It’s Barack Obama who’s on record clinging to guns and religion — if by religion we mean Marxism of sorts. Via Legal Insurrection comes the following MLK Day remarks:
he philosophy of nonviolence only makes sense if the powerful can be made to recognize themselves in the powerless. It only makes sense if the powerless can be made to recognize themselves in the powerful. You know, the principle of empathy gives broader meaning, by the way, to Dr. King’s philosophy of nonviolence. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but rich people are all for nonviolence. Why wouldn’t they be? They’ve got what they want. They want to make sure people don’t take their stuff. But the principle of empathy recognizes that there are more subtle forms of violence to which we are answerable. The spirit of empathy condemns not only the use of firehoses and attack dogs to keep people down but also accountants and tax loopholes to keep people down. I’m not saying that what Enron executives did to their employees is the moral equivalent of what Bull Connor did to black folks, but I’ll tell you what, the employees at Enron feel violated. When a company town sees its plant closing because some distant executives made some decision despite the wage concessions, despite the tax breaks, and they see their entire economy collapsing, they feel violence . . . [emphasis Patterico's]
I have a feeling he’s no fan of MLK. Well, to be honest, I had that feeling for a very, very long time.
I don’t like the sloppy reasoning that imagines everything unpleasant to be violence, but ‘Bamster was onto something when he said that rich people being non-violent because they already have everything they want. That’s why so many upper middle class Americans are pacifists: they are well off, and although their fortunes are protected by cops and soldiers, they easily ignore that, and insist that everyone should embrace pacifism, just like they do. It’s all very self-serving.
How do you square this rhetoric with his bitter clingers remark?