After reading Keesha's comments [see, http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/2005/01/keesha-speaks-to-new-york-times-about.html] I just wanted to weigh in as well.
MLK stood for many things. Folding under pressure and giving factually challenged speeches to the UN wasn't one of them nor was courting the favor of those in power at the expense of the people.
That NYT uses text and photos to equate MLK day with a private moment (it should have been private, they're practically humping!) between the Bully Boy and Colin Powell is disgraceful.
NYT appears to think MLK day is about being black. It's our national black day. That's not what it's about. It's about honoring a leader who motivated and inspired us to all be the better person inside of us. It's about honoring a leader who challenged not one system, but many.
To reduce it to, look a black man made it into the cabinet is insulting to everyone. On George Washington day will we see a photo of Rummy rubbing up against the Bully Boy?
NYT's view of MLK is so narrow that it goes beyond stereotypical.
They ought to be ashamed that a day chosen to celebrate one of our most important leaders (of any race) is reduced to Elisabeth Bummiler's usual sub-standard reporting as she sucks up to the administration and a photo of the Bully Boy in some sort of mating dance with Powell.
They have reduced all that MLK stood for and fought for to one thing: the color of one's skin.
And this from a supposedly social responsible paper? I'm outraged.
[Note, the post above was typed up from Gina's e-mail early Wednesday morning. It was saved to draft for later posting.]