5 Questions (re: "good" democrats)
One of the things that I find most interesting on this forum is the discussion of what makes a person a “good democrat” -- including opinions on party loyalty. I do not believe that there are rigid rules that define the answer. Indeed, the differences of opinion, and even the different value systems that individuals may have, makes the Democratic Party far more interesting than the republican party.
Yesterday, I read Tavis Smiley’s new book, “Death of a King: The Real Story of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Final Year.” King was, of course, a registered republican up until the 1960 presidential election. The democratic candidate, Senator John F. Kennedy, reached out to Mrs. King while Martin was incarcerated -- the situation posed a serious risk to King’s safety -- and by doing so, won the support of King and his father. The support of black citizens would give Kennedy the margin of victory in an extremely close contest.
King would go on to have a close, though sometimes tense, working relationship with LBJ when Johnson became president. Despite FBI Director Hoover’s obsessive warning that King was a “communist” and “sexual pervert,” LBJ would maintain close contact with the civil rights leader, and invite him to the White House several times. Even as King began to connect issues of race with poverty, President Johnson considered him to be a reliable supporter. And King recognized Johnson’s civil rights legislation as historic, and LBJ’s dream of a “Great Society” promising.
Yet, in 1967 -- against the advice of the majority of his associates -- King had connected the war in Vietnam with racism and unjust economic policies. LBJ began to ignore King. No more phone calls, much less invitations to the White House. In time, the president would come to side with Hoover; hence King, now considered a threat to national security, was monitored by military intelligence.
Thus, in January of 1968, Martin Luther King, Jr., would call his first press conference of the year. In it, Dr. King expressed several beliefs that many advisors thought were “risky.” Among them were the following:
-- he attacked the US Department of Justice for indicting Benjamin Spock and William Sloane Coffin for actively assisting young men in opposing the draft;
-- he expressed support for Senator Eugene McCarthy’s run against LBJ in the democratic primaries; and
-- he criticized Senator Robert Kennedy for not opposing the war as frequently or loudly as King believed he should.
Thus, my questions to other forum members are: Was King a “good” democrat? Should he have opposed the democrat president publicly? Was he wrong in wanting a choice in the primaries, other than the sitting president? Was he wrong to criticize the Justice Department? And was he wrong for attempting to pressure Senator Kennedy to speak out forcefully against the war in Vietnam?
Thank you,
H2O Man
= new reply since forum marked as read
Without having read the book, yet, I'm happy to reply briefly, if only to kick the thread and the discussion.
Was King a “good” democrat?
Yes, absolutely. IMO, a good democrat is principled and deliberate, and their actions match their words, even if they don't match the party platform.
Should he have opposed the democrat president publicly?
I believe a good and thoughtful democrat takes the long view, which may required taking action strategically, and this includes public statements.
Was he wrong in wanting a choice in the primaries, other than the sitting president?
No, I think full participation in the process requires honesty; compromising at the primary level is an insult to the dream.
Was he wrong to criticize the Justice Department?
One is never wrong in criticizing government if one is firm in their convictions.
And was he wrong for attempting to pressure Senator Kennedy to speak out forcefully against the war in Vietnam?
Oh, hell no. And this last question reveals, for me, the dual and truly opposite definitions of the term "good democrat".
I'll leave it at that, sir.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He was a man...a human....a person with a conscience.
He was principled. Flaws and all....still principled and ethical.
and a democrat....who should never have (or have had) to toe anyone's line to be one.
My 2 cents. 
All kinds of 
to Solly Mack. 
Can always use a hug.
