O’Reilly, the professional liar in a suit and tie

Here is Bill O’Reilly recently during an interview he conducted with Democrat talking head James Carville:

in which he said

No Republicans and no conservatives were invited.

That, of course, was, at best, a false presumption and at worst, an outright lie. In fact, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, Eric Cantor and John Boehner were all invited to the event and all declined for one bullshit reason or another.

One would think at least one person in the House of Representatives, with its 233 Republicans in office, or someone in the Senate, with 46, would grow a spine for this one day and at least pretend to care about the causes championed by Martin Luther King Jr. and at least feign respect for the original March on Washington and what it represented. That more than 270 GOP politicians in Washington did nothing is a sad commentary indeed, especially since politicians on both sides of the aisle came together to support civil rights 50 years ago. I call that a digression.

I mean, seriously. Why would 270 Republicans need to be invited in order to participate? Why couldn’t they — perish the thought — actually ask to be part of the festivities given the historic and crucial importance of the march. Hell, I’m beginning to think that conservatives in the 1960s had more balls than the gaggle of clowns sitting on The Hill here in 2013.

To his credit, O’Reilly aired a correction and admitted he was wrong in his assumption (Ass-U-Me):

Obama on MLK: ‘His words belong to the ages’

I’m not going to say a lot about the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech, mostly because the newspaper for which I write just published a lengthy column of mine on the topic, and as a practice, I generally don’t blog about topics that I cover for the paper. Suffice it to say that King’s abilities in oratory and rhetoric, his intelligence and his command of an audience and a microphone rivaled that of any American past or present. His power to inspire shook the nation’s conscience to its core, changed the social and political landscape for the better and bent the course of history toward freedom more so than anyone since Abraham Lincoln.

His “I Have a Dream” speech, in particular, is a study in rhetoric and should be required reading for all American students. One doesn’t even have to watch the video of the speech from 1963 to feel King’s rhetorical and emotive power; genuine tears flow just from reading the text. If you watch closely in his speeches, when he concludes, he looks completely exhausted as if he had just harnessed some immense force in delivering his timeless message of nonviolent resistance, equality and mutual trust and respect among people all of races.

Here is the video from 1963, along with the last part of his last speech, known as the “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop” sermon, which was delivered April 3, 1968, the night before he was killed.


Sharpton vs. Beck: Round 1

Credit: Kevin Wolf/AP (left); Nikki Kahn/The Washington Post (right)

So, should we reclaim the dream or restore honor?

As it turns out, it depends on who you talk to. Whichever ambiguous path you choose, it’s sure to curry favor with either the Rev. Al Sharpton, who led an event today to honor the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s historic March on Washington in 1964, or Glenn Beck, and we all know his reputation. As it happens, Beck, the presiding FOX News lunatic who was holding his “Reclaim the Dream” rally in Washington on the same weekend, a gathering that he said was not, necessarily, planned, to coincide with King’s famous march and speech. Sure.

Here’s how The Washington Post has framed it:

On the anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech, steps away from where it was delivered, Sarah Palin and other speakers at Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally staked a claim to King’s legacy and to that of the Founding Fathers. They urged a crowd that stretched to the Washington Monument to concentrate on the nation’s accomplishments rather than on its psychological scars.

“Something that is beyond man is happening,” Beck said from the base of the Lincoln Memorial. “America today begins to turn back to God.”

The event was billed as “nonpolitical,” and Beck steered clear of the partisan commentary that has made him a hero to many conservatives and a nemesis to many on the left. But political overtones were unmistakable, and the rally drew a large crowd – including many who said they were new to activism – that was energized and motivated to act.

The effort by Beck and Palin to lay claim to the mantle of the civil rights movement drew protests from the Rev. Al Sharpton and others who marched in a separate and much smaller event, to the National Mall from Dunbar High School in Northwest Washington, to commemorate King’s speech 47 years ago.

