Two of the most evil members of Congress, Bob Barr and Cynthia McKinney, will see their fates decided tomorrow in Georgia primaries:
Georgia Primaries
My prediction: McKinney loses because Republicans will flood the polls to oust her, and Barr will win because he has the support of grassroots groups like the NRA that really know how to mobilize voters. I hope I'm wrong on the last one.
Full Version: Big Day in Georgia
[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
My prediction: ... Barr will win because he has the support of grassroots groups like the NRA that really know how to mobilize voters.
You're right on that one -- the NRA (along with other elements of his political machine) really helped on GOTV efforts for John Dingell. (But I too hope Barr loses ...)
In the meantime, Barr is trying to rev up support in another bastion of his supporters: Clinton-haters: he recently sent out a direct mail appeal to a nat'l conservative audience. In red ink on the cover of the manila envelope: "Bill Clinton is trying to finish me off once and for all -- please help me!" The return address label includes Barr's title of "House Impeachment Manager."
From the four-page letter, which includes a separate 5x7 photo of Barr: "I've sent you this photo because this is the last time you may ever hear from me. The entire Democratic Party is going all out to make sure I lose reelection this year -- and I need your immediate help!"
More: "In just a few weeks, my service to our country could be over. Because if Bill Clinton, Dick Gephardt, and every liberal Democrat in America gets their way, they will destroy me at the polls on Election Day. My friend, I have never been so concerned about losing my reelection campaign before. But this time I am deathly afraid I may lose, because the liberals gerrymandered my seat in the redistricting process so badly even the courts wouldn't know how to fix it. What should have been a relatively easy campaign has become the most serious campaign of my life."
More: "Frankly, I'm doing everything I can to make sure Bill Clinton doesn't get the satisfaction of seeing Bob Barr go down in flames on Election Day. ... Sure, Bill Clinton might be 'retired' from being President, but that doesn't mean he's out of politics. Far from it! Bill Clinton knows full well that he can get away with doing even more underhanded deals than he did during his entire eight years as President. And I can tell you for a fact that nothing would give him more satisfaction than defeating the Impeachment Manager he hates the most -- me! Bill Clinton already destroyed two of my closest friends in the House last time -- Congressman Jim Rogan and Congressman Bill McCollum. They were both CRUSHED in their last campaigns for Congress. But Bill Clinton didn't just stop there. No sir, he made absolutely sure he defeated his own hometown Congressman! That's right, Republican Congressman Jay Dickey of Arkansas was called virtually every name in the book by Bill Clinton, just because he voted in favor of the Articles of Impeachment. My friend, that's three scalps Bill Clinton has on his wall already. Mine would be his last and most coveted prize."
More: "[I]f I can't rely on a loyal conservative like you to help me out of this jam, I'm afraid I could lose my reelection. Please understand that my race is more than just a battle for one Republican seat. It's a test of wills and a battle to the end between Bill Clinton loyalists around the nation and key leaders in the conservative movement like me and you. And it's about stopping Bill Clinton from putting yet another Impeachment Manager's scalp up on his wall. ... Please don't leave me in this hour of need."
The letter does not mention Barr's "Election Day" opponent -- Rep. John Linder (R-GA 11)
My prediction: ... Barr will win because he has the support of grassroots groups like the NRA that really know how to mobilize voters.
You're right on that one -- the NRA (along with other elements of his political machine) really helped on GOTV efforts for John Dingell. (But I too hope Barr loses ...)
In the meantime, Barr is trying to rev up support in another bastion of his supporters: Clinton-haters: he recently sent out a direct mail appeal to a nat'l conservative audience. In red ink on the cover of the manila envelope: "Bill Clinton is trying to finish me off once and for all -- please help me!" The return address label includes Barr's title of "House Impeachment Manager."
From the four-page letter, which includes a separate 5x7 photo of Barr: "I've sent you this photo because this is the last time you may ever hear from me. The entire Democratic Party is going all out to make sure I lose reelection this year -- and I need your immediate help!"
More: "In just a few weeks, my service to our country could be over. Because if Bill Clinton, Dick Gephardt, and every liberal Democrat in America gets their way, they will destroy me at the polls on Election Day. My friend, I have never been so concerned about losing my reelection campaign before. But this time I am deathly afraid I may lose, because the liberals gerrymandered my seat in the redistricting process so badly even the courts wouldn't know how to fix it. What should have been a relatively easy campaign has become the most serious campaign of my life."
