Obama and MLK really don't belong on the same web page.

How many banksters walk free this day? All of them. And how many government whistleblowers are watching their lives be ruined further on this day? And how many "signature strikes" will Obama's drones deliver this day?

The list is long and time is short.

I'm very sad to say I have to agree with Zapkitty above. As a Black woman, I don't think I've ever felt my political voice has been so shut out by the Black Professional Political Class as under this Administration. Oh, the irony. Clearly, the job of activist Black progressives under the first Black president is to sit down, shut up, and support whatever agenda the President is pushing, no matter how neoliberal. And this "Shut up and play ball" message is coming from White liberals just as strongly as it is from Black liberals.

But I do want to thank Brad for his dedication and tireless work in trying to bring light to the very dark and corroded place that is our "democracy". You are truly loved and appreciated.

Sorry Brad, and you know I respect you and support the site, you are so totally off base with the graphic comparing Obama with MLK. This is a huge huge insult to MLK and all that he stood for, and all that he did.

I really can't fathom how you thought or think that the comparison is in any way appropriate.

It is not. Egregious, Brad.

Oaktown Girl, do you read Black Agenda Report? They say what you say.

Respectfully, I'd suggest that Zap, Oaktown Girl & Valley Girl have overreacted to the photo Brad posted in this piece.

I believe that the photo was appropriate in 2008 and remains appropriate now as Barack Obama's very ascendency to the Presidency represents at least a partial fulfillment of MLK's "I have a dream" speech.

That, by no means suggests that Brad does not see the fundamental distinction between the two men --- a distinction that we spelled out in Beyond Afghanistan, We Must be Insane and A Thoughtful Response to Robert Gibbs from the Educated Left.

Those articles make the very same points you've raised here, and more. Though they were drafted by me, I can assure you that Brad edited and approved each of them before publishing the same on his blog.

If you take the time, you will find numerous instances in which Brad has published similar critiques of the incumbent President.

The photo was not the "egregious" comparison that the three of you assumed it to be.

To all above: Hopefully you know I appreciate your thoughts, whether they agree with my own or not. (Perhaps especially when they don't agree with my own.)

That said, a couple of quick thoughts in response. It seems those who were quick to criticize above may have glossed over the text I used to introduce that graphic (which is from 2008). So here is the text again, this time with emphasis added. Please read it closely this time...

Finally, Ernie's response above is an appropriate one. I'd add only this quote of mine from an article here only days ago:

...Along with the added remark: Wow! Tough crowd!

Hi Brad. Thanks for reading.

Yes, I did read your words concerning the graphic, and I read them carefully before I posted.

~~The timing of this year's ceremonial swearing in makes makes this Photoshopped graphic, widely circulated during Obama's first inaugural, perhaps even more appropriate, even if somewhat less moving four years later...~~

Perhaps I didn't understand what you were intending with that. But the graphic says to me "they are brothers", because of the hand to hand part of the image especially. If there was some deep irony in your comment, I missed it. What did you mean by "somewhat less moving"?

For me, images can trigger an in emotional reaction, and that one did, and it trumped your words. It triggered a very negative reaction. Obama is in his actions, not so much his words (which are often the opposite of what he does) the antithesis of MLK and all he stood for, and spoke for, and fought for, and died for.

I wonder if perhaps my strong reaction to something that you see as not worthy of a strong reaction come from our different ages, and how we experience that time in history. Just a thought.

I actually don't know how old you are, but I'd put it as 2 decades younger than I am. I came of age during the Vietnam War, and the assassination MLK, and Robert Kennedy, 1968, in a few short months. Graduated college in 1969. Those were turbulent times, and marked my generation.

Both MLK and Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize- and that is about all that I can see that they have in common. Oh, and some similarity in the color of their skin. MLK: "I have a dream". Obama: "I have a drone".

As for Canning's take that I and others had "over reacted", one's reaction is a very personal matter. Because I had a different reaction than Canning thought warranted, it does not make my reaction and that of others any less genuine or truthful or deeply felt.

