Friday, August 30, 2013

NFL Settles in $765 Million Lawsuit So Everyone Will Forget About Concussions

this is especially concerning to me as i have a grandson who plays college football.
A federal judge announced a settlement Thursday between the NFL and 4,500+ retired players bringing suit for the NFL's cover-up of crucial data on the health risks of football, forcing the league to pay out approximately $765,000,000. 
The $765 million figure is to be distributed over a 20-year span. While the settlement seems like it could be characterized as a step in the right direction, both the amount of the compensation and the lack of an admission of guilt on the league's part make for a very weak settlement and undermine any significant attempt at addressing an increasingly important problem.
Here's what the settlement really means. As Bill Barnwell of Grantland notes, the league has decided to set aside a meager $10 million for both education and research.  About a year ago, the league announced that it had pledged $30 million to the National Institutes of Health for medical research on head injuries related to football, an amount three times greater than the settlement award. The league also apportioned $75 million for baseline testing (assessing the validity of the neurological issues laid claim by the former players), and the remaining $675 million is to go to the players and families involved in the suit. 
These baseline tests will go a long way in determining the amount of money awarded to players affected by various neurological issues.
that to me should have decades ago been a no brainer pun not intended, keep them healthy and you reap more benefits for them and the owners, with the billions they make you would think that was job number one.
given the time span and the amount wish someone would come up with a figure per ex-player and see if it's fair.  like they say "people sure act funny when they get a little money" owners of sports teams are not immune, never enough profit. 
What's also important about this settlement is that the players and their families are not receiving this money up front. The $675 million is to be distributed to players over a 20-year span. To put this in context, the NFL brought in around $10 billion in revenue last year.
f we assume that this revenue total remains consistent over the next 20 years (a very conservative assumption at best), the $675 million figure being distributed to the players through this settlement amounts to .34% of the NFL's total projected revenue over this period.
This settlement sum will no doubt set a framework for future suits brought forward by former players. Also, when you take into consideration major reporting outlets like Businessweekrecently predicting a multi-billion dollar settlement, it's hard not to think that the league made out like bandits.
Perhaps the best news for the NFL is the mere fact that they do not have to admit they did anything wrong.
paying off is a moral thing but no disclosure of guilt is a pass to not really sure up the medical indications to future players, this is where the union should shine, but so can idividual or class action lawyers. "it ain't over till it's over"

Maddow on LGBT rights: 'Thanks for nothing, Bill Clinton'

Article Photo
Thursday night on “The Rachel Maddow Show,” host Rachel Maddow marveled at the changes in federal policy on same sex marriage and toward states that are legalizing marijuana. She said that the new laws are so significantly different from the norm that the situation is like “cats chasing dogs, like pigs flying.”

Maddow began by discussing the incredible strides made in this country by advocates for same sex marriage. On Thursday, the U.S. Treasury announced that legally married same sex couples can now jointly file their taxes. This is a sea change from just nine years ago when George W. Bush’s re-election team used the issue of stopping same sex marriage to drive conservative voters to the polls.
“Democrats were terrible on the issue as well,” Maddow said, pointing to Bill Clinton’s two major anti-LGBT legacies, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
much luv for Rachel, this time i think she should consider the times and realize America wasn't ready then.  what Clinton did was allow them to maintain closet status with out the questions forcing self outing or ostracizing.
“Thanks for nothing, Bill Clinton,” she said, adding that it seems almost inconceivable in hindsight that things would change so quickly.
She moved on to Thursday’s historic change in marijuana laws. Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the federal government will not be taking action for now against Colorado and Washington for legalizing marijuana for medical and recreational use. The Department of Justice sent a memo to U.S. Attorneys with new guidelines on marijuana prosecution, urging them not to prosecute low level users.
Maddow pointed out that this comes after decades and decades of federal action against marijuana users and suppliers, that these policy reversals constitute a seismic shift in U.S. drug policy.
there is a time and place for everything no one knows about a good thing until it happens, i prefer to look at this as part of the change Pres. said was possible when we remember he said "yes we can" LGBT helped on the battlefield of civil rights, not necessarily the change some had in mind but undeniably change.
lighten up on Bill Rachel the good things have come to those who waited, cultural change is a big f@#$%^# deal, it requires the majority colaboration and exceptance, or "CHANGE".

Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly: I Made Wrong Claim About March

NEW YORK (AP) — Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly is apologizing for incorrectly claiming that no Republicans were invited to participate in ceremonies marking the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington for civil rights.
In his on-air apology Thursday, O’Reilly said it was a reminder to check the facts before making a definitive statement. He had made the claim on Wednesday’s show, the day of the Washington ceremony. 
In fact, Republican House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor were invited but did not attend. Former President George W. Bush sent a statement.
O’Reilly said the mistake was on him — that he just assumed no Republicans were invited.
But O’Reilly said the Republicans made a mistake, too. He said they should have been there.
assuming makes an ass out of you and me, reconize O'reilly, pointing out another's failure when it's yours at topic does not lessen the guilt.
not a lot of credit for admission he does this kinda thing all the time but this time he got called on it.  don't expect him to research any what he might consider juicy or not provable as to his "assumptions" it's Fox.
he should check his archives and a progressive too and correct all his other intentional misinformation.

Thursday, August 29, 2013

Archbishop of Canterbury: Christians must repent for their homophobia

Article PhotoThe Archbishop of Canterbury, the head of the Church of England, has warned Christians that their views on sexual orientation were beginning to look like an “atrocious injustice”.
Justin Welby spoke at the opening of the Evangelical Alliance on Wednesday. During a question and answer session after his speech, the archbishop was asked why he voted against same-sex marriage legislation.
“What I voted against was what seemed to me to be the rewriting the nature of marriage in a way that I have to say within the Christian tradition and within scripture and within our understanding is not the right way to deal with the very important issues that were attempted to be dealt with in that bill,” he replied.
“The bill was clearly, quite rightly, trying to deal with issues of homophobia in our society,” Welby continued.”As I said at the time in the House of Lords, [...] the church has not been good at dealing with homophobia — it has at times, as God’s people, either implicitly or explicitly supported it and we have to be really, really repentant about that because it is utterly and totally wrong.”
wonder what prompted his speaking out it seems not in favor of homosexuality but tolerance of those who are, which i personally think would be correct we are all Gods children, 
don't remember seeing or hearing in the Bible God saying kill all the homosexuals, except with Lot and those people of Sodom and Gomorrah who were wanton and out of control.
Welby said he didn’t support same-sex marriage, but he warned the Church’s view was quickly becoming out of touch.
“We have to face the fact that the vast majority of people under 35 not only think that what we’re saying is incomprehensible but also think that we’re plain wrong and wicked and equate it to racism and other forms of gross and atrocious injustice. We have to be real about that.”
a very 21st century idea "love thy neighbor as yourself", unless you stand in front of a mirror and say atrocious things to yourself or beat yourself with a hammer you have a chance at being tolerant of another as they would be you, there can come a time when the shoe is on the other foot you don't want those in power to remember how you treated them or maybe that might be good for those who oppose to know the feeling of hate and exclusion.

Obama Plans Executive Action To Close Gun Sale Loophole

Article PhotoWASHINGTON (AP) — Striving to take action where Congress would not, the Obama administration announced new steps Thursday on gun control, curbing the import of military surplus weapons and proposing to close a little-known loophole that lets felons and others circumvent background checks by registering guns to corporations.
Four months after a gun control drive collapsed spectacularly in the Senate, President Barack Obama added two more executive actions to a list of 23 steps the White House determined Obama could take on his own to reduce gun violence. 
With the political world focused on Mideast tensions and looming fiscal battles, the move signaled Obama’s intent to show he hasn’t lost sight of a cause he took up after 20 first graders and six adults were gunned down last year in an elementary school in Newtown, Conn.
One new policy will end a government practice that lets military weapons, sold or donated by the U.S. to allies, be reimported into the U.S. by private entities, where some may end up on the streets. The White House said the U.S. has approved 250,000 of those guns to be reimported since 2005; under the new policy, only museums and a few other entities like the government will be eligible to reimport military-grade firearms.
The Obama administration is also proposing a federal rule to stop those who would be ineligible to pass a background check from skirting the law by registering a gun to a corporation or trust. The new rule would require people associated with those entities, like beneficiaries and trustees, to undergo the same type of fingerprint-based background checks as individuals if they want to register guns.
i am praying he is able to do this alone the republicans want to muddy up his legacy, while they do nothing to protect the kids and others from being shot to death almost on a daily schedule.  let their legacy be exacted by their incompetence and outright denial of the American process, he won they didn't in 5 years they expect us to believe he did nothing, then why are we getting better than we were 5 years ago under their thumb in spite of their obstruction?
Vice President Joe Biden, Obama's point-man on gun control after the Newtown tragedy thrust guns into the national spotlight, was set to unveil the new actions Thursday at the White House.
The event in the Roosevelt Room will also mark the ceremonial swearing-in for Todd Jones, whose confirmation to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives after six years of political wrangling to fill that position was another of Obama's post-Newtown priorities. A Senate deal to approve the president's pending nominations after Democrats threatened to change Senate rules cleared the way for Jones' confirmation last month.
Still out of reach for Obama were the steps that gun control advocates and the administration's own review say could most effectively combat gun violence in the U.S., like an assault weapons ban and fewer exceptions for background checks for individual sales. Only Congress can act on those fronts.
once again here it is at the doorstep of congress where legislation goes to die, and that is why Pres. is seeking to go it alone because those who oppose could care less than gnat crap if ypou are gunned down in the street or your home as long as your killer was able to get the weapon of your destruction. despicable them  
those who care say a prayer.

Ted Cruz: Syria, Obamacare 'tied'

Article Photo
Sen. Ted Cruz on Wednesday tied Obamacare and Syria together, saying the two issues are linked “by an arrogance of this administration.”
The Texas Republican told radio host Rush Limbaugh that it’s clear by the way President Barack Obama and his administration approaches Obamacare and the conflict in Syria that “they don’t believe they’re accountable to the American people.”
brass up his ass he is accusing the Pres. as not believing he is accountable, he got that from the Bush era where they refused to testify, called executive privilege and sent one sacrificial lamb the Scooter.
they lied us into wars they did not pay for or finish and bear no responsibility according to them.
Fundamentally, actually, these two issues, you look at Syria, you look at Obamacare," Cruz said, according to a transcript on Limbaugh's site. "They're tied together. They're tied together by an arrogance of this administration, that they don't believe they're accountable to the American people, and they are going to jam their agenda down the throats of the American people."
taking the time to make sure this is the right move for Syrian intervention, and providing 30 million more Americans health care, is not only "an abomination", are now the same arrogance they exhibit daily, they do the dirt and try to sweep it on our shoes.
Cruz is going to mouth himself out of contention, i think he's becoming too much for the far right he cannot win 2016 not enough that go along with his exaggerations, and their numbers are dwindling, he'll end up being to lone vote for himself, oh cheney and his spawn will vote for him.

White House expected to brief Congress on Syria

Article PhotoWith the United States apparently on the verge of launching military strikes in Syria, senior administration officials will brief members of the congressional leadership, as well as the chairmen and top-ranking minority-party on national security committees, on the situation Thursday.
Many members of Congress, even some who are inclined to support military action, have expressed a belief that the White House should consult with lawmakers — or even seek authorization — before using military force. Still others are miffed that only a handful of lawmakers are given information about possible acts of war by the United States.
we know this is just the republicans making Pres. jump through hoops, and posturing.  we also know had Romney been elected this would not be an issue they would have already been engaged.  you've heard all the posturing blaming Pres. for "inaction" and "we can't let this happen", "he's not leading" and like everything else they complain about when he does it they challenge and accuse him of impeachable offenses.  know this he will never be right, or win or be acknowledged by republicans who seek to have history portray him as a keystone cop in the WH second only to Bush.
“It will take presidential leadership and a clear explanation of our policy, our interests, and our objectives to gain public and Congressional support for any military action against Syria,” House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) wrote to Obama in a letter sent Wednesday.
they have not approved anything before i think they are bullying him into this so they can pick it apart, they have not had an idea since the one to sink this admin in 2008 they like a vulture on a tree limb waiting to swoop down and kill any Obama initiative, this is a set up to fail, Beohner is parroting the T-Per's demands for the moderate republicans to do it their way, he knows better but all he can do is cry.
note how they throw around Presidental leadership which they won't allow by blocking him, what we need is a congress not of home grown terrorist, scaring their party into "the do nothingest party ever".

Guess Who’s Setting Up The GOP’s New Vote Rigging System? Read more:
No longer satisfied with the humble vote, the GOP has tapped Karl Rove to develop a system by which they can pick every winner. Bye Bye Tea Party. Election Fraud For Dummies, from

The GOP is not out of the election manipulation business yet. Despite the uncovering of Karl Rove’s attempt to hack the election by the hacker collective Anonymous, the Washington Examiner has unveiled how the Republican Party is building a digital network designed to rival, and surpass, Romney’s vote challenger system Orca.