More: "Frankly, I'm doing everything I can to make sure Bill Clinton doesn't get the satisfaction of seeing Bob Barr go down in flames on Election Day. ... Sure, Bill Clinton might be 'retired' from being President, but that doesn't mean he's out of politics. Far from it! Bill Clinton knows full well that he can get away with doing even more underhanded deals than he did during his entire eight years as President. And I can tell you for a fact that nothing would give him more satisfaction than defeating the Impeachment Manager he hates the most -- me! Bill Clinton already destroyed two of my closest friends in the House last time -- Congressman Jim Rogan and Congressman Bill McCollum. They were both CRUSHED in their last campaigns for Congress. But Bill Clinton didn't just stop there. No sir, he made absolutely sure he defeated his own hometown Congressman! That's right, Republican Congressman Jay Dickey of Arkansas was called virtually every name in the book by Bill Clinton, just because he voted in favor of the Articles of Impeachment. My friend, that's three scalps Bill Clinton has on his wall already. Mine would be his last and most coveted prize."
More: "[I]f I can't rely on a loyal conservative like you to help me out of this jam, I'm afraid I could lose my reelection. Please understand that my race is more than just a battle for one Republican seat. It's a test of wills and a battle to the end between Bill Clinton loyalists around the nation and key leaders in the conservative movement like me and you. And it's about stopping Bill Clinton from putting yet another Impeachment Manager's scalp up on his wall. ... Please don't leave me in this hour of need."
The letter does not mention Barr's "Election Day" opponent -- Rep. John Linder (R-GA 11)
Thank you, all, for reminding me of why I left the South!
Some good news for the state of our union -- voter turnout in Georgia is very high today, esp. in the McKinney and Barr/Linder districts -- this according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution and a political trade rag called Bill Shipp's Georgia. GOP crossover voting in the McKinney primary race is also strong.
If Cynthia McKinney loses in the primary, I hope she decides to run as an independent.
Both Barr and McKinney are going down in flames.
You Georgians should be proud about righting a wrong. What a great day to be an American.
You Georgians should be proud about righting a wrong. What a great day to be an American.
One of my clients came in today and told me he received a recorded phone call saying it was illegal to vote cross party in a primary election and could result in federal reprisal. I wonder who's camp was up to these highjinks...hmmm....?
Cyndy Mac maybe? I think this is tampering with voters. Any legal experts out there?
Cyndy Mac maybe? I think this is tampering with voters. Any legal experts out there?
To answer the wadester's question:
It's generally believed that those calls would've come from the Cynthia McKinney camp. The calls only went to people who have voted in the past in Republican primaries in Georgia's 4th. Denise Majette was expected to get HUGE cross-over support from Republicans in the Georgia 4th, as it is a predominanatly Democratic district, and the Republican primary was moot.
This is a possible violation of the federal Voting Rights Act, According to section 1971(
of title 42 of the United States Code (42 U.S.C. section 1971(), which reads:
"No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, presidential elector, Member of the Senate, or Member of the House of Representatives, Delegates or Commissioners from the Territories or possessions, at any general, special, or primary election held solely or in part for the purpose of selecting or electing any such candidate."
Regarding Miss McKinney's phone calls to Republicans in her district, telling them it's illegal for them to cross-over and vote in a Democratic primary. This does seem to be threats and intimidation in an attempt to prevent someone from voting in an election for a member of the House of Representatives. This is at least more intimidating than the behavior that Democratic activists in Florida complained about after the 2000 presidential election, claiming that black voters in certain parts of Florida were "intimidated" because police cars were parked within a couple of blocks of polling places in predominantly black precincts.
This is actually an important reference. If you remember your Florida election history, before the U.S. Supreme Court decisions, this intimidation issue was right up there with the notorious butterfly ballot as alleged "evidence" of the systematic repression of the black vote in Florida. If there had been actual attempts to intimidate African-American voters, that would have been in violation of the Voting Rights Act section I cited above. This potential violation of a key U.S. civil rights law was the reason that Bill Clinton's U.S. Civil Rights Commission was investigating. It would be interesting to find out if Miss McKinney was one of those Democratic activists who complained about such "intimidation" in Florida.
Will McKinney or someone associated with her camp be prosecuted? Doubtful. An incumbent losing 2:1 in the primary -- that's punishment enough.
And besides, as a Bill of Rights purist, I personally think those calls may have reprehensible, disgusting, under-handed, imnmoral, and, thankfully ineffective, I also think they were protected first amendment political speech. But courts are heavily involved in regulating political speech (McCain-Feingold anyone?), so I don't think any Court would adopt my expansive view of the first amendment (although, in light of a recent Supreme Court decision invalidating a Minnesota statute that regulated speech in judicial elections, maybe this Court would be more protective of the first amendment).
There may be additional Georgia laws at issue. I have chosen not to research those.