Best,

VG

p.s. Brad

Another factor here perhaps has to do with geography. I am a Californian, born and bred. But, I have lived in the South for the past 20 years- not entirely by choice, but I have a job in academia, and sometimes one has to go there the job is. And, once tenure sets in, it is hard to move.

I really did not fully appreciate (as in know, not as in like) the racial history and events of the South until I lived there. Until then, it was not possible for me to begin grasp the enormity of the challenges, or what ever might be the right word. It was all, before that, somewhat removed.

The Univ I am at did not admit women until 1953, considerably later than its founding in 1836. I know that there are Univs that became co-ed much later than that. I mention this because when I came there, the legacy of racism was present. In all the older buildings, there were two types of restrooms. One for women, one for men. And, they were not the same. The women's restrooms were the ones that had originally been constructed for the "coloreds" who worked as janitors and such. That was when I began to understand more than I had before. The physical "tells" of how "coloreds" were treated are present where ever one looks, and the restrooms are hardly the only example. I am not saying that I can yet fully grasp the Black experience in the South- in fact what I've mentioned is pretty superficial.

But, even that small part made me see things in a different way. And, helped me recognize the dignity and greatness of MLK in way that I never could have from California afar.

Best,

VG

VG @ 7:

(Cleaned up your stuttering edit for ya, btw.)

Perhaps I didn't understand what you were intending with that. But the graphic says to me "they are brothers", because of the hand to hand part of the image especially. If there was some deep irony in your comment, I missed it. What did you mean by "somewhat less moving"?

In this case, there was no irony intended. As to "somewhat less moving", again, no irony. It's somewhat less moving seeing the first African-American President being sworn in for the second time, than it was when it happened the first time, and not only because we've done it once already.

For me, images can trigger an in emotional reaction, and that one did, and it trumped your words. It triggered a very negative reaction.

That, of course, is fine. I don't post stuff to assure that everyone agrees with me in any particular way. I agree it's very provocative graphic. It was in 2008, and it still is today. I stand by my assertion that the timing of today's Inaugural, on MLK Day, helps makes the graphic arguably more appropriate. Whether you believe Obama is true to MLK's spirit or not, it seems unlikely he would have been sworn in twice, much less once, were it not for the advocacy and sacrifices by MLK (and others) before him.

If that triggers a "very negative reaction", that's fine. It's not necessarily what I was trying to trigger (wasn't trying to trigger anything, in truth) but it's a perfectly appropriate response.

Obama is in his actions, not so much his words (which are often the opposite of what he does) the antithesis of MLK and all he stood for, and spoke for, and fought for, and died for.

Fair enough. I both agree and disagree with you. How's that for fence sitting? (Really, it's not fence sitting, it's actually how I feel.)

As for Canning's take that I and others had "over reacted", one's reaction is a very personal matter. Because I had a different reaction than Canning thought warranted, it does not make my reaction and that of others any less genuine or truthful or deeply felt.

By "over reacted", I don't think he meant your reaction was not genuine, truthful or deeply felt. I believe he meant that your presumptions about my opinions or reasons for using the graphic (along with the reactions of others here as well) was an over reaction to my using it here. I believe it was a perfectly appropriate use of the graphic, no matter what opinions it might provoke either for, against, or other. I respectfully disagree with your assessment that it was "egregious". But, you know, I am completely in favor of disagreement! I couldn't fight so hard for actual democracy if I wasn't!

I just left you a long comment, and it completely vanished!

VG - I didn't do it! But I am sorry about whatever the Internets did to eat your note Haven't seen that happen here before.

Try again?

VG: My use of the word "overreact" was not intended as a criticism. Perhaps it would have been better if I'd written that the three of you had misunderstood Brad's reason for the photo.

Your comment @7 and handle suggests that you and I grew up in the SFV at the same time. Grant HS, '65.

I'd ask what's a nice So. Cal girl doing in the formerly Jim Crow South, but you've already answered that.

Brad, I'll try to reconstruct comment at some point. I was hoping it ended up on your computer. Alas.

https://bradblog.com/?p=9823#comment-493808

Ernest- okay, fair enough.

Yes, you are correct about VG. Cleveland 65.

btw, BB was the first blog I commented on, and chose VG here. A bit of a Zappa homage, a bit of well, irony.