Coretta Scott King DNC rally

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
You are beginning to make as much sense as dingy_chick.

Dude, you just proved my point with your last post. thanks!

BTW, what did Jesus say about your whole speeding ticket fiasco?

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by Shaun 84 Targa
Dude, you just proved my point with your last post. thanks!

BTW, what did Jesus say about your whole speeding ticket fiasco?

I would be disgusted at the DNC's use of Coretta's body as a tool too, Shaun...You are in the anger stage of humiliation, it will pass, you will be in denial soon enough. The good news is you seem to be progressing to the blame stage rather quickly.

[Halm]

Thanks Shaun. My sentiments as well.

[dtw]

Not going to touch my comment, eh, Shaun? The answer for those of you keeping score: Mrs. King embarassed herself and her husband's memory year after year by constantly suing the University for MLK's writings, so that she could capitalize on them. The administration steadfastly refused, and continued to win in court.

Whereas MLK was revered on campus (the center of campus features a rather uplifting sculpture dedicated in his memory), the mention of CSK usually caused frowns and scowls.

[gaijindabe]

The family wanting to be paid for the use of MLK's speaches and papers is a total shame. The net effect is fewer and fewer young people hear what MLK had to say, the rest of us forget, and the hucksters and pimps become cultural icons.

[turbocarrera]

Mul, shutup.

You've called MLK a "useful idiot", communist, traitor, etc.. just shutup.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by turbocarrera
Mul, shutup.

You've called MLK a "useful idiot", communist, traitor, etc.. just shutup.

Did you know that Robert Kennedy had super secret wiretaps on Mr. King?...Funny that Jimmah Carter didn't mention that...But that is another issue, the issue at hand is how improper it was to dance on the grave of a dead woman, using it for scoring political points...A subpoint would be why she was hailed as some hero when she did nothing save capitalize on her husband's speeches.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by dtw
Not going to touch my comment, eh, Shaun? The answer for those of you keeping score: Mrs. King embarassed herself and her husband's memory year after year by constantly suing the University for MLK's writings, so that she could capitalize on them. The administration steadfastly refused, and continued to win in court.

Whereas MLK was revered on campus (the center of campus features a rather uplifting sculpture dedicated in his memory), the mention of CSK usually caused frowns and scowls.

Dave, didn't know that and haven't had time to check it out. Just finished boxing up a 915 off to WI.

do you have any context on your story? heck, the Vatican is suing people who using the Pope's speeches, or you have to pay royalties to use them.

talk about a fücked up world. The Pope's mission is to spread the Word of God...but you gotta pay up first.

Anyway, post some context please.

[dtw]

Uh...thanks for the Catholic jab/diversion, not sure what that has to do with anything in this entire thread - but again, thanks.

What do you want in the way of context. MLK got PhD from BU, they own the rights to his related writings, she wanted his body of work so she could license it. Pretty cut and dry.

[Tobra]

Originally posted by gaijindabe
The family wanting to be paid for the use of MLK's speaches and papers is a total shame. The net effect is fewer and fewer young people hear what MLK had to say, the rest of us forget, and the hucksters and pimps become cultural icons.

That and saying they were fine with an MLK memorial in D.C., but they had to be paid first. I notice no reply to my earlier post, perhaps it contains things that are inconvenient to refute.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Dave, I've not been able to find much on the subject googling around.

Any links? I don't doubt you, just want to know what the story is.

Since you're a big fan staying on topic, how does you original post have anything to do with my post, or even Jason's? For god's sake, a great woman dies, I am sure not without fault in her life, and the frickin peanut gallery here has nothing better to do than malign her memory.

[dtw]

The original post was along the lines of, "how dare the politicos taint this great woman's memory with their posturing at her ceremony?"

One of the counterpoints was, "Was she all that great?"