“The ‘March on Washington’ changed America,” Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) said at the Sharpton rally, referring to King’s speech. “Our country reached to overcome the low points of our racial history. Glenn Beck’s march will change nothing.” ((http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/28/AR2010082801106.html))

Not only will it not change anything, at least not for the good of the country, it will further splinter America. Beck, in all his civil rights fake-profundity, forgets that the tax cuts that he so trumpets nearly every day on his TV show will hurt many Americans who are the very people he claims to so embrace in the rally: low- to middle-income Americans.

Of course, there’s much over-excited banter from the other side as well. Here is Avis Jones DeWeever, executive director of the National Council of Negro Women:

Don’t let anyone tell you that they have the right to take their country back. It’s our country, too. We will reclaim the dream. It was ours from the beginning.

It is, indeed, black folks’ nation as well, but DeWeever, I think, misunderstands the point the Tea Party crowd, Beck, Palin and others have been attempting to make all along. They aren’t attempting to take the country back from black people or any race (That would be a perversion of the original intent), but from what they refer to as the liberal movement. Now, to me, the word “liberal” is a meaningless term. Even so, the point on Beck’s part is a political one, not a racial one.

And now, let me turn to numbers.

The Washington Post reported that thousands had descended on Washington for the Beck event, while Beck himself estimated that between 300,000-500,000 had attended the event. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), talking to a crowd after the Beck event had this to say:

We’re not going to let anyone get away with saying there were less than a million here today – because we were witnesses.

I find her use of the words “We were witnesses,” interesting. The numbers at the conservative event balloon from 300,000 to 500,000 then to a million? And yes, because we were witnesses, a million turned out to Washington to rail against the government. And because “we” (the gospel writers) were witnesses to the event, Christ performed miracles, raised Lazarus from the dead, exorcised demons and appeared before the disciples after death, and hundreds or maybe thousands were “witnesses” to UFO sightings or abductions and others were “witnesses” to paranormal activity and myriad other happenings that transcend the laws of nature. To simply establish that a person was a witness to a certain event doesn’t make the said event true. It makes the claimant either trustworthy, misunderstood, deceitful or, most plainly, wrong.

As it happens, the actual March on Washington likely consisted of between 200,000-300,000 people without any gross, and in Bachmann’s case, terribly gross, number-fudging.

Here is King’s monumental speech on that monumental day:

Obama: ‘Hope over fear’

Watching the inauguration speech today, it seemed evident to me from Barack Obama’s tone and content that, while the speech included much of the inspirational verbiage we heard in Philadelphia’s Speech on Race and Denver’s Democratic nomination address, we were listening to a man who’s position in history — and his high calling amid numerous national and global crises — had been fully realized.

As was mentioned in a local newspaper editorial, the irony of the moment was palpable. Forty-five years to the day that Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech during the March on Washington, Obama stood in Denver and accepted the nomination to lead the Democratic ticket. A day after the holiday honoring King for his service to the country, we inaugurated Obama as the first black president.

King Jr. famously said: “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.”

Today, Obama stood inside both those moments. Surely, it was a happy, triumphant occasion for his family and himself. But it was also a day where the critical position he found himself in, as frigid air beat down on the crowd of a million or more — the largest ever to assemble in Washington — must have come crashing down around him.

Photo by The Associated Press

Photo by The Associated Press

Some Republicans have claimed he’s just another politician. And he may very well prove to be nothing more. And even if he is nothing more, we will still be able to say that, for a time, he made many hope and believe a better day was coming — that a betteer day and a more perfect union was within our grasp, just as 40 years prior, King helped us believe the same. Even if Obama turns out to be a dud, at least he gave us that.

But, of course, I sincerely hope (and think he will) turn out to be much more. He’s not a wonder-worker. But these things he brings to the table, which have been missing for awhile: poise, thoughtfulness, careful deliberation (almost to a fault), compassion and erudition.

As the next months and years play out, we should get behind him and remember his Inaugural Day words:

On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.