This page was last updated on March 18, 2015.
Dr. King deserves thanks from many groups; Lonzie Cox, Jr.; Beaver County Times; March 18, 2015. Though my friends have fun at my expense by referring to him as my “Cousin Lonzie,” I am not related to Mr. Cox.
Most of Mr. Cox’s at least 93 letters since 2004 are tinged with race, and all take leftist positions. The most recent previous Cox letter I critiqued was “Past decisions led to where we are.” You can find more Cox letters in the archives (2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004).
When it comes to race issues, Mr. Cox is pretty tolerant if you share his leftist ideology. For example, Mr. Cox had no problem with the late-Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV), a former KKK officer, but referred to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas as an “Uncle Tom.”
Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.
“As the Black History season winds down, I have a few reminders to those who only acknowledge the ‘I have a dream’ segment of Dr. King’s most famous speech and not the part that says our nation had given its black citizens a bounced check marked ‘insufficient funds.’
“To think of Martin L. King Jr. as a dreamer is to miss the point of his leadership. He should be appreciated by people everywhere, but especially by some of the following groups: Handicapped people should thank the civil rights movement for their improved access to all kinds of facilities that the movement inspired; women have jobs they never would have had without King’s movement; students of all racial groups can make plans for college that would have been unrealistic in earlier generations; and Equal Employment opportunities are legally required even though their enforcement by Congress, employers and President Obama leave a lot to be desired.
“So, even as John Roberts, the nefarious Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, works furiously to tear down the hard-fought gains of the Civil Rights movement -- voting rights for example -- we should all remember Selma, Birmingham, Watts, Emmett Till, Jimmy Jackson, Viola Liuzzo and the Rev. James Reeb. We all need to thank King, Abernathy and the civil rights movement for something.”
[RWC] If you’re wondering what Mr. Cox is whining about re CJ Roberts, it’s likely the decision in Shelby County v. Holder. In summary, the SC ruled Section 4 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is now unconstitutional because “Coverage today is based on decades-old data and eradicated practices. The formula captures States by reference to literacy tests and low voter registration and turnout in the 1960s and early 1970s. But such tests have been banned for over 40 years. And voter registration and turnout numbers in covered States have risen dramatically. In 1965, the States could be divided into those with a recent history of voting tests and low voter registration and turn out and those without those characteristics. Congress based its coverage formula on that distinction. Today the Nation is no longer divided along those lines, yet the Voting Rights Act continues to treat it as if it were.”
© 2004-2015 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.