History Lessons
January 13th, 2008This is disturbing to me because it is politically dishonest to an extreme and because it represents a level of historical apathy, as well as selectiveness, in the general public and Washington elite that I find completely unacceptable.
Edwards told the mostly black congregation at Mount Zion Missionary Baptist Church here this morning that he was “troubled” by the suggestion that change came through President Lyndon Johnson instead of Martin Luther King, Jr.
“I must say I was troubled recently to see a suggestion, that real change that came not through the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, but through a Washington politician. I fundamentally disagree with that,” he said. “Those who believe that real change starts with Washington politicians have been in Washington too long and are living in a fairy tale. Real change has never started in Washington. Real change came from those who have fought in the trenches.”
Edwards was referring to Hillary Clinton’s comments in New Hampshire a week ago, when she said King’s dream was realized when Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The New York senator has taken heat from the Obama campaign and from neutral South Carolina Rep. Jim Clyburn for the remarks.
Edwards then recalled historical landmarks in civil rights and talked about how, even decades after King’s death, there are still two Americas[, one where his father works in a mill and Ann Coulter is forced to be a public safety guinea pig].
Nobody has said or will say that change comes through Washington politicians instead of grassroots movement but they certainly belong together and change can’t happen without both. It is idiotic to talk about Lyndon Johnson’s achievements as if they were nothing — without Lyndon Johnson’s political courage, the United States of America leaves its senior citizens, its poor and its disenfranchised minorities out in the cold. For all the contempt people have for LBJ because of Vietnam, there should be a greater understanding of his bold and remarkable domestic policy. That nobody knows or understands or cares to do either for Lyndon Johnson is, to me, a travesty of memory. That the other Democrats want to harass Hillary Clinton because she said change was put into effect when LBJ signed his laws is a joke. I guess the change was put into effect when Barack Obama was conceived in Selma. Right?
Really, all Hillary said was, “Change happened once Lyndon Johnson signed the law and the old ones were gone.” Her greater point — that change came through legislation after public outcry and protest, such as Martin Luther King’s — is a great one, as well, and demonstrates the need for leadership from the American President. Besides the fact that it’s true and therefore gives some credit to LBJ for something, there’s nothing objectionable except for the opportunistic.