For those who do not remember, Orca was a centralized computer system which, on the surface, allowed for direct ties between the election headquarters and the poll challengers, using mobile apps. Orca was Romney’s attempt to out-do Obama’s election machine. As reported by Anonymous, Orca held a darker secret, and was set up to manipulate the election in a similar manner to what is theorized happened in 2004 with Ohio where a server went dead for 90 minutes in the middle of an election, and the tabulation miraculously flipped from John Kerry to George W. Bush.
This new system, being developed by former Facebook engineer Andy Barkett, the Republican National Committee’s chief technology officer, looks capable of allowing even more insidious poll and vote manipulation than ever before.

The plan involves intrusive data scrubbing through detailed observation, using set-top boxes such as those provided by your cable provider to analyze viewing habits on an individual household level. It also scrubs social media to selectively target voters for advertising. Combining the two, the GOP is plotting on becoming Big Brother, and they plan on having it ready for a dry run for the 2014 elections, securing candidates which have the approval of the party bosses while eliminating competition, such as Tea Party wildcards who all but destroyed Mitt Romney’s chances in 2012 though comments such as “legitimate rape.”
this speaks volumes about the character of the party that would be kings, what ever happened to go to the states plead your case, debate the issues and the better candidate wins, has that ever been the case or have our elections always been rigged some successfully others not, but truly absent is the political process as we are told it is.  take another look above now do any of those ploys give signals of "yes that's the party for me" good old American secret values like republicans decision they did not need to change their values and we see here and every place that is not a winning plan.
they intend to manipulate, invade your home with Neilson like devices and target you  remember this by G W Bush, "you can fool some of the people all of the time and those are the ones you want to concentrate on" .  the right wing has been doing this since the 70's to you and anyone who looks at TV or listens to the radio.
a party with this much dissention within it's ranks can't stand for long, too many chefs cause unattended boil overs.

Obama’s Inspiring Speech On MLK Anniversary Repudiates MSNBC’s Crass Racial Agitation

Article PhotoThe president spent most of the opening of his speech reverentially recalling the oppression and struggles overcome by the civil rights movement’s activist leaders and followers alike. He touched on the lives taken by the hands of the hateful in that tumultuous period, and the tirelessness of the civil rights leaders who surmounted that great injustice to change America and the world.
It was a broad speech. It was not overly political or myopically focused on the small issues which dominate political debates on cable news today. It was a historic speech, spanning generations and crossing arbitrary national boarders to appeal to a common humanity. It was very much a speech that King would have appreciated had he lived to see the nation’s first black president pay tribute to his legacy.
Then Obama admonished and repudiated those who say that “little has changed” in the 50 years since MLK spoke on those steps. He said that to declare complete racial equality had been achieved would also dishonor the memories of those who died seeking to achieve it.
“We’ll suffer the occasional setback, but we will win these fights,” Obama said. “This country has changed too much. People of goodwill regardless of party are too plentiful for those with ill-will to change history’s currents.”
Yes, the president spoke to his base. He spoke of the growing wealth gap between blacks and whites, high unemployment among minorities, poor schools, overcrowded prisons, his embattled health care reform law and, of course, his political opponents who stand in the way of civic progress as he defines it. 
It is forgivable for the president to take such an anticipated opportunity to advance his own political agenda – nearly any competent politician would.
In general, though, when the president took on the issue of race he was responsible, dignified, and optimistic. Obama advocated for overcoming bigotry and rejecting excuse for allowing families to fragment and children to go uneducated and unsupervised. He was a role model for the next generation in that moment on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.
It was a soaring speech deserving of praise. But contrast the president’s address with the smallness of some of his most dedicated supporters on MSNBC – some of whom spoke at that podium just hours before the president took the stage.
i can see where he would want to back away from the critique of MSNBC personalities although in my opinion true, the right would just spin in their favor and try to paint him and MSNBC as far let extremist or something just as ridiculous.
 The 2012 presidential campaign was an especially educational romp through the energetic imaginations of professional racial victims. Far too many examples of egregious exaggeration and inference occurred on that network over the course of that election cycle to cite here, but suffice it to say that Chris Matthews’ insistence that Mitt Romney’s very decision to challenge Obama for the office of the presidency carried racial implications is all you need to know.
Earlier this month, Matthews insisted that President Barack Obama’s decision to give MSNBC a wide berth was evidence for him that his network was not as biased as its reputation suggests. But Obama’s speech today suggests that the president does not want anything to do with the agitation practiced on that network.
i think it was the correct move by MSNBC sometime you have to fight fire with fire, and taking in consideration of the nasty racist vitriolic rhetoric coming from Fox and the campaign people, had they not called attention to the reality and the destructive results of the republican propaganda juggernaut we would have had a lot more people under informed.
again i understand Pres.'s position but i think he needs to find a way to lessen the sting of those who do support him on the air waves.

North Carolina Sharia Ban is Unconstitutional

are you ready for this?
north, carolina, sharia, ban, is, unconstitutional, , North Carolina just passed a bill banning judges from considering Islamic law — or sharia — in court rulings. The bill was passed without Gov. Pat McCrory's (R) signature. 
North Carolina is now the seventh state to enact anti-sharia legislation, joining Arizona, Kansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Tennessee. Unlike broader bans enacted by some of the other states, North Carolina limits the ban to family law practices.
Governor McCrory called the bill "unnecessary" and he is completely right. Not only is banning sharia law pointless but it is unconstitutional too.
were they not running around hair on fire right around the time republicans decided Pres. was a Muslim, fear mongering their base with the onslaught of sharia law coming to a city near you, even passing laws to prevent their lie from happening?
Muslim voters, they are throwing you a bone of insincerity, they have not stopped hating in the last week, hold on one of them will come out and continue to hate they are trying to hard too late, key word "unnecessary", so it was illegal in the first place and they are going to rectify their wrong, nah probably got called out or one of them realized the the unconstitutional ramifications, and now trying to get ahead of it.
Banning sharia law in any state is a superfluous decision because sharia law actually requires Muslims to obey the laws their nation. So any Muslim who lives in a non-Muslim country as a citizen or immigrant is obligated by Islamic law to follow the law of that country they reside in. As long as American Muslims want to continue to live in the United States they must adhere to the U.S. Constitution as the ultimate law of the land. Any individual who unlawfully attempts to use Islam as a justification for committing a crime is actually going against Islamic guidelines.
Critics of sharia law, the very individuals who encourage banning it, would probably be the first to ask: If U.S. laws do in fact trump sharia laws for American Muslims who live in the United States, then why would a ban bother them? The answer to this question is simple: Because banning sharia law is unconstitutional and an infringement on their religious freedoms as American citizens.
we are finding out daily those republicans in congress have no idea what the laws are and how they are to be enforced, so we get what they think it should be and they try to govern on their perception of constitutional rights, hard to distinguish those rights when their foot prints redact 3/4 of it.  another false alarm by the right wing exposed.

Steve King: Unemployed people are like kids trying to eat without doing chores

Article PhotoRep. Steve King (R-IA) told a crowd in South Carolina this week that unemployed people were like children who wanted to eat before they had done their chores.
At a closed-door Charleston event put on by conservative activist Mallory Factor, King said that there were over 100 million people between the ages of 16 and 74 who were “simply not in the work force.”
“Now, what kind of a family, if you had six kids and a third of you kids would say, ‘I’m not doing the chores, mom’?” he opined. “If any of them say, ‘I refuse, I’m not going to participate, I’m not going to contribute to the American GDP,’ pretty soon those kids would be on the — you get to eat after you do the work! Not just in hopes that one day you might actually do the work!”
wow you can almost hear the republican voters that are unemployed jumping ship, maybe they will realize part of the reason they are unemployed just made the demeaning disparagement about their character, but some will turn a deaf ear and vote any way.
“And so here we sit, this great big country that is a family, and we have common interests and a common history and a common culture and a common language and we have free enterprise capitalism, and this all should tie us together,” King continued. “See what’s happening?
A hundred million Americans aren’t contributing. And yet, we’re looking out across the border and saying, let’s bring in some more people that are uneducated, unskilled. And we’re going to put them into the unskilled workforce, and somehow we’re going to increase our economy.”
did he just re-diss the 47%?  he is obviously not talking to Americans that believe in American proposed values, what gave it away the common analogies "common history and common culture", do you share that sentiment?  Clinto, "takes a lot of brass to accuse someone of what you are doing", to them denying jobs and unemployment, food stamps, healh care, who is the real bogeyman?