Anyway - I googled also. First three pages were all about her death, I didn't bother to dig further. I thought it was common knowledge in Boston anyway, but this was all 10+ years ago now.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by Shaun 84 Targa
Since you're a big fan staying on topic, how does you original post have anything to do with my post, or even Jason's? For god's sake, a great woman dies, I am sure not without fault in her life, and the frickin peanut gallery here has nothing better to do than malign her memory.

Just as JFK was shaped and manufactured by the press, as is Coretta Scott King...She did NADA for civil rights, in fact she acted quite inappropriately surrounding her husband's work, capitalizing on work he surely wouldn't have approved of being capitalized on...This does not dismiss the behavior of the Democrat party and the liberal blacks, using her death to slander George Bush, turning her funeral into a fundraiser/political rally.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by dtw
Anyway - I googled also. First three pages were all about her death, I didn't bother to dig further. I thought it was common knowledge in Boston anyway, but this was all 10+ years ago now.

In the 1990s it began to run large deficits, and by 2005 it needed $11.6 million in repairs. The future of the center became the subject of an ugly family squabble, with Dexter and Yolanda pushing to sell the institution to the National Park Service over the objections of Martin III and Bernice. Several years earlier the King family had tried to block a National Park Service proposal to open its own exhibit on Rev. King, arguing that it would detract from the family-run center across the street. The Kings and
Coretta Scott King Scandals

The Park Service eventually resolved their differences, but the dispute tarnished Coretta King's image. Other controversies — such as selling the rights to her husband's "I Have a Dream" speech for use in cell phone commercials while limiting access to his papers by serious scholars and journalists- only sharpened the criticism that King and her family were putting personal profit before public interest.

The King estate forced USA Today to pay $1,700 plus legal fees after the newspaper published the text of Rev. King's "I Have a Dream" speech.

It also sued CBS for selling a video documentary that made extensive use of the network's own film of King and the march on Washington. After the success of Henry Hampton's widely praised PBS series on the civil rights movement, "Eyes on the Prize," the estate made similar claims that film of King had been used illegally and demanded a licensing fee. The latter dispute was settled out of court for an undisclosed sum. After a deal to sell King's papers to the Library of Congress for $20 million fell through, the King estate arranged with Sotheby's auction house to sell the archives privately, but no satisfactory buyers have been found.

Meanwhile, the estate was expected to earn as much as $10 million from a 1997 deal with TimeWarner to release his speeches and writings in various media, including audio and CD-ROMs. A self-professed workaholic who often called staff members late at night, Coretta King never took a salary from the center but supported herself through speaking fees and royalties from her autobiography and her late husband's writings.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

I was in Chicago 10 years ago.

Anyway, carry on throwing stones at a dead woman.

[Mulhollanddose]

I interviewed Coretta Scott King once. It cost $5,000.

In 1985, I approached the Martin Luther King Center in Atlanta seeking both that interview and permission to use old audio of Coretta's husband for a radio documentary. I was told it would cost five grand for the audio rights, and it was made clear that unless that money was paid, there would be no interview.


http://www.dekalb-chronicle.com/articles/2006/02/05/opinions/columnists/columnists06a.txt

[Tobra]

Originally posted by Shaun 84 Targa
I was in Chicago 10 years ago.

Anyway, carry on throwing stones at a dead woman.

Nobody is casting stones at her, as I understand it, she did not speak at the Memorial Service, even via video. Almost all the comments, save for yours, have regarded folks speaking at the funeral.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Here's the original by Pitts in the Miami Herald, not the chopped up version posted by Jason.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/columnists/leonard_pitts/13779153.htm


Posted on Fri, Feb. 03, 2006
IN MY OPINION

Amid dignity and courage, a human flaw

BY LEONARD PITTS JR.
lpitts@MiamiHerald.com

I interviewed Coretta Scott King once. It cost $5,000.

In 1985, I approached the Martin Luther King Center in Atlanta seeking both that interview and permission to use old audio of Coretta's husband for a radio documentary. I was told it would cost five grand for the audio rights and it was made clear that unless that money was paid, there would be no interview.

