April 6, 2006
-- by Dave Johnson
The fact that white Democrats are so unwilling to stand up for McKinney is just plain shameful. It's bad enough that they're cowards, but do they really think there is no downside to letting McKinney get pummelled by these right-wing loonies who keep attacking her? Those people are racists, and it's outrageous to see Democrats sitting on the same side with them.
... You can't appease these people, you have to fight back every time they do this crap. And liberal bloggers who talk about this stuff all the time should be really embarrassed to be falling for it now.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
What I think is more interesting is that you haven't seen any of the prominent African-American lawmakers like Maxine Waters or Sheila Jackson Lee come to her defense either -- and I think that is largely because McKinney has a long history of erratic behavior and nutty statements. That's how she lost her House seat in a primary only to get it back when her successor rolled the dice and try to win a Georgia Senate seat to no avail.
Posted by: Edward Copeland at April 6, 2006 10:59 AM
OK, example of "erratic behaviour" or "nutty statement" please?
Her reputation for this comes from demanding to know what intelligence Bush might have had before 9/11, and what he did about it.
Posted by: Dave Johnson at April 6, 2006 11:30 AM
There have been lots, but I can't find them all quickly.
She once said that former Vice President Al Gore had a low "Negro tolerance level."
There are 42 African-American members of Congress, 14 of whom are women, yet I haven't heard one come out in her defense. I think that is because they know her and her frequent use of crying racism at any slight of her is usually a bruised ego. It could be that the Capitol Hill officer touched her inappropriately, but I don't think race had anything to do with this or other African-American lawmakers would report their own incidents. I think they are quiet because they know that her constant move of crying wolf undermines cases of real racism when it's just an example of arrogance on her part.
Posted by: Edward Copeland at April 6, 2006 12:24 PM
I caught the end of her apology on CNN this afternoon, and now I feel like I don't know what's going on.
"After an incident in 1993 when she had an altercation with an United States Capitol Police officer, a picture of her was posted for all officers since she refuses to wear a security pin identifying her as a member of Congress."
This is the fourth time. You'd think she'd agree to wear the effing pin. McKinney alleged "stock traders" (i.e., Jews) knew about 9/11 before it happened and made a big killing on airline and insurance stocks. To my knowledge she's never offered any evidence of this.
Her playing the race and gender cards in this incident is typical, and typically unwarranted. She's an idiot and a nutcase and if we on the Left expect the Right to denounce theirs, we gotta denounce ours.
"McKinney alleged "stock traders" (i.e., Jews) knew about 9/11 before it happened and made a big killing on airline and insurance stocks."
I'm sorry but this is just a lie. McKinney asked if Bush had intelligence, and said we need an investigation to find out what Bush knew. The Right has been smearing her since.
It was not McKinney who was asking about the stock trading in airlines. Trading volume on "put options' for UAL and AA in the week before 9/11 was more than 100 times normal. The 9/11 commission looked into it, offered a weak explanation.
Posted by: Dave Johnson at April 7, 2006 11:43 AM
What I have a problem with is over-simplifying the situation. Your posts on this topic suggest that either one side is all right or all wrong.
What I suspect (but don't know, of course) actually happened is that you have a handful of (Republican) cops who don't like McKinney and try to fuck with her.
Is race a factor? Of course. Race is ALWAYS a factor. But just because you can't separate the racial component doesn't mean that you should act as if that is the sole, or even primary, explanation for the incident.
I am sure that some of the cops would never fuck with other black representatives. They just don't like McKinney. PART of the reason that they don't like her has to do with racial issues. But part, no doubt, is simply cultural.
As for McKinney herself, she is indeed a loose cannon. Yes, she has had many of her words unfairly twisted (the 9/11 statements being a good example). And, as usual, few Democrats would defend her when she was unfairly maligned. But she has made her share of blockheaded comments (the Gore one is a good example). It is just too simplistic to conclude that EITHER she is a nutcase OR her enemies have unfairly attacked her. Both may, and likely are, true.
I agree with other commenters that she launches into racial accusations at the drop of a hat. For instance, if she had said that she gets defensive about being challenged on her identity because she is sensitive to racial profiling that would be one thing. But to make conclusory statements about a particular officer without any investigation is ALWAYS going to make you look bad.
What if that particular officer wasn't screwing with her and just made an innocent mistake? Doesn't he deserve better than to be accused of racism without any additional evidence?
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)