George Zimmerman's Wife Admits Perjury, Apologizes to Judge

Article PhotoThe wife of George Zimmerman, the Florida man acquitted in the death of Trayvon Martin, pleaded guilty today to perjury chargesand apologized for her lie saying "the truth will set you free."
The plea deal allows Shellie Zimmerman to avoid a felony charge.
George Zimmerman was not present during today's proceedings asJudge Marlene Alva asked Shellie Zimmerman if she understood what she was pleading to.
guess he had to make appearances elsewhere, is he pursuing a career?
"Yes, your honor," she responded as Alva asked her several questions about the agreement.
Under the negotiated plea deal Shellie Zimmerman can continue pursuing her nursing aspirations because she will not be a convicted felon. She was given 100 hours of community service, one year probation and will have to present an apology letter to the judge she lied to.
life is good in Sanford Fla. if you are a murderous, and larceny hearted Zimmerman.  innocence gets buried and the guilty go free to pursue a career and the perpetrator rides around lookin' for autograph hounds, (that's me did not read that anywhere).
In her letter to Judge Kenneth Lester, who was presiding when she committed her perjury, Shellie Zimmerman wrote, "By lying under oath, I let my God down, I let your Honor and the court down, ... and most of all I let myself down."
"I am a Christian and I know the words of the Bible, espcially those of Jesus in the Gospel of John 8:32. I am sorry that I had forgotten this passage and forevermore I promise to remember, 'The truth will set you free.'"
Shellie faced perjury charges after she was accused of lying about her and George Zimmerman's finances during his April 2012 bond hearing.
When asked by prosecutors and Zimmerman's attorneys about their finances, she said they were virtually indigent. However, Zimmerman had raised nearly $200,000 in funds through an online defense fund. Taped jail house recordings later surfaced showing Shellie and George speaking in code about their finances. Those conversations led to Zimmerman's bail being revoked and then bail raised to a $1 million bond.
On April 9, 2012 George Zimmerman launched the website and within weeks received more than $200,000 in donations to help pay for his mounting legal fees. But during his bond hearing Zimmerman's wife testified that the couple was nearly broke.
for someone who admits to being conscious of all the laws man made and spiritual, money won.

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

No, Martin Luther King Jr. Was Not A Republican — But Here’s What He Had To Say About Them

“Most people don’t talk about the fact that Martin Luther King was a Republican.”
was that a disclaimer by saying most don't talk about it implies the proverbial covering of the ass, to explain why you had not heard that ditty, they would have wore that out he is to Blacks and to some Whites the the civil rights martyr of all time and as now they would have then destroyed his character and image.
That’s a quote from Ada Fisher, a Republican National Committeewoman from North Carolina, that was published without qualification or correction this week by ABC News.
Fisher is wrong on two fronts. First, many people talk about the “fact” that King was a Republican. It is asserted incessantly by conservatives on Twitter andelsewhere on the internet, especially in the lead up to today’s 50th anniversary of the March on Washington. The claim is most prominently advanced by King’s niece, Republican activist Alveda King. Over the years, conservative groups havepurchased billboards making the claim.
Second, Martin Luther King Jr. was not a Republican. Or a Democrat.
King was not a partisan and never endorsed any political candidate. In a 1958 interview, King said “I don’t think the Republican party is a party full of the almighty God nor is the Democratic party. They both have weaknesses … And I’m not inextricably bound to either party.”
the desperation throughout the right wing is just unbelievable they lie with impunity, they seek to destroy and erase any positive history of those of color, like they took credit for accomplishments of Blacks leaving those true inventors in obscurity.
King did, however, weigh in on the Republican party during his lifetime. In Chapter 23 of his autobiography, King writes this about the 1964 Republican National Convention:
The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism. All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right. The “best man” at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade.
Senator Goldwater had neither the concern nor the comprehension necessary to grapple with this problem of poverty in the fashion that the historical moment dictated. On the urgent issue of civil rights, Senator Goldwater represented a philosophy that was morally indefensible and socially suicidal.

While not himself a racist, Mr. Goldwater articulated a philosophy which gave aid and comfort to the racist. His candidacy and philosophy would serve as an umbrella under which extremists of all stripes would stand. In the light of these facts and because of my love for America, I had no alternative but to urge every Negro and white person of goodwill to vote against Mr. Goldwater and to withdraw support from any Republican candidate that did not publicly disassociate himself from Senator Goldwater and his philosophy.
In 2008, King’s son Martin Luther King III said “It is disingenuous to imply that my father was a Republican. He never endorsed any presidential candidate, and there is certainly no evidence that he ever even voted for a Republican.” Garrow claimed there is little doubt King voted for Kennedy in 1960 and Johnson in 1964.
expect to hear this again from the otherside of truth.