National Review Has No Shame
I see the neo-Nazi -er, National Review has run an article in which they claim that if he were alive today, Martin Luther King wouldn’t vote for Barack Obama. For a magazine as dedicated to white supremacy and fascism as National Review has been since the squalid rag was founded to pretend to know or care what Martin Luther King would have wanted is shameless. How shameless? Imagine if Fred “God Hates Fags” Phelps and his church had claimed to speak for Matthew Shepherd, or if neo-Nazis (or old Nazis) had claimed to speak for Anne Frank. Add them together, then cube it.
Here are some vintage quotes from National Review and its founder, William Buckley:
“I am convinced that Martin Luther King belongs behind bars along with everyone else who conspires to break the law.”
and
“If the entire Negro population in the South were suddenly given the vote and were to use it as a block and pursuant to directives handed down by some more demagogic Negro leaders, chaos would ensue.”
This last one was written after King was assassinated:
“The martyrdom [King] seemed sometimes almost to be seeking may commend him to history and to God, but not likely to Scarsdale, New York, which has never credited the charge that the white community of America conspires to ensure the wretchedness of brothers of Martin Luther King . . .”
There’s more, as Crooks & Liars points out:
So a white supremacist rag founded and edited by a man who thought Martin Luther King was asking for it when he was killed now claims King wouldn’t vote for Barack Obama. Such crocodile tears.