[ August 20, 2002: Message edited by: Charlie in the Trees ]
It's generally believed that those calls would've come from the Cynthia McKinney camp. The calls only went to people who have voted in the past in Republican primaries in Georgia's 4th. Denise Majette was expected to get HUGE cross-over support from Republicans in the Georgia 4th, as it is a predominanatly Democratic district, and the Republican primary was moot.
This is a possible violation of the federal Voting Rights Act, According to section 1971(
of title 42 of the United States Code (42 U.S.C. section 1971(), which reads:"No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, presidential elector, Member of the Senate, or Member of the House of Representatives, Delegates or Commissioners from the Territories or possessions, at any general, special, or primary election held solely or in part for the purpose of selecting or electing any such candidate."
Regarding Miss McKinney's phone calls to Republicans in her district, telling them it's illegal for them to cross-over and vote in a Democratic primary. This does seem to be threats and intimidation in an attempt to prevent someone from voting in an election for a member of the House of Representatives. This is at least more intimidating than the behavior that Democratic activists in Florida complained about after the 2000 presidential election, claiming that black voters in certain parts of Florida were "intimidated" because police cars were parked within a couple of blocks of polling places in predominantly black precincts.
This is actually an important reference. If you remember your Florida election history, before the U.S. Supreme Court decisions, this intimidation issue was right up there with the notorious butterfly ballot as alleged "evidence" of the systematic repression of the black vote in Florida. If there had been actual attempts to intimidate African-American voters, that would have been in violation of the Voting Rights Act section I cited above. This potential violation of a key U.S. civil rights law was the reason that Bill Clinton's U.S. Civil Rights Commission was investigating. It would be interesting to find out if Miss McKinney was one of those Democratic activists who complained about such "intimidation" in Florida.
Will McKinney or someone associated with her camp be prosecuted? Doubtful. An incumbent losing 2:1 in the primary -- that's punishment enough.
And besides, as a Bill of Rights purist, I personally think those calls may have reprehensible, disgusting, under-handed, imnmoral, and, thankfully ineffective, I also think they were protected first amendment political speech. But courts are heavily involved in regulating political speech (McCain-Feingold anyone?), so I don't think any Court would adopt my expansive view of the first amendment (although, in light of a recent Supreme Court decision invalidating a Minnesota statute that regulated speech in judicial elections, maybe this Court would be more protective of the first amendment).
There may be additional Georgia laws at issue. I have chosen not to research those.
[ August 20, 2002: Message edited by: Charlie in the Trees ]
Bye bye Barr!!!!
I was wrong!! I was wrong!! Barr loses!!!
Woo-hoo!!! It's a beautiful day in America.
Woo-hoo!!! It's a beautiful day in America.
Au Tiger in LA...Georgia is no longer in the South. They exceeded their quota a Yankees and were officially removed.
DISCLAIMER:
This was a tongue in cheek comment, please retract claws.
DISCLAIMER:
This was a tongue in cheek comment, please retract claws.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by William1865:
I was wrong!! I was wrong!!
I think I might print this and save it!!
Just kidding, not a personal attack!!
Just joshing, really!
I was wrong!! I was wrong!!
I think I might print this and save it!!
Just kidding, not a personal attack!!
Just joshing, really!
What is the world coming to? I actually agree with William about both Barr and McKinney (although I wouldn't quite call McKinney evil - just incompetent).
Now, back to Bush-bashing. (I've heard that Bush thought that Roe versus Wade was the choice facing Washington when he needed to cross the Delaware River.)
Now, back to Bush-bashing. (I've heard that Bush thought that Roe versus Wade was the choice facing Washington when he needed to cross the Delaware River.)
CITT, Nice legal analysis, although I respectfully disagree with you on the protected speech issue, since I think maintaining electoral integrity trumps permitting misleading and threatening electoral speech. (Query if Mary Frances Berry will jump on this violation with the same dedication she did to those she perceived in FL?) At any rate, I too am glad to see Barr and McKinney go; they deserve to be partners in defeat. Barr should have held onto his judgeship instead of straying off the bench and into the limelight, and McKinney can now return to whatever hole she crawled out of.
[quote]Originally posted by wade n atlanta:
One of my clients came in today and told me he received a recorded phone call saying it was illegal to vote cross party in a primary election and could result in federal reprisal.
Why IS cross-party voting allowed in Georgia (and other places)? If it's a primary to decide between two Democratic candidates, it's none of the Republicans business and they shouldn't have any say. And vice versa.
One of my clients came in today and told me he received a recorded phone call saying it was illegal to vote cross party in a primary election and could result in federal reprisal.
Why IS cross-party voting allowed in Georgia (and other places)? If it's a primary to decide between two Democratic candidates, it's none of the Republicans business and they shouldn't have any say. And vice versa.
