaginable!

[Jakes Progress]

136. Why in hell would you write this?

The point of the OP is that he called on the name of MLK in the cause of letting Wall Street not be demonized. Why would you demean King's name by deliberately messing with what happened just in order to give the perpetrator a pass? King did not march and protest, write and preach, suffer and prevail just so that a president could use those struggles to give some billionaires some slack.

You should be ashamed.

[Anatos]

32. As so often happens...

the unstated corollary of his words are far more important than the plain reading. MLK would have wanted to (and did) want to end the economic inequity which Wall Street has come to represent. That he would not have wanted us to vilify "all who work on Wall Street" is only a counterpoise to the truth that OWS, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and President Obama are all aligned against Wall Street itself.

[phleshdef]

35. I like how many pretend they aren't guilty of sweeping generalizations against financial workers.

...and people who are in the top income bracket.

Some on the left are just as guilty as many on the right of the kind of bigotry and prejudiced that sweeping generalizations entail. The targets are just different, thats all.

I've seen it here time and time again, especially lately. Like when some wealthy Democrats have spoken out in support of OWS, they've gotten piled on just because they are in the top 1% income bracket themselves. Its the kind of bigotry that says "no, you can't be part of this because you have too much money to be considered a human like the rest of us!". Anyone that pretends this attitude hasn't been embraced by some around here are fucking fooling themselves.

The fact of the matter is, there are real villains at all levels of income. And there are real heroes, at all levels of income. The problem isn't people with a lot of money. The problem are policies that discourage a healthy distribution of wealth and encourage irresponsible risks that put the economy in peril. We should keep the discourse focused on that and leave the targetting of individuals out of it altogether.

[Enrique]

39. maybe you're missing the point

I don't know what you are referring to, but some wealthy Democrats aren't just wealthy, they are part of the problem, and when someone who is part of the problem comes and says "i'm with you guys" then they deserve some spirited catcalling.

[phleshdef]

44. Thats a very regressive way to look at things.

If ANY influential person in Washington aligns themselves with a movement like this, for reasons geniune or purely political, its a good thing regardless. We keep saying that we want to move the Democratic party back towards the left. Then when a movement like this, a movement most certainly born out of progressive ideology, actually GETS some of these people to start moving that direction, we bitch at them for doing so. Thats utterly ridiculous. As I said, the attitude is "oh you aren't good enough to be human like US because you supported some bad bills or you have donors that are connected to Wall Street interests!". If FDR were alive today, he would be treated like absolute SHIT by the Naderite left because of the financial class status of himself and his family.

There is absolutely nothing liberal about telling someone they can't be part of your club because you don't believe they can be changed or influenced to see things in a better light, which is exactly what this mindset is guilty of.

[Enrique]

47. it's a matter of interests

if we judge that someone serves the banks, then we can suspect that their involvement in the protest movement is actually an effort to co-opt it in the banks' favor. It only makes sense to not let them do that.

[phleshdef]

49. If you have any faith in the movement, you shouldn't be worried about such things.

Besides, I don't think its POSSIBLE for something like this to be co-opted in the banks favor. That would be like saying that the civil rights movement could have been co-opted in favor of the racists that opposed it. Its just not the way things work.

[Enrique]

51. the right-wing DOES try to co-opt the Civil Rights Movement

do you think civil rights activists should embrace Glenn Beck just because he claims to be acting in the spirit of Martin Luther King? (which he did, if you missed that).

[phleshdef]

52. Trying doesn't mean shit. They've never successfully co-opted it and they never will.

And no, of course they shouldn't accept a racist like Beck.

And if the Koch brothers tried to claim that they are acting in the spirit of the 99% movement, they would get laughed out of the country.

But when Bill Clinton and Al Gore publically speak out in support of the OWS protests, then I say hell yea, I'm glad they are with us. But many others on the left don't see it the same way, which I find frustrating and counterproductive. The fact is, you've got a lot of Democrats that have used their careers to help Wall Street and help the middle class at the same time. I'd say Clinton and Gore both fall into that type of Democrat. You can't claim that either are 100% warriors for the middle class but you also can't claim that they've never fought for middle class interests either. What I'm getting at, is it seems that any Democrat that EVER did anything that Wall Street liked is considered the enemy, regardless of how many things he or she may have also done for working class folks. All the good gets ignored and all the focus is put on the points of criticism. Its a kind of thinking based on absolutes and I for one reject absolutes.

Obama seems to get this treatment worse than anyone. He has signed off on middle class tax relief, unemployment extensions, subsidies to help lower income folks purchase health insurance, funding for anti-poverty programs, more funding to help people afford college and a long list of others things that have been in the interest of middle class people, throughout various bills that he has signed as President or bills that he supported as a Senator. And that should be compounded with all the work he did as a community organizer which was 100% geared towards assisting those in poverty situations. And the financial reform bill he signed into law may have been watered down from where it likely should have been, but it doesn't contain ANYTHING that Wall Street interests wanted. It was very much NOT in favor of Wall Street. Yet none of that ever gets considered by his critics. Because Obama hasn't personally seen to it that bankers get prison time and because Obama hired financial industry people to oversee financial industry related areas of government, he isn't "allowed" to be one of us. Thats just disgusting when you really sit and think about it.

[loyalsister]

186. +1 Well said!

..:thumbsup:

[BlueIris]

36. Using King to rationalize Wall St. corruption? Awful.

Enjoy retirement, Sir.

[ClarkUSA]

38. Your strawman argument is ridiculous but entirely expected.

Enjoy President Obama's second term, ma'am.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[msongs]

37. Obama lives in a different universe than MLK nt

[phleshdef]

41. Yea, the universe of the living.

[KoKo]

130. But, some could say the "Universe of the Privileged" also..

...

[Empowerer]

43. Dr. King's sister and children, Kerry Kennedy, John Lewis

Rev. Lowery, Dr. Bernard Lafayette, Andrew Young, Dr. Dorothy Cotton, Rev. Al Sharpton, Marian Wright Edelman, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Nancy Pelosi, and half of the Congressional Black Caucus - all of whom were among those who stood and cheered the President's remarks - didn't seem to have a problem with anything he said.

