The Screwing of Cynthia McKinney (excellent commentary)

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by Preechr

I agree. I personally think that we should only let actual people contribute to campaigns. I can accept lobby groups and PACS, though I don't particularly like them all that much (more accepting them as a necessary evil,) but I see a problem with the concentration of influence allowed by letting corporations and such essentially vote with their money. Citizens should be the only ones that influence the behavior of the officials elected to represent them. Let the companys fend for themselves until laws are broken.

Here, here.

"Why not use their money for a good cause, like rebuilding NYC..."

Because of the attitude of the benefactor. I support Rudy's action, even if it was only motivated by PR. We have money, and it was important that we spend it and whatever money we used to rebuild on proper terms, not letting the spirit of the effort be convoluted by statements designed to cast blame on innocent victims of a horrible crime.

Rudy could've taken the money and told them to burn in hell anyway (I'm no Rudy fan, but this would've been quite acceptable, IMO).

"Furthermore, as the article above points out, McKinney was hardly pro-Saudi..."

That may well be. I personally wish that more coverage were dedicated to that, so I could determine its veracity. My impression of the woman is not very favorable, and I am free to assume, biased as I am by that, that she may have pressed for those investigations to infiltrate the process in order to favor the Saudis.

Biases aside, that strikes me as a bit of a stretch. McKinney wanted investigations, not witch hunts. Perhaps she knew Bush wouldn't persue these leads, and thus used them for her own political ends, but this is often the case with elected officials. True conviction is a dying trait in your average politico (forgive my jaded soul).

And your "impression" of her, as this article tries to argue, may be highly contrived by a misrepresentation in the press. I too, despite being a Left-leaning Green, had a certain degree of mistrust for McKinney. When asked why, I could never truly answer, other than parroting what the press had said of her. I have since taken it upon myself to dig a little deeper, and to further qualify my opinion.

"Not to throw out accusations, but I'd wager that this is a fairly borderline racist remark..."

I live here. It's just how I see things as filtered through what I read and hear. If a district is predominantly black, how is it racist to say it is? My description of the white folks that live in her district couldn't be racist, because they are white, right? kinda j/k...

I suppose.

I don't like being called a racist, but you don't know yet just how NOT racist I am. Water off a duck's back, if ya knowhaddimasayin...

I wasn't calling you a racist per se, but I felt the remark was borderline.

None taken... haha... That was my impression. Maybe she didn't lose her base... or obviously she didn't, if your statement is correct. Then she fired up her opposition. Majette didn't really win on merit, IMO. She was just not Cindy the Commie...

She fired up the opposition, yes. And God bless her for not being a typically weak-willed Democrat who's scared to say what they believe. She made the ultimate political sacrifice for it, too.

Other variables were involved, however. I knew folks who went down to help campaign for her, Greens and other Lefty types, and they all said the same thing: She underestimated how far her enemies would go. NOBODY mobilizes voters like Republicans, period. I can admit this as a VERY partisan individual.

Don't forget that up to this point, she had been a very successful politician. She felt confident, and what I have heard is that she essentially got a little cocky about it.

"This is what happened to McKinney in her district, much as it did to Bob Barr in his district..."

Nope. Barr could have stayed in the district with his base but chose to run against an entrenched incumbent. I'm pissed at him for that decision, as I think we need him kinda, even though he's a racist sumbitch (against BLACKS, mind you,) and he could have won his seat back had he not decided to do more than get back in.

Hmmm, I think I knew this and brain farted it out. I do recall there being some differences, but I was forced to compare the two races, and they have sort of melted together in my head into a Barr/McKinney stew.

McKinney was obviously not hurt by redistricting, if it affected her at all (not willing to take the time to check it out, honestly.) As you said, she got more votes than ever before.

Higher population due to district change, higher voter turnout, etc. These things and more could've affected the case. My point wasn't that McKinney was going to get elected prom queen, it was that she still had the support of her base. The problem is that her base had been shifted away from her out from under her feet.

The cross-over voting was limited, and curbed by last-minute shady practices by McKinney (calling registered Reps with a recording informing them that crossing over was a crime!) and has been determined to have had no influence on the result.

Can I see a source on that? I believe the voter turnout was higher than in previous district primaries, so I'm not so sure about that....

"Now her district had become more middle-class, more white, less Liberal..."

Just as Black, just as Liberal. We have ALL sorts of black people here... even *gasp* RICH ones! Seriously... Dekalb and Fulton Counties are predominantly Black and Liberal, and their is no traditional lines of income inequality doe to race or none of that other stuff you guys burned us down for before... Please leave us be... Most of the Racism talk we are constantly bombarded with anymore is widely regarded, by all races, as being financially influenced, not true signs of actual racism...

ok, ok, economically different, but still a factor.

Atlanta is one of the most racially un-biased towns I've ever experienced... if anything, the city government is biased IN FAVOR OF black folks...

I would agree, but that is QUITE another topic....

Yes.... I'll not get into that here with you.... Run with that ball over on Newsfilter, whydontcha?

Don't worry... that's not a setup... there's a few people there that are DYING to have that discussion... they will take your side, if you present it well enough... I'd LOVE to see that discussion happen.

I'm all about the opinion expression stuff, y'know....

Time permiting, perhaps. I dunno, gang beatings aren't quite my thing.

I'm just not impressed, and I remember just getting sick of her constant soundbites. Maybe that was all part of a media conspiracy to give advantage to Republicans... for MANY MANY years before 2002... but I doubt it. She was a real wack job.

Again... just my opinion. Never voted for or against her...

Well, I think the Rumsfelds, Ashcrofts, and the Wolfowitzs of the world are FAR more wacky, but that is just MY opinion, of course.

And politicians over using the soundbite.....NEVER!