The ethical constraints of a radio production house are different from those of a news organization; we made the deal. I didn't like it, but I rationalized it by telling myself it was an honor to contribute to the upkeep of a legendary legacy.

Amazing what you can make yourself believe.

Coretta Scott King died this week, five months after suffering a heart attack and stroke. She is being widely and lavishly eulogized. ''A remarkable and courageous woman,'' said the president. ''A staunch freedom fighter,'' said the Rev. Jesse Jackson.

The praise is deserved. There was majesty and grace in Coretta Scott King, a strength of heart that was displayed nowhere more clearly than at her husband's death. Like Jacqueline Kennedy before her, she mourned inconceivable loss with awesome dignity. Since then, she has been a tireless defender of the dream her husband articulated in August of 1963.

TV COMMERCIALS

She shielded it against racism, pessimism and defeatism. She was less successful against commercialism.

And I don't mean the piddling $5,000. That's a small symptom of the larger malady. I refer you to the King family's 1993 lawsuit against USA Today for reprinting the I Have A Dream speech and their subsequent licensing of King's image and voice for use in television commercials, one of which placed him between Homer Simpson and Kermit the Frog. Then there's the attempt to sell his personal papers for $20 million. Perhaps most galling was the family's demand to be paid to allow construction of a King monument on the Washington Mall.

Yes, it's all legal. But if Dr. King's life taught us nothing else, it taught us that legality and morality are not necessarily the same.

I don't mind the King family making money. But not at all costs, and certainly, not at the cost of Martin Luther King's dignity. Granted, dignity is subjective and you might draw the line in a different place than I. But I suspect most of us would agree that when a martyr, minister and American hero becomes a TV character hawking cellphones with Homer Simpson, that line has been well and truly crossed.

Coretta Scott King founded the King Center and it has always been controlled by the family. So it seems plain that she approved this money grubbing or at least tolerated it. And as a result, her kids have lost their minds.

FEUDING OVER MONEY

Particularly the sons, Martin III and Dexter, recently seen publicly feuding over which one will have the six-figure job of running the King Center. Meantime, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution tells us the facility is in need of over $11 million in repairs and that $4.2 million of Center money has been paid since 2000 to a company Dexter owns. This would be the same Dexter who, in 1995, visited Graceland for tips on how to exploit his father's image as Lisa Marie Presley has exploited hers.

Martin Luther King, it seems necessary to say, was not Elvis Presley. He was a man who stood for something and died for something. That something was not profit. That something belonged to all of us. One wonders if the loss of their mother will shock his children into understanding this.

I'd like to think so. But had you visited the King Center website three days after Coretta died looking for a tribute, here's what you'd have found: a press release, a quote from Dr. King, and a request for money. ''Make an online donation in loving memory,'' it said.

You can do it if you want. Me, I gave at the office.



© 2006 MiamiHerald.com and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.miami.com

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by Shaun 84 Targa
I was in Chicago 10 years ago.

Anyway, carry on throwing stones at a dead woman.

So we should just go ahead and accept the leftist mythology around this woman?. Are we to accept the Presidential treatment and the week+ ceremonies and memorializing a woman who made no contributions to anything for America?...We are to accept the left's use of her as a tool?...We are to accept that any dignity that was constructed around Coretta was sullied as the leftist speakers revealed what the processions were really about?...We are to turn a blind eye to grandstanding and the politicization of a dead woman, while her coffin was being used as a soap-box?

Coretta's body was used to foment hate and racism, to race-bait and grandstand, to raise funds and manipulate the public.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by Tobra
Nobody is casting stones at her, as I understand it, she did not speak at the Memorial Service, even via video. Almost all the comments, save for yours, have regarded folks speaking at the funeral.

I know you have your own version of grammar rules, but your own dictionary too?! Go Tobra!