But your "concern" about the President's interpretation of Dr. King's views is noted.

[Enrique]

46. I didn't have a big problem with it

as someone pointed out above, he is a politician.

And for the record, here is the official version of the remark

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/10/16/remarks-president-martin-luther-king-jr-memorial-dedication

If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there;

[Empowerer]

50. I know what he said. I was there when he said it.

And the fact that you started a thread isolating and highlighting one sentence in the speech suggests that perhaps you DO have a big problem with it.

Which, of course, is your prerogative. I simply pointed out that people who were much closer to Dr. King than you were and who have far more credibility in these issues than most people on DU seemed to NOT have any problem - big or small - with what the President said today.

[yardwork]

53. I have a problem with what Obama said.

I didn't post the OP, but I have a problem with Obama bringing up Wall Street in a speech about MLK in which he speaks for MLK and implies that MLK would not have supported OWS. That's how it sounds to me and I don't like it.

[Empowerer]

54. Did you listen to the entire speech?

[yardwork]

55. I read the entire official transcript. I don't agree with a lot of it.

I don't agree that we have seen slow but steady progress toward freedom. Since my childhood, when Dr. King was murdered, it seems to me that my country has become more unequal and less free. That's what OWS is about, and I'm glad that people are standing up to be heard. I don't like that Obama took the opportunity of honoring MLK to take a swipe at OWS. I think it was unnecessary. But even more to the point, I don't agree with the overall premise of his speech.

[Empowerer]

64. Fine. You have a right to your opinion

But the fact that people who marched and risked their lives with Dr. King and who knew him better than any of us on DU did AGREE with the President should at least be enough to keep folk from attacking the President for saying what he did.

But, of course, it's not . . . how sad.

[yardwork]

66. The fact that an anonymous poster on a political bulletin board claims

that everybody who knew MLK agreed today with every word that Obama said should keep me from posting my anonymous opinion on a political bulletin board?

Do what now?

[Empowerer]

71. You have every right to post whatever you like where you choose

You just have much less credibility on the topic than people I know to be much more in tune and in touch with the issue than you are. And you don't have to take my word for it. Just watch it on television and you will see for yourself.

Take that however you wish.

[yardwork]

72. I would hope that people you know have more credibility to you than an anonymous poster.

I'm not sure why that would need to be said.

[ProSense]

57. Hmmm?

I have a problem with what Obama said. I didn't post the OP, but I have a problem with Obama bringing up Wall Street in a speech about MLK in which he speaks for MLK and implies that MLK would not have supported OWS. That's how it sounds to me and I don't like it.

The OP is a bullshit interpretation, and you obviously have no clue what the President said.

President Obama

<...>

If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there; that the businessman can enter tough negotiations with his company’s union without vilifying the right to collectively bargain. He would want us to know we can argue fiercely about the proper size and role of government without questioning each other’s love for this country -- (applause) -- with the knowledge that in this democracy, government is no distant object but is rather an expression of our common commitments to one another. He would call on us to assume the best in each other rather than the worst, and challenge one another in ways that ultimately heal rather than wound.

<...>

[yardwork]

58. I know what he said. I read the entire official transcript.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[yardwork]

70. It is your opinion that I am misrepresenting. It is my opinion that I am not. /nt

[bvar22]

45. We shouldn't "begrudge them their wealth."

I know these guys, "and they are just savvy businessmen."

I mean, "look at all the baseball players."

"Its the Free market."

---defending the obscene Wall Street Bonuses after the Bailout.
Guess Who.



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Enrique]

48. it's the American Dream

to have money coming out of your ears.

[Pirate Smile]

56. How typically DU to take a speech that was received as a positive and distort it to turn it into a

negative. Gotta find something in it to attack the President for...

[phleshdef]

60. The full quote of what he said here. (anyone offended by what he said must be nuts)

"If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there; that the businessman can enter tough negotiations with his company’s union without vilifying the right to collectively bargain. He would want us to know we can argue fiercely about the proper size and role of government without questioning each other’s love for this country -- (applause) -- with the knowledge that in this democracy, government is no distant object but is rather an expression of our common commitments to one another. He would call on us to assume the best in each other rather than the worst, and challenge one another in ways that ultimately heal rather than wound."

There is not one damn thing in that passage for anyone to get offended over. Not one.

[Empowerer]

65. You're right.

But the previous two paragraphs are also very relevant, and puts his comment into even greater context. (Of course, the WHOLE SPEECH is even more relevant, but obviously plenty of folk around here couldn't care less about the full context).

To say that we are bound together as one people, and must constantly strive to see ourselves in one another, is not to argue for a false unity that papers over our differences and ratifies an unjust status quo. As was true 50 years ago, as has been true throughout human history, those with power and privilege will often decry any call for change as “divisive.” They’ll say any challenge to the existing arrangements are unwise and destabilizing. Dr. King understood that peace without justice was no peace at all; that aligning our reality with our ideals often requires the speaking of uncomfortable truths and the creative tension of non-violent protest.

But he also understood that to bring about true and lasting change, there must be the possibility of reconciliation; that any social movement has to channel this tension through the spirit of love and mutuality.

[yardwork]

69. That's your opinion. I don't agree with Obama's premise. I'm not offended. Just disagree.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EffieBlack]

80. What exactly do you disagree with?

Do you think that Dr. King would have believed that all those working on Wall Street SHOULD be vilified?

[yardwork]

83. I've expressed my opinion in several places on this thread.

Here, for example: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=798379&mesg_id=798571

On edit, also here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=798379&mesg_id=798578

[BklnDem75]

149. I missed the speech but after reading the context...

Is this really what people are getting worked up over? Really? Are people so bored, they'll find outrage in everything?

[Number23]

169. Thanks for the context. That statement is very mild and is one sentence out of many

But if you're determined to be negative and find fault, then (as this thread and some of the comments within prove) anything will do.

[joshcryer]

175. Reminds me of the CBC speech that was disparaged.

Anything to bash Obama.

[Empowerer]

62. Here's that sentence in context:

To say that we are bound together as one people, and must constantly strive to see ourselves in one another, is not to argue for a false unity that papers over our differences and ratifies an unjust status quo. As was true 50 years ago, as has been true throughout human history, those with power and privilege will often decry any call for change as “divisive.” They’ll say any challenge to the existing arrangements are unwise and destabilizing. Dr. King understood that peace without justice was no peace at all; that aligning our reality with our ideals often requires the speaking of uncomfortable truths and the creative tension of non-violent protest.

But he also understood that to bring about true and lasting change, there must be the possibility of reconciliation; that any social movement has to channel this tension through the spirit of love and mutuality.

If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there; that the businessman can enter tough negotiations with his company’s union without vilifying the right to collectively bargain. He would want us to know we can argue fiercely about the proper size and role of government without questioning each other’s love for this country -- (applause) -- with the knowledge that in this democracy, government is no distant object but is rather an expression of our common commitments to one another. He would call on us to assume the best in each other rather than the worst, and challenge one another in ways that ultimately heal rather than wound.

Anyone interested in the the whole speech (rather than one out-of-context sentence) can read it here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x798583

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Enrique]

74. as someone pointed out above, he's a politician

i don't hate politicians. My post was not hateful, or even angry. Yours, however is angry (notice the "fucking") and the anger is misplaced. I also don't hate "the other side" if you mean the ordinary people that happen to be conservatives. One thing we did point out about them, on the other hand, is how during the Bush years they were overly uncritical of their leader. I don't know if we hated that, but we sure did notice it.

[yardwork]

78. I'm shaken by the hatred expressed in this thread. The personal attacks are over the top.

[ClarkUSA]

84. The OP cherrypicked a phrase in order to demonize President Obama.

Such subterfuge on MLK day excites disgust, not hatred.

[ClarkUSA]

79. And you're cherrypicking one phrase from a quote which also defends unions against vilification too.

How Clintonian of you.

[Enrique]

89. take any of my criticisms of Obama, and apply it to either Clinton

it would probably fit, they're all pretty much the same. Throw in Wesley Clark while you're at it, he's an actual banker.

[yardwork]

90. +1

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Enrique]

96. I also defended Wesley Clark

from a scurrilous attack from Matt Taibbi in The Nation. It doesn't take away from the fact that he is an actual banker, and IIRC he took a ton of money from Wall Street in 2004, just as Hillary and Obama both did in 2008. I believe the top 3 in 2008 were Obama, Hillary and McCain.

[ClarkUSA]

99. Your OP is a cherrypicked paraphrase that distorts Pres. Obama's healing MLK speech into ugliness.

"If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there; that the businessman can enter tough negotiations with his company’s union without vilifying the right to collectively bargain. He would want us to know we can argue fiercely about the proper size and role of government without questioning each other’s love for this country -- (applause) -- with the knowledge that in this democracy, government is no distant object but is rather an expression of our common commitments to one another. He would call on us to assume the best in each other rather than the worst, and challenge one another in ways that ultimately heal rather than wound."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x798605

How sad you did this on such a fine day for MLK admirers. But then again, not everyone gives a shit about respecting the President's efforts to honor and give voice to MLK's memory on this of all days.

[Anatos]

187. Obamaphobia

That word is not directed at anyone, it is not an insulting broad brush. It is a real thing that is actually happening. Your suggestion that because Republicans refused to criticize very real very important very grievous policy failures by Bush, you're being treated unfairly for your relatively vapid relatively trivial relatively strained "criticisms" of Mr. Obama, is laughable. It illuminates your perspective well in that regard. Of course we hated it, and we noticed it, and we mentioned it, constantly for years. Because he actually was a terrible President, while Mr. Obama is merely not transcendently perfect enough for some.

And the correlation between those who think claiming the President doesn't "show leadership" and those who have never proven an ability to show respect to an African American in a position of authority over them is way too fucking scary.

Sorry, did that make me seem angry? I'm fucking amused, is what I am. A bit miffed that DU shows itself to possibly be too fond of deleting one side of the argument, but certainly not angry, no.

[EffieBlack]

188. Great post!

Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[Hutzpa]

75. This is pointless

guess you"re looking to stir sh*t up.

[ClarkUSA]

77. Your cherrypicking demonization is a FAIL.-->Obama: MLK would not want businessmen to vilify unions.

"If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there; that the businessman can enter tough negotiations with his company’s union without vilifying the right to collectively bargain. He would want us to know we can argue fiercely about the proper size and role of government without questioning each other’s love for this country -- (applause) -- with the knowledge that in this democracy, government is no distant object but is rather an expression of our common commitments to one another. He would call on us to assume the best in each other rather than the worst, and challenge one another in ways that ultimately heal rather than wound."

Context matters and should not be ignored.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x798605

[Enrique]

82. yes, it's much more interesting in context

I wish I had waited, I missed how he compares OWS with the Tea Party and the attack on collective bargaining.

[EffieBlack]

85. I missed that part, too.

Oh, wait a minute. No wonder I missed it. He didn't say it - or anything close to it.

[ClarkUSA]

86. That's a false statement. Keep digging.

Meanwhile, Hillary will be retiring from public office soon. The dream dies. :)

[MjolnirTime]

81. Do you think everyone who works on Wall Street is a crook? Some do.

[Enrique]

91. yeah, and there was a guy there with a sign blaming the Jews

it doesn't mean it represents OWS, at all. Suppose Obama had said, "Rev. King would have been ok with protesting, but he wouldn't want us blaming the Jews." He'd be right, MLK wouldn't want that, but it would have been a straw man.

[MjolnirTime]

107. So you agree with the Teabaggers who claim that the ObamaNazi guy isn't one of them?

It's only a straw man if noone believes it.

There are a good number of protesters who do vilify all of Wall Street. That's as complex as they want to get.
So where's the straw man?

I support OWS wholeheartedly, but I don't want the idiots who are willing to go to extremes ruining what could be an effective social movement for the masses. Obama doesn't want this either.

So he says, protest, but protest logically. Protest for a result not just a grievance.

[ClassWarrior]

120. What's "a good number?" 1 million? 1 thousand? 100?

Some guy you saw on C-SPAN?

:eyes:

NGU.

[MjolnirTime]

127. How about people right here at DU? People who claim to be representative of OWS.

[ClassWarrior]

131. You didn't answer my question.

How many? Wherever you see 'em.

NGU.

[JVS]

164. Did the segregationists not have law on their side too? Did their adherence to the law exempt...

them from MLK's criticism?

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ClarkUSA]

95. OP is a cherrypicked paraphase designed to excite disgust at Pres. Obama. What O said in context->

"If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there; that the businessman can enter tough negotiations with his company’s union without vilifying the right to collectively bargain. He would want us to know we can argue fiercely about the proper size and role of government without questioning each other’s love for this country -- (applause) -- with the knowledge that in this democracy, government is no distant object but is rather an expression of our common commitments to one another. He would call on us to assume the best in each other rather than the worst, and challenge one another in ways that ultimately heal rather than wound."

Context matters and should not be ignored.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x798605

[LittleBlue]

98. I read the context before writing my response

It's several posts up.

His talk is the same old talk. We're one nation, we should be united, blah blah blah. "I support protestors but..."

Message to Obama: we are not one nation right now. The 1% does not see the rest of us as anything more than serfs for exploitation. And his neutral mush is meaningless, especially when he has to make it neutral by using a strawman.

[ClarkUSA]

100. Then you could care less about MLK's message also. Gotcha.

We are one nation; it's people who insist on their way or the highway and make sport of demonizing their philosophical opponents that are responsible for its division.

[EffieBlack]

102. LOL

GMTA!

[LittleBlue]

103. MLK is a better man than I am

And I won't use him to make a point, especially defending people who would rather see my family die from a lack of affordable healthcare than give up preferential tax treatment.

Sorry Clark, you're off-base.

[ClarkUSA]

105. President Obama wasn't doing that or saying that. You're missing his message completely.

You're the one who's off-base, Little Blue.

[LittleBlue]

106. No, he was using a logically fallacious argument to prove

that we are all in this together, and that OWS is somehow demonizing Wall Street (which it isn't). We are not. Their interests and our interests are not the same.

[ClarkUSA]

108. You're taking his thoughtful, wise words & making a strawman argument. Nowhere did he cast blame.

But you are. How ironic.

[LittleBlue]

109. No Clark, it's a strawman

I don't care if you keep writing a million posts, it doesn't change the fact that OWS hasn't said what Obama has alleged.

And nothing you can say will change it. Not even if you continue replying in an extremely lame attempt to defend strawman logic.

[ClarkUSA]

111. That's a false narrative you're pushing. Quote exactly what Pres. O said that outrages you so much.

In full context.

[LittleBlue]

113. Right here

"I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there"

This is obviously a reference to OWS. No one at OWS has alleged that all those who work in Wall Street are bad people. No one from the recent anti-Wall St. movement has demonized all people on Wall Street.

Game. Set. Match. Go home.

[ClarkUSA]

115. You are missing his points completely.He was defending protesters' right to challenge Wall Street...

... as well as the businessman who negotiates with unions as well as political opponents who disagree. He was saying none should be demonized for doing so.

"If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there; that the businessman can enter tough negotiations with his company’s union without vilifying the right to collectively bargain. He would want us to know we can argue fiercely about the proper size and role of government without questioning each other’s love for this country -- (applause) -- with the knowledge that in this democracy, government is no distant object but is rather an expression of our common commitments to one another. He would call on us to assume the best in each other rather than the worst, and challenge one another in ways that ultimately heal rather than wound."

Get a clue.

[LittleBlue]

117. He used a logical fallacy to do it. Look, I can do it too

We must recognize that homosexuals have rights and have a right to be outraged, but also realize that not all people will be for equal rights.

Oh look, I argued for protestors in one clause but against their message in the next. Look, I know the word game. This may impress some people, but not me.

[ClarkUSA]

118. No, you're using a strawman fallacy to distort his wise words that caution against demonization.

His words are all the more apt, given this OP.

[LittleBlue]

119. No one is demonizing.

The protestors are protesting Wall Street, not everyone who works on Wall Street.

Therein lies the fallacy. Obama brought up demonization when no one was demonizing. Srawman by definition.

[ClarkUSA]

124. President Obama said no one should do so, just because they disagree with protesters or businessmen.

FYI, I see people demonizing Wall Street bankers as a faceless group and anyone who has worked for or at Goldman Sachs every day here. I also read about Republicans who trash Wall Street protesters and unions as a group, too.

What President Obama is saying is this approach to philosophical problem-solving is wrong.

[LittleBlue]

132. This is about OWS, not some Republican you read somewhere

You think this statement happened the same week that OWS went global, and it was directed toward some random Republicans?

Look, shit stinks. You can smell it. And when you can scientifically prove it's shit, there's not a whole lot of discussion that makes shit any less shitty.

And Obama's little statement about not demonizing Wall Street smells shitty because it is logically... shit. It uses a textbook logical fallacy. Wall Street is the institutionalized principle that profit is good. Only problem is that profit is frequently at odds with people. Profit can be made by hurting and even killing people, examples being the defense and healthcare industries. That's why the interest of the people are not congruent with the interests of Wall Street (or profit.) OWS is protesting Wall Street and the high level cronies who keep it going, not the kid out of college looking for a job.

[ClarkUSA]

138. This is not about OWS. It is about President Obama's full context which didn't mention OWS...

... no matter how much you want to create a false narrative.

Your opinion is irrelevant to me. Those who understand MLK's preachings understand President Obama's words. That's good enough for me. I assure you that the Democratic base's most loyal demographic are most appreciative and we will be voting for him with pleasure in 2012.

[LittleBlue]

144. Let me get this straight. You think

that when Obama says this, "the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street", he's NOT referring to the OWS protests?

Seriously???

[Name removed]

147. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ClarkUSA]

167. Pres. Obama spoke in allegory. His other references, which you're ignoring, are similarly framed.

[EffieBlack]

110. He didn't even MENTION OWS!

Talk about grasping at straws!

[LittleBlue]

126. Oh really?

He mentions protests against Wall Street the same week that this movement begins and goes global? I suppose that's just a coincidence.

You're having a laugh. :rofl:

[ClassWarrior]

143. NEITHER DID THE OP!!

Talk about hypocrisy!!

:rofl:

NGU.

[EffieBlack]

101. I can imagine how much you must hate listening to Dr. King's speeches

"I have a dream" . . . blah blah blah . . . "Out of the mountain of despair, a stone of hope" . . . blah blah blah . . . "the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice" . . . blah blah blah

Talk talk talk . . .

[LittleBlue]

104. I could believe in hope if we had someone to place that hope in

Dr. King was someone I could have faith in.

Obama and this congress are not.

[EffieBlack]

112. Then maybe you should seek out a civil rights leader to put your hopes in . . .

Dr. King was a minister, an activist, a strategist. He was not a politician or elected official. It sounds like you're looking in the wrong place for the inspiration you seem to need.

[LittleBlue]

121. Maybe I should go to church and not bother voting.

If I'm looking for a pastor, why bother with a presidential race?

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[woo me with science]

114. Strong K&R. And what strikes me most about the responses

is the sudden interest in making this about the PEOPLE who work on Wall Street rather than the SYSTEM that is impoverishing people across the globe. Suddenly we are being told it is mean or heartless to want fundamental change to the corporate system. Corporations are not people. It is precisely because they are not people, and their bottom line is profit, that they are squeezing workers in this country (and others) until they are dried husks, and then discarding them.

Corporations do not have consciences. This has nothing to do with people on Wall Street. It has to do with the structure that is in place, in which profit is the bottom line motive, above human beings and their lives. Corporations do not have empathy. They do not function to care about people. They function for the bottom line.

This is their new strategy. We are people and Wall Street is also people, and we must have empathy for each other. How ironic that the people in the "We are the 53 percent" posts are being revealed as fabricated, two-dimensional photoshop jobs, not actual people at all.

What a perfect symbol of this transparent attempt to make us empathize with corporations.

[ClarkUSA]

116. Oy vay. Your conclusion reminds me of how sailors would see a manatee and swear it was a mermaid.

President Obama was defending protesters' right to challenge Wall Street as well as the businessman's right to drive tough negotiations with unions as well as political opponents' right to disagree. He was saying none should be demonized for doing so, that MLK would not want that to happen.

"If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there; that the businessman can enter tough negotiations with his company’s union without vilifying the right to collectively bargain. He would want us to know we can argue fiercely about the proper size and role of government without questioning each other’s love for this country -- (applause) -- with the knowledge that in this democracy, government is no distant object but is rather an expression of our common commitments to one another. He would call on us to assume the best in each other rather than the worst, and challenge one another in ways that ultimately heal rather than wound."

Get a clue.

[LittleBlue]

122. +100000

Thank you. Precisely.

[ClassWarrior]

123. Well said.

NGU.

[ProSense]

128. Really?

"Well said."

You think taking what the President said:

If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there; that the businessman can enter tough negotiations with his company’s union without vilifying the right to collectively bargain. He would want us to know we can argue fiercely about the proper size and role of government without questioning each other’s love for this country -- (applause) -- with the knowledge that in this democracy, government is no distant object but is rather an expression of our common commitments to one another. He would call on us to assume the best in each other rather than the worst, and challenge one another in ways that ultimately heal rather than wound.

...and twisting it into this: "This is their new strategy. We are people and Wall Street is also people, and we must have empathy for each other" based on another distortion (the OP title: "Obama: MLK would not want us to vilify all who work on Wall Street") of what the President said, is "well said"?

[LittleBlue]

133. Yes, really

It was eloquently said. The interests of Wall Street and the 99% are not the same. They are frequently opposed, like in healthcare and war.

And besides, how the hell does Obama know what MLK would say? He isn't alive to speak for himself. For all Obama knows, MLK would be protesting with OWS. He might say anything. No one can rightly claim what he would say.

[ProSense]

137. And

"It was eloquently said....And besides, how the hell does Obama know what MLK would say? He isn't alive to speak for himself."

...eloquence is definitely missing from the attempts to distort the President's statement.

[ClassWarrior]

134. self delete... double post...

[ClassWarrior]

135. Do you believe that Corporate America routinely vilifies the right to collective bargain?

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

139. ?

[ProSense]

140. Hmmm?

"Do you believe that Corporate America routinely vilifies the right to collective bargain?"

It depends on who you ask. IMO, yes!


Do you?

[ClassWarrior]

141. That's a yes. So do you believe that unemployed workers routinely demonize everyone who...

...works on Wall Street?

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

142. Well?...

NGU.

[ProSense]

145. Actually,

"That's a yes. So do you believe that unemployed workers routinely demonize everyone who...works on Wall Street?"

...the premise of the spin is fairly evident, but it creates a false equivalency.

If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there; that the businessman can enter tough negotiations with his company’s union without vilifying the right to collectively bargain.

The President is affirming that people can protest excesses "without demonizing all who work there." In other words, the attempts to portray the protestors in a negative light are bogus. For the equivalency to be accurate, "businessman" would have to equate to "umeployed worker" and "the right to collectively bargain" to "the excesses of Wall Street."

Officials from Bloomberg to Romney made claims that the protestors were against everyone on Wall Street. Clearly the President's statement supports the notion that protests can occur without making such false claims. He also states that a businessman can negotiate with a union without vilifying the process.

The President also said:

To say that we are bound together as one people, and must constantly strive to see ourselves in one another, is not to argue for a false unity that papers over our differences and ratifies an unjust status quo. As was true 50 years ago, as has been true throughout human history, those with power and privilege will often decry any call for change as “divisive.” They’ll say any challenge to the existing arrangements are unwise and destabilizing. Dr. King understood that peace without justice was no peace at all; that aligning our reality with our ideals often requires the speaking of uncomfortable truths and the creative tension of non-violent protest.

[Name removed]

146. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LittleBlue]

148. Are you for real?

That doesn't make any sense.

I think the other poster nailed you on this one.

[ProSense]

151. More

"Are you for real?"

...real than the faux outrage.

"That doesn't make any sense."

It makes perfect sense, but hey, keep trying to gin up outrage by trying to spin one line in a great speech.

[ClassWarrior]

152. You're right on one point, by the way. It's a strawman, a false equivalency and it doesn't even...

...compare apples to apples. The businessman vilifies a right, but unemployed folks demonize people? WTF is THAT??

NGU.

[ProSense]

154. That's

"The businessman vilifies a right, but unemployed folks demonize people? WTF is THAT??"

...spinning what the President actually said.

[ClassWarrior]

156. That's

a nice try.

:rofl:

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

155. Really?? You want us to believe that the Prez's statement actually SUPPORTS THE PROTESTERS??

:rofl:

NGU.

[yardwork]

157. Good points.

[workinclasszero]

125. Damn just Damn!

I went to an Occupy march yesterday and heard speakers. Mostly young folks in their 20's and most of them with kids. It was heartbreaking to hear of the houses being foreclosed, by wall street banks and children left with their parent on the mean damn streets of capitalist America.

The years of job searching for nothing because wall street outsourced all the jobs to China. The outrageous student loans of 30000 or more that have to be paid back on 10 dollar an hour jobs, because of those fucking anti american thieves on wall street!

And on the day after a worldwide global condemnation of these fuckin wall street criminals that are systematically destroying the very planet we live on and untold millions upon millions of poor and former middle class people, President Obama decides he has got to stand up and defend these filthy fucking dogs?

Wow...WOW! REALLY? DAMN!

I have to say the man is clueless! He just doesn't get it does he? Bill Clinton doesn't fuckin get it either and I have to wonder. Is the whole entire democratic party as clueless as its leaders are?

There is a righteous peoples revolution coming, the 99% are going to rise up and take back what is ours! If these present politicians of any stripe want to survive the righteous fire that's coming right at them they better get the fuck out of their ivory towers in Washington DC and take their asses down to the streets in OWS/boston/detroit/tampa/portland/LA/KC and hundreds of other towns and cities in this country and get a fucking education in the new America!

I understand being sold out by the republican/teabaggers. They are hate filled greed monsters that worship a god of political power and wealth.

But the democrats! The party of Truman and FDR! They have lost their way. It has got to stop. When will the president stop worrying about poor little Hitlers on wall street that buy and sell the american working class day in and day out and start worrying about US?! The 99% that are in misery because of the crimes committed on wall street day after day?

[ClarkUSA]

129. You got all that from a cherrypicked paraphrase that conveniently ignores full context? Damn.

See Reply 115 if you're interested in the whole truth:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=798379&mesg_id=798790

[bvar22]

150. True to form, President Obama tip-toes expertly down the middle,

Neither FOR it,
Nor Against it,
Deliciously Ambiguous,
Open to interpretation,
Never to be pinned down,
Never committing,
Never Taking a Stand,
Elevated to an Art.

How can anyone be offended by this?
How can anyone enthusiastically support it?
I'll bet Obama excelled at Dodge Ball when he was in grade school.


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their evasions.

Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[yardwork]

158. Rev 3:16 - So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.

Words to ponder.

[bvar22]

172. That might apply to Roast Beef Sandwiches,

...but I don't see a parallel when it comes to the "Leader of the Free World".

The Top 1% already have a Party that fights for them, the Republicans.
We don't need a "Hope & Change" President elected with a BIG Popular Mandate
who has trouble choosing sides.


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their Rhetoric.



"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone

photo by bvar22


Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[yardwork]

182. I agree, which was my point. No lukewarm. Jesus didn't like it either.

[ClassWarrior]

174. How does giving credence to a RW lie about the protesters "tip-toe down the middle??"

:crazy:

NGU.

[BklnDem75]

153. Huge Unrec

[Tx4obama]

159. Unrec. You should have posted the FULL quote.

<...>

If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there; that the businessman can enter tough negotiations with his company’s union without vilifying the right to collectively bargain. He would want us to know we can argue fiercely about the proper size and role of government without questioning each other’s love for this country -- (applause) -- with the knowledge that in this democracy, government is no distant object but is rather an expression of our common commitments to one another. He would call on us to assume the best in each other rather than the worst, and challenge one another in ways that ultimately heal rather than wound.

<...>


Transcript of the FULL speech: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/10/16/remarks-president-martin-luther-king-jr-memorial-dedication

[ClassWarrior]

160. Do you believe that Corporate America routinely vilifies the right to collectively bargain?

NGU.

[Mimosa]

161. YES. See Citizens United, Americans for Progress and Citizens for a Sound economy.

Plus there was the Club for Growth.

When there are elections or issues to be decided the 1% flood the airwaves and publications with seemingly 'populist' lying propaganda. I have seen this for 25% years. I first noticed it with the LYING Harry and Louise commercials against national health care. As an old timer who walked in MLK's funeral cortege I think I have a darn good idea of what he stood for.

MLK was murdered because he sided with workers and spoke out against the Vietnam War, for God's sake. MLK was a follower of gandhi's philosophy. The establishment viewed MLK as an increasingly dangerous man.

I wonder if president Obama has read much about those times? Let's remember he was only born in 1960.

[ClassWarrior]

163. Do you believe that unemployed workers routinely demonize everyone who works on Wall Street?

NGU.

[Mimosa]

165. Heck no.

I doubt anybody is actually 'demonizing' 'everone who works on Wall Street'. People are calling for justice and equality. maybe even JOBS! What quaint notions. ;)

The 1% mainly don't 'work on Wall Street'. They are investors. And they have power .

[ClassWarrior]

166. Then the President's statement is a false equivalency.

:shrug:

NGU.

[JVS]

179. Look at what the Obama administration does with teachers' unions.

[JVS]

162. I really have a hard time imagining MLK speaking up on behalf of the persecuted of Wall Street

[ClassWarrior]

168. I don't. I'm sure there are minimum wage workers on Wall Street who need a defender, just like...

...anywhere else. But #OWS protesters have routinely voiced support for them, not "demonization."

NGU.

[JVS]

177. I don't think that the janitors on wall street are the ones Obama is talking about.

[ClarkUSA]

170. Link to the ENTIRE speech by Pres. O in full context, not the OP's cherrypicked paraphrase. -->

We here have often criticized the RW for responding to sound bites rather than context of the words of our leaders. Rather than discuss isolated phrases of President Obama's speech today, I hope many here will listen to ALL of it. The President spoke of both the past and the present struggles of our country. I hope my fellow DUers are listening.

Link to video: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=798531&mesg_id=798531

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. (Applause.) Thank you. (Applause.) Please be seated.

An earthquake and a hurricane may have delayed this day, but this is a day that would not be denied.

For this day, we celebrate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s return to the National Mall. In this place, he will stand for all time, among monuments to those who fathered this nation and those who defended it; a black preacher with no official rank or title who somehow gave voice to our deepest dreams and our most lasting ideals, a man who stirred our conscience and thereby helped make our union more perfect.

And Dr. King would be the first to remind us that this memorial is not for him alone. The movement of which he was a part depended on an entire generation of leaders. Many are here today, and for their service and their sacrifice, we owe them our everlasting gratitude. This is a monument to your collective achievement. (Applause.)

Some giants of the civil rights movement –- like Rosa Parks and Dorothy Height, Benjamin Hooks, Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth –- they’ve been taken from us these past few years. This monument attests to their strength and their courage, and while we miss them dearly, we know they rest in a better place.

And finally, there are the multitudes of men and women whose names never appear in the history books –- those who marched and those who sang, those who sat in and those who stood firm, those who organized and those who mobilized –- all those men and women who through countless acts of quiet heroism helped bring about changes few thought were even possible. “By the thousands,” said Dr. King, “faceless, anonymous, relentless young people, black and white…have taken our whole nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the founding fathers in the formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.” To those men and women, to those foot soldiers for justice, know that this monument is yours, as well.

Nearly half a century has passed since that historic March on Washington, a day when thousands upon thousands gathered for jobs and for freedom. That is what our schoolchildren remember best when they think of Dr. King -– his booming voice across this Mall, calling on America to make freedom a reality for all of God’s children, prophesizing of a day when the jangling discord of our nation would be transformed into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood.

It is right that we honor that march, that we lift up Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech –- for without that shining moment, without Dr. King’s glorious words, we might not have had the courage to come as far as we have. Because of that hopeful vision, because of Dr. King’s moral imagination, barricades began to fall and bigotry began to fade. New doors of opportunity swung open for an entire generation. Yes, laws changed, but hearts and minds changed, as well.

Look at the faces here around you, and you see an America that is more fair and more free and more just than the one Dr. King addressed that day. We are right to savor that slow but certain progress -– progress that’s expressed itself in a million ways, large and small, across this nation every single day, as people of all colors and creeds live together, and work together, and fight alongside one another, and learn together, and build together, and love one another.

So it is right for us to celebrate today Dr. King’s dream and his vision of unity. And yet it is also important on this day to remind ourselves that such progress did not come easily; that Dr. King’s faith was hard-won; that it sprung out of a harsh reality and some bitter disappointments.

It is right for us to celebrate Dr. King’s marvelous oratory, but it is worth remembering that progress did not come from words alone. Progress was hard. Progress was purchased through enduring the smack of billy clubs and the blast of fire hoses. It was bought with days in jail cells and nights of bomb threats. For every victory during the height of the civil rights movement, there were setbacks and there were defeats.

We forget now, but during his life, Dr. King wasn’t always considered a unifying figure. Even after rising to prominence, even after winning the Nobel Peace Prize, Dr. King was vilified by many, denounced as a rabble rouser and an agitator, a communist and a radical. He was even attacked by his own people, by those who felt he was going too fast or those who felt he was going too slow; by those who felt he shouldn’t meddle in issues like the Vietnam War or the rights of union workers. We know from his own testimony the doubts and the pain this caused him, and that the controversy that would swirl around his actions would last until the fateful day he died.

I raise all this because nearly 50 years after the March on Washington, our work, Dr. King’s work, is not yet complete. We gather here at a moment of great challenge and great change. In the first decade of this new century, we have been tested by war and by tragedy; by an economic crisis and its aftermath that has left millions out of work, and poverty on the rise, and millions more just struggling to get by. Indeed, even before this crisis struck, we had endured a decade of rising inequality and stagnant wages. In too many troubled neighborhoods across the country, the conditions of our poorest citizens appear little changed from what existed 50 years ago -– neighborhoods with underfunded schools and broken-down slums, inadequate health care, constant violence, neighborhoods in which too many young people grow up with little hope and few prospects for the future.

Our work is not done. And so on this day, in which we celebrate a man and a movement that did so much for this country, let us draw strength from those earlier struggles. First and foremost, let us remember that change has never been quick. Change has never been simple, or without controversy. Change depends on persistence. Change requires determination. It took a full decade before the moral guidance of Brown v. Board of Education was translated into the enforcement measures of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, but those 10 long years did not lead Dr. King to give up. He kept on pushing, he kept on speaking, he kept on marching until change finally came. (Applause.)

And then when, even after the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act passed, African Americans still found themselves trapped in pockets of poverty across the country, Dr. King didn’t say those laws were a failure; he didn’t say this is too hard; he didn’t say, let’s settle for what we got and go home. Instead he said, let’s take those victories and broaden our mission to achieve not just civil and political equality but also economic justice; let’s fight for a living wage and better schools and jobs for all who are willing to work. In other words, when met with hardship, when confronting disappointment, Dr. King refused to accept what he called the “isness” of today. He kept pushing towards the “oughtness” of tomorrow.

And so, as we think about all the work that we must do –- rebuilding an economy that can compete on a global stage, and fixing our schools so that every child -- not just some, but every child -- gets a world-class education, and making sure that our health care system is affordable and accessible to all, and that our economic system is one in which everybody gets a fair shake and everybody does their fair share, let us not be trapped by what is. (Applause.) We can’t be discouraged by what is. We’ve got to keep pushing for what ought to be, the America we ought to leave to our children, mindful that the hardships we face are nothing compared to those Dr. King and his fellow marchers faced 50 years ago, and that if we maintain our faith, in ourselves and in the possibilities of this nation, there is no challenge we cannot surmount.

And just as we draw strength from Dr. King’s struggles, so must we draw inspiration from his constant insistence on the oneness of man; the belief in his words that “we are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny.” It was that insistence, rooted in his Christian faith, that led him to tell a group of angry young protesters, “I love you as I love my own children,” even as one threw a rock that glanced off his neck.

It was that insistence, that belief that God resides in each of us, from the high to the low, in the oppressor and the oppressed, that convinced him that people and systems could change. It fortified his belief in non-violence. It permitted him to place his faith in a government that had fallen short of its ideals. It led him to see his charge not only as freeing black America from the shackles of discrimination, but also freeing many Americans from their own prejudices, and freeing Americans of every color from the depredations of poverty.

And so at this moment, when our politics appear so sharply polarized, and faith in our institutions so greatly diminished, we need more than ever to take heed of Dr. King’s teachings. He calls on us to stand in the other person’s shoes; to see through their eyes; to understand their pain. He tells us that we have a duty to fight against poverty, even if we are well off; to care about the child in the decrepit school even if our own children are doing fine; to show compassion toward the immigrant family, with the knowledge that most of us are only a few generations removed from similar hardships. (Applause.)

To say that we are bound together as one people, and must constantly strive to see ourselves in one another, is not to argue for a false unity that papers over our differences and ratifies an unjust status quo. As was true 50 years ago, as has been true throughout human history, those with power and privilege will often decry any call for change as “divisive.” They’ll say any challenge to the existing arrangements are unwise and destabilizing. Dr. King understood that peace without justice was no peace at all; that aligning our reality with our ideals often requires the speaking of uncomfortable truths and the creative tension of non-violent protest.

But he also understood that to bring about true and lasting change, there must be the possibility of reconciliation; that any social movement has to channel this tension through the spirit of love and mutuality.

If he were alive today, I believe he would remind us that the unemployed worker can rightly challenge the excesses of Wall Street without demonizing all who work there; that the businessman can enter tough negotiations with his company’s union without vilifying the right to collectively bargain. He would want us to know we can argue fiercely about the proper size and role of government without questioning each other’s love for this country -- (applause) -- with the knowledge that in this democracy, government is no distant object but is rather an expression of our common commitments to one another. He would call on us to assume the best in each other rather than the worst, and challenge one another in ways that ultimately heal rather than wound.

In the end, that’s what I hope my daughters take away from this monument. I want them to come away from here with a faith in what they can accomplish when they are determined and working for a righteous cause. I want them to come away from here with a faith in other people and a faith in a benevolent God. This sculpture, massive and iconic as it is, will remind them of Dr. King’s strength, but to see him only as larger than life would do a disservice to what he taught us about ourselves. He would want them to know that he had setbacks, because they will have setbacks. He would want them to know that he had doubts, because they will have doubts. He would want them to know that he was flawed, because all of us have flaws.

It is precisely because Dr. King was a man of flesh and blood and not a figure of stone that he inspires us so. His life, his story, tells us that change can come if you don’t give up. He would not give up, no matter how long it took, because in the smallest hamlets and the darkest slums, he had witnessed the highest reaches of the human spirit; because in those moments when the struggle seemed most hopeless, he had seen men and women and children conquer their fear; because he had seen hills and mountains made low and rough places made plain, and the crooked places made straight and God make a way out of no way.

And that is why we honor this man –- because he had faith in us. And that is why he belongs on this Mall -– because he saw what we might become. That is why Dr. King was so quintessentially American -- because for all the hardships we’ve endured, for all our sometimes tragic history, ours is a story of optimism and achievement and constant striving that is unique upon this Earth. And that is why the rest of the world still looks to us to lead. This is a country where ordinary people find in their hearts the courage to do extraordinary things; the courage to stand up in the face of the fiercest resistance and despair and say this is wrong, and this is right; we will not settle for what the cynics tell us we have to accept and we will reach again and again, no matter the odds, for what we know is possible.

That is the conviction we must carry now in our hearts. (Applause.) As tough as times may be, I know we will overcome. I know there are better days ahead. I know this because of the man towering over us. I know this because all he and his generation endured -- we are here today in a country that dedicated a monument to that legacy.

And so with our eyes on the horizon and our faith squarely placed in one another, let us keep striving; let us keep struggling; let us keep climbing toward that promised land of a nation and a world that is more fair, and more just, and more equal for every single child of God.

Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x798549

[JoePhilly]

173. Obama Bad Obama Bad Obama Bad

[dionysus]

176. i have nothing against secretaries and janitors who work there.

[JVS]

178. I'm going Godwin on this one. That's like challenging the injustice of the Nazi regime...

without vilifying those who staff the concentration camps.

[Empowerer]

180. No, it's not. Not even close.

That's an insulting and callous comparison.

Wall Street is not a concentration camp - as I'm sure anyone who suffered through one or lost a family member in one would tell you.

Can we stop with the Nazi/Holocaust metaphors, please?

[JVS]

181. What would those who have lost family members on the altar of Wall Street's greed have to say?

[Empowerer]

189. Wow.

Just wow.

[boppers]

183. "Banksters"

Nah, you never see that word here.

[Romulox]

184. "Also, he'd be WAAAY into outsourcing. You know, statues, etc..." nt

[Skittles]

185. the actual speech is good

but he has always been good at speeches

[boxman15]

190. If you think that was a pro-Wall Street statement, you're mistaken.

It's important to remember that not everybody on Wall Street is a greedy CEO or something like that. For many, they have the job because it's the best one available for them. It's important not to vilify every single employee on Wall Street. Go after those on top. Don't vilify everyone, though.