Malcom X was the man
Tu Stultus Es
Malcom X fought the man.eleven bravo wrote:
Malcom X was the man
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
Hey Pug, if you do not think integrity, morality, honesty or fairness is something that the civil rights or MLK stood for, so be it, then I can see where you would say it is insignificant and it does not matter, and more power to you and your logic.Pug wrote:
Do I have to be a preacher to be part of the civil rights movement?
Well, in the mean time you can explain how her accomplishments, which have been shown to amount to more of that than MLK's is insignificant while MLK's is beyond reproach.lowing wrote:
tell yas what you show me where I said Palin did more than MLK. I merely compared what they actually did accomplish.
Here's one. But I think you misquoted yourself.
I'm not going to find the others, since you meant something else, which is fine by me.
We could have saved five or six pages if you were a bit more careful.
LOL...so let me get this straight. "His character is shit and SHOULD NOT be part of what he did for the civil rights movement" and now you post the above?lowing wrote:
Hey Pug, if you do not think integrity, morality, honesty or fairness is something that the civil rights or MLK stood for, so be it, then I can see where you would say it is insignificant and it does not matter, and more power to you and your logic.
Make up your fucking mind.
lowing, I disagree with your premise that he lacked any morality or integrity whatsoever.lowing wrote:
Perhaps for others, but for a preacher wh obuilt his entire reputation and preached integrity honesty, morality and fairness. do you not find it at least ironic, in not flat out relevant, that hte man preaching all of this was neither honst, moral fair or possessed an ounce of integrity?
Her accomplishments apples for apples did amount to more, outside what they both have been proven to have accomplished, she was a public servant, she was a governor, she was a mayor. MLK was a protester.Pug wrote:
Well, in the mean time you can explain how her accomplishments, which have been shown to amount to more of that than MLK's is insignificant while MLK's is beyond reproach.lowing wrote:
tell yas what you show me where I said Palin did more than MLK. I merely compared what they actually did accomplish.
Here's one. But I think you misquoted yourself.
I'm not going to find the others, since you meant something else, which is fine by me.
We could have saved five or six pages if you were a bit more careful.LOL...so let me get this straight. "His character is shit and SHOULD NOT be part of what he did for the civil rights movement" and now you post the above?lowing wrote:
Hey Pug, if you do not think integrity, morality, honesty or fairness is something that the civil rights or MLK stood for, so be it, then I can see where you would say it is insignificant and it does not matter, and more power to you and your logic.
Make up your fucking mind.
If you insist that the civil rights movement is relevant to the man, you have my response, if you insist the civil rights movement is not relevant to the man, then stop bringing it up and I will ask if integrity, morality, honesty or fairness is relevant to any man?
Take your pick on which one you want to answer.
Last edited by lowing (2010-08-05 09:51:20)
It is not like he was backed into a corner and had to make a choice so he chose the lesser of 2 evils. He cheated on his wife and he cheated on his credentials. He did so with a choice to make and he made it. he chose the path of dishonestly, void of integrity and fairness. Not to even mention he did this to the person he loved, what do you think he was capable of to those he did not?SenorToenails wrote:
lowing, I disagree with your premise that he lacked any morality or integrity whatsoever.lowing wrote:
Perhaps for others, but for a preacher wh obuilt his entire reputation and preached integrity honesty, morality and fairness. do you not find it at least ironic, in not flat out relevant, that hte man preaching all of this was neither honst, moral fair or possessed an ounce of integrity?
If he had integrity, where did it show? Let me guess, his stolen words?
What do I think he was capable of to those he did not love? I don't know, and neither do you. You're using conjecture as a means to tear him down?lowing wrote:
It is not like he was backed into a corner and had to make a choice so he chose the lesser of 2 evils. He cheated on his wife and he cheated on his credentials. He did so with a choice to make and he made it. he chose the path of dishonestly, void of integrity and fairness. Not to even mention he did this to the person he loved, what do you think he was capable of to those he did not?
It showed in the other works he did, which you aren't willing to give the man credit for. He was not a great husband or a great academic, but he did do quite a bit with his life that was positive.lowing wrote:
If he had integrity, where did it show? Let me guess, his stolen words?
Iti s called a behavior pattern and it is easy to follow in his case.SenorToenails wrote:
What do I think he was capable of to those he did not love? I don't know, and neither do you. You're using conjecture as a means to tear him down?lowing wrote:
It is not like he was backed into a corner and had to make a choice so he chose the lesser of 2 evils. He cheated on his wife and he cheated on his credentials. He did so with a choice to make and he made it. he chose the path of dishonestly, void of integrity and fairness. Not to even mention he did this to the person he loved, what do you think he was capable of to those he did not?It showed in the other works he did, which you aren't willing to give the man credit for. He was not a great husband or a great academic, but he did do quite a bit with his life that was positive.lowing wrote:
If he had integrity, where did it show? Let me guess, his stolen words?
He was a protester, what other works did he do or is he known for? ( I mean works that were not stolen from others mind you).
Last edited by lowing (2010-08-05 10:00:51)
I'm sure you are able to look into an alternate future and see what MLK might have done with his life, right? Why else would you be trying to pin part of your argument on nothing but the supposition that you have some idea of what might have been.lowing wrote:
Iti s called a behavior pattern and it is easy to follow in his case.
He was a protester, he what other works did he do ( I mean works that were not stolen from others mind you).
He was a protester and a leader. He may have used some of other people's words, but his leadership was certainly not stolen from anyone else. Promoting Ghandi-style civil disobedience and non-violence was part of that.
behavior pattern deal with it. i am all for arguing what he is acutually guilty of. thereis plenty there I do not need to show based on his behavior that his future would have probably been more of the same.SenorToenails wrote:
I'm sure you are able to look into an alternate future and see what MLK might have done with his life, right? Why else would you be trying to pin part of your argument on nothing but the supposition that you have some idea of what might have been.lowing wrote:
Iti s called a behavior pattern and it is easy to follow in his case.
He was a protester, he what other works did he do ( I mean works that were not stolen from others mind you).
He was a protester and a leader. He may have used some of other people's words, but his leadership was certainly not stolen from anyone else. Promoting Ghandi-style civil disobedience and non-violence was part of that.
Yeah he was a protester AND A LEADER!! Now we are getting somewhere....So you feel integrity honesty and morality is insignificant or irrelevant to a good leader. Gotta respectfully disagree.
Last edited by lowing (2010-08-05 10:10:15)
Did he lead immorally?lowing wrote:
behavior pattern deal with it. i am all for arguing what he is acutually guilty of. thereis plenty there I do not need to show based on his behavior that his future would have probably been more of the same.
Yeah he was a protester AND A LEADER!! Got it...So you feel integrity honesty and morality is insignificant or irrelevant to a good leader. Gotta respectfully disagree.
He betrayed his own "spoken" beliefs and yes this makes him a bad leader, since his leadership was steeped in lies and false pretences. Would he have been a bad leader if he got busted during the civil rights movement?SenorToenails wrote:
Did he lead immorally?lowing wrote:
behavior pattern deal with it. i am all for arguing what he is acutually guilty of. thereis plenty there I do not need to show based on his behavior that his future would have probably been more of the same.
Yeah he was a protester AND A LEADER!! Got it...So you feel integrity honesty and morality is insignificant or irrelevant to a good leader. Gotta respectfully disagree.
So anyway, do you really feel a good leader does not need to possess integrity honesty morality or fairness within his character? tell me more about this and how you figure it.
Well...again, we have you saying Palin has accomplished more than MLK...I've posted several lists with MLK in the top ten. So where's Palin rank?lowing wrote:
Her accomplishments apples for apples did amount to more, outside what they both have been proven to have accomplished, she was a public servant, she was a governor, she was a mayor. MLK was a protester.
If you insist that the civil rights movement is relevant to the man, you have my response, if you insist the civil rights movement is not relevant to the man, then stop bringing it up and I will ask if integrity, morality, honesty or fairness is relevant to any man?
Take your pick on which one you want to answer.
How exactly am I insisting anything, as you just included his character within his civil rights activity?
Did I get this wrong:
Hey Pug, if you do not think integrity, morality, honesty or fairness is something that the civil rights or MLK stood for
(aka, his integrity, morality, honesty and fairness are part of his civil rights involvement?)
I thought you wanted it separate????
A good leader should have those characteristics.lowing wrote:
So anyway, do you really feel a good leader does not need to possess integrity honesty morality or fairness within his character? tell me more about this and how you figure it.
The timing sucks on finding out about MLK though, doesn't it?
Already said to chose which you want,If you insist that the civil rights movement is relevant to the man, you have my response, if you insist the civil rights movement is not relevant to the man, then stop bringing it up and I will ask if integrity, morality, honesty or fairness is relevant to any man?Pug wrote:
Well...again, we have you saying Palin has accomplished more than MLK...I've posted several lists with MLK in the top ten. So where's Palin rank?lowing wrote:
Her accomplishments apples for apples did amount to more, outside what they both have been proven to have accomplished, she was a public servant, she was a governor, she was a mayor. MLK was a protester.
If you insist that the civil rights movement is relevant to the man, you have my response, if you insist the civil rights movement is not relevant to the man, then stop bringing it up and I will ask if integrity, morality, honesty or fairness is relevant to any man?
Take your pick on which one you want to answer.
How exactly am I insisting anything, as you just included his character within his civil rights activity?
Did I get this wrong:
Hey Pug, if you do not think integrity, morality, honesty or fairness is something that the civil rights or MLK stood for
(aka, his integrity, morality, honesty and fairness are part of his civil rights involvement?)
I thought you wanted it separate????
Accomplishments IE tasks, are not the same as recognition.
MLK is recognized for his work in civil rights, I have no problem with that.
This does not mean he has accomplished more than Palin ( if you insist that I compare the 2) She has IN FACT accomplished all MLK has and then some. Including being a leader. I already asked before what has MLK really done? He was a protester and a leader. Now I have you telling me that his character is not significant. I can only assume integrity honesty morality etc.. are not reqquired in your eyes for good leadership.
I see, so it is relevant to everyone other leader, just not MLK...ok well we all have opinions don't we?Pug wrote:
A good leader should have those characteristics.lowing wrote:
So anyway, do you really feel a good leader does not need to possess integrity honesty morality or fairness within his character? tell me more about this and how you figure it.
The timing sucks on finding out about MLK though, doesn't it?
Anyone who is revealed to be a hypocrite when leading is obviously not fit to lead anymore...but like Pug said, it wasn't discovered during his time. This is not an excuse for his behavior, by any means.lowing wrote:
So anyway, do you really feel a good leader does not need to possess integrity honesty morality or fairness within his character? tell me more about this and how you figure it.
Ummm, no, I've explained he isn't getting a free pass from me already.lowing wrote:
I see, so it is relevant to everyone other leader, just not MLK...ok well we all have opinions don't we?Pug wrote:
A good leader should have those characteristics.lowing wrote:
So anyway, do you really feel a good leader does not need to possess integrity honesty morality or fairness within his character? tell me more about this and how you figure it.
The timing sucks on finding out about MLK though, doesn't it?
SO what are you tell me? He was a good leader because he was skillful enough to keep his hypocrisy from the public eye?SenorToenails wrote:
Anyone who is revealed to be a hypocrite when leading is obviously not fit to lead anymore...but like Pug said, it wasn't discovered during his time. This is not an excuse for his behavior, by any means.lowing wrote:
So anyway, do you really feel a good leader does not need to possess integrity honesty morality or fairness within his character? tell me more about this and how you figure it.
Where did I say integrity/honesty/morality aren't important?lowing wrote:
Already said to chose which you want,If you insist that the civil rights movement is relevant to the man, you have my response, if you insist the civil rights movement is not relevant to the man, then stop bringing it up and I will ask if integrity, morality, honesty or fairness is relevant to any man?
Accomplishments IE tasks, are not the same as recognition.
MLK is recognized for his work in civil rights, I have no problem with that.
This does not mean he has accomplished more than Palin ( if you insist that I compare the 2) She has IN FACT accomplished all MLK has and then some. Including being a leader. I already asked before what has MLK really done? He was a protester and a leader. Now I have you telling me that his character is not significant. I can only assume integrity honesty morality etc.. are not reqquired in your eyes for good leadership.
Now that we are making head way here, let us wipe the slate clean and pick up fresh.Pug wrote:
Ummm, no, I've explained he isn't getting a free pass from me already.lowing wrote:
I see, so it is relevant to everyone other leader, just not MLK...ok well we all have opinions don't we?Pug wrote:
A good leader should have those characteristics.
The timing sucks on finding out about MLK though, doesn't it?
We agree MLK's accomplishments was that of a protester, and a leader. Is his character relevant to these accomplishments or not.?
yeah, that's exactly what he saidlowing wrote:
SO what are you tell me? He was a good leader because he was skillful enough to keep his hypocrisy from the public eye?SenorToenails wrote:
Anyone who is revealed to be a hypocrite when leading is obviously not fit to lead anymore...but like Pug said, it wasn't discovered during his time. This is not an excuse for his behavior, by any means.lowing wrote:
So anyway, do you really feel a good leader does not need to possess integrity honesty morality or fairness within his character? tell me more about this and how you figure it.
Have you been sniffing glue?lowing wrote:
Now that we are making head way here, let us wipe the slate clean and pick up fresh.Pug wrote:
Ummm, no, I've explained he isn't getting a free pass from me already.lowing wrote:
I see, so it is relevant to everyone other leader, just not MLK...ok well we all have opinions don't we?
We agree MLK's accomplishments was that of a protester, and a leader. Is his character relevant to these accomplishments or not.?
I've already said yes.