Back to when I posted last, **Lute Goldfish ** responded with incident notes which purported to show a pattern of racism on the the part of Capital Police. However, I see a serious problem with that argument.
First of all, McKinney often changes her appearance, sometimes wildly. That makes it difficult to recognize her. I’ve seen some pictures of her, and aside from her (reasonably pretty but not distinctive) face, she changes her hair and wardrobe a lot.
Second, the officers watching have a lot of their minds. If she comes striding by, they have seconds to look at her lapel, notice the pin is not there, then try and look at her face. Sure, they’ve probably heard of McKinney. but with 500 people to recall, it’s gonna be hard to remember one.
Given that I’ve heard no similar complaints from any other black or female Congressmen, I can’t really have any sympathy for her. Aside from the fact that she’s a jerk (which I won’t get into) she goes out of her way to create a problem.
Think about it: you think that security officer is going to go out of his way to piss off a Congressman? Heck no! But they are going to make absolutely sure that there’s no threat. And McKinney refuses to play by the rules and safeguards which allow the security officers to do that efficiently. And when they do go that extra mile, she whack them with a cellphone. Was that some brutal beatng? No, of course not. But it is wholly and completely unacceptable behavior, period.
Wow, I had no idea. Consider my ignorance squashed. Had I known it had that connotation, I would’ve never used it. Replace it with “arrogant” in my last post. Thanks, ElvisL1ves and Maureen.
Load of shit. This entire thread exists as nothing more than a distraction from the Tom Delay thread, and I, for one, refuse to let you idiots get away with pretending otherwise. And I’m not even a fucking liberal.
Yes, yes, McKinney suxxors, etc. YAWN. Delay is Satan compared to her, and I’m not about to let you forget it.
Still, it’s like comparing the kid that gets called to the principal’s office ten times in a year with a felon. I won’t defend her, but compared to Delay, she’s a piker. It would be nice if the good people of Atlanta decided to replace her, but they’re the only ones with a dog in this fight.
that would be the question, had she been arrested. she wasn’t. she still hasn’t been (but certainly might be. she was stopped (because they did not know she was a representative). from what I’ve heard on the local readio news (WSB) she’ll be charged with a misdemeanor.
I agree - to a point. And you’ll also note that I’ve not made the comparison you’re objecting to. That comparison, one which equates McKinney’s transgressions with DeLay’s, has never been explicity made in this thread by anyone. It’s possible to infer that an argument for equivalence from the OP, but only loosely and only by exposing one’s own biases. On the other hand, there are numerous and explicit condemnations coming from the lefties here of an idea that’s not been concretely offered. You guys are kinda puttin’ the cart afore the hoss, ain’t ya?
And a side note: The more times I read that OP, the more I think the derogatory remarks about McKinney’s physical characteristics are pretty stupid - offensive even. Shodan, the topic could have far better served by leaving that crap outta there. It’s entirely pointless and detracts from a valid gripe. Including them is just as stupid as the title of Franken’s book about Limbaugh.
I don’t quite buy that. Buy the choice of the thread title, I think that equivalence was more of a matter of being implied than of us inferring it. I agree it would be nice if personal attributes like weight and appearance were kept out of the discussion.
I just don’t understand this. What do you think was Shodan’s motive for starting a pit thread with the name he chose? Do you think that McKinney’s egregious behavior, by itself, calls up a Wizard of Oz song if only to refute the song?
Yes, she deserves the pitting (Evil One has just done so). But I don’t see the OP as anything but an attempt to goad leftists into defending her, so that he can establish a false equivalence between the two cases. If he wasn’t trying to do that, he would have chosen a different title to the OP.
I’m open to hearing alternate explanation for the OP’s title, but so far, none have been reasonable.
Interestingly, the editorial feature in the 4/5 edition of USA Today is entitled “Heights of Arrogance”. Cynthia McKinney gets second billing after Tom DeLay.
From McKinney’s lambasting: *"Security on Capitol Hill is no joke. Two Capitol Police officers were killed in 1998 when a mentally ill man opened fire at a tourist entrance. That was before 9/11 and the anthrax attacks.
McKinney should stop exploiting a phony race issue and apologize for her overbearing behavior. There’s little doubt that Capitol Police will remember her in the future."*
How dare you almost call me uppity, my parents are black and they were killed on 9/11…(for those of you who don’t know, this is not true but merely a reference to the late unpleasantness involving a banned poster)
See Unc, I have a sense of humor. I chuckled at that. Now had I actually been of african descent it would be a different story. Kind of like I would not get upset if you called me nigger. Not being black that word when directed at me has no impact. Get it? Those of us who objected to the word uppity were objecting to it only in the context it was used.
P.S. Thanks Frank.
You don’t understand it, because you left out the part where I said “explicitly.” The thing people are arguing against in here - the equivalence of the McKinney transgressions & the DeLay wrongdoings - has never been made explicitly. The only logical reason then for anyone offering condemnations of something that doesn’t concretely exist, is by projecting their own biases onto the actual statements made. The only actual link those persons offering condemnations actually have, is a similarity of thread titles - pretty thin, I think. Certainly not concrete or conclusive enough to justify the volume of the condemnations and accusations. There’s a bit of an issue over the timing of the thing, too, but one of the newstories linked in the OP justifies that quite well; the issue is very topical. Even McKinney herself is laboring to keep it alive and at the forefront.
Whatever you believe are Shodan’s motives for choosing that thread title, amkes no difference. Why? Because he hasn’t proffered the argument of equivalence that you say can be his only justification. If he’s not done that, then the inference of his accusers must be mistaken.
I can think of a reason he might have used that title that has nothing to do with the DeLay thread. It’s a kinda catchy literary hook on which to hang a thread to draw in viewers, particularly so when the title is a variation of another on the same page. I see similar thread titles quite frequently; people see ideas and copy them. Ain’t so difficult to come up with another explanation. I’ve no idea whether it’s correct (and in actual fact, I think your interpretation probably is the correct one, but that judgement is lacking evidentiary support), or not, but at least we can dispassionately examine alternatives without rushing to a bias-influenced judgement.
Joke noted… my bad. In fact, I was thinking that I hadn’t seen any posts by **Stephe **in months, so the idea of coaxing him into this thread seemed absurd. Anyway, sorry I missed the humor angle.
I don’t live far from you and I knew I was in the 12th (my representative is Tom Lantos, D-Transylvania), but I did have to Google first to make sure I was right.