[quote]Originally posted by conor500:
Why IS cross-party voting allowed in Georgia (and other places)?
There's a good discussion of open primaries / cross-party voting on this NewsHour site.
A defense of the open primary I remember from growing up in Wisconsin (which developed the primary system in the U.S. -- and famously defended its open primary system) is the having to openly declare one's party affiliation amounts to an unwarranted test to vote.
Why IS cross-party voting allowed in Georgia (and other places)?
There's a good discussion of open primaries / cross-party voting on this NewsHour site.
A defense of the open primary I remember from growing up in Wisconsin (which developed the primary system in the U.S. -- and famously defended its open primary system) is the having to openly declare one's party affiliation amounts to an unwarranted test to vote.
I can't believe Barr lost. With Newt (long departed) and Bob the Bigot out of office, what remnant lingers of that old-gaurd "Contract with America" gang?
Georgia is certainly a better place for the absence of both men. Nuff sed, by crackey!
No comment on McKinney. Some controversial university appointment awaits her, a la Gore. Berkeley comes to mind.
Georgia is certainly a better place for the absence of both men. Nuff sed, by crackey!
No comment on McKinney. Some controversial university appointment awaits her, a la Gore. Berkeley comes to mind.
[quote]Originally posted by Aubie in Bham:
Au Tiger in LA...Georgia is no longer in the South. They exceeded their quota a Yankees and were officially removed.
You're about right. Georgia, like the Northeast, especially Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, etc., and California, Illinois, etc., subsidizes most of the South, Plains and Mountain states (save Colorado) through the grossly unequal balance-of-tax payments by its citizens, so I guess it now belongs to the Yankee club! (Actually good president Abe Lincoln made sure all the refractory states were part of the club again, but in case anyone was wondering....) For more on this inequality as of 1999, go here.
B'bye, Cynthia--you were mighty wacky with your half-baked ideas (think 'em through, Cynthia, think 'em through) and golden sneakers, and you did the unthinkable--you publicly dissed W. and crossed the Israel lobby, so you had to go! What were you thinking, crazy lady? Bring on the Majette! B'bye!
B'bye, Bob--you vile hypocritical monster. The next time you condemn someone for personal failings, perhaps you'll climb up out of your ooze and look in the mirror--that is unless you accidentally carry one of those unlocked firearms into an MRI. You had to go. Bring on the Linder! B'bye!
[ August 21, 2002: Message edited by: fantomas ]
Au Tiger in LA...Georgia is no longer in the South. They exceeded their quota a Yankees and were officially removed.
You're about right. Georgia, like the Northeast, especially Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, etc., and California, Illinois, etc., subsidizes most of the South, Plains and Mountain states (save Colorado) through the grossly unequal balance-of-tax payments by its citizens, so I guess it now belongs to the Yankee club! (Actually good president Abe Lincoln made sure all the refractory states were part of the club again, but in case anyone was wondering....) For more on this inequality as of 1999, go here.
B'bye, Cynthia--you were mighty wacky with your half-baked ideas (think 'em through, Cynthia, think 'em through) and golden sneakers, and you did the unthinkable--you publicly dissed W. and crossed the Israel lobby, so you had to go! What were you thinking, crazy lady? Bring on the Majette! B'bye!
B'bye, Bob--you vile hypocritical monster. The next time you condemn someone for personal failings, perhaps you'll climb up out of your ooze and look in the mirror--that is unless you accidentally carry one of those unlocked firearms into an MRI. You had to go. Bring on the Linder! B'bye!
[ August 21, 2002: Message edited by: fantomas ]
Fantomas, Do you have any substance to back up what you say or are you making a blanket statement based on your belief of what the South, plain and mountain states represent in tax payment? I pay my Taxes and plenty of them and take offense at statements such as this.
wade, he posts a link to a very thourough report on the subject. I can't quite figure out where it came from, but it appears to be on the Harvard website, for what it's worth. And he explicitly states that Georgia is not a state receiving more from the federal government than it pays in.
Thank you, jqueer. The link works just fine. The report "The Federal Budget and the States," was introduced by former U.S. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan and written by Herman B. Leonard and Jay H. Walder of the JFK School of Government. The reports online go back to 1995. Try this link.
There is a listing of balance-of-tax payments going back at least a decade from 1999. It's quite clear which states transfer more money per capita into the Federal coffers. Georgia, where you live and pay taxes, is one that does this--is that not clear enough?
[ August 21, 2002: Message edited by: fantomas ]
There is a listing of balance-of-tax payments going back at least a decade from 1999. It's quite clear which states transfer more money per capita into the Federal coffers. Georgia, where you live and pay taxes, is one that does this--is that not clear enough?
[ August 21, 2002: Message edited by: fantomas ]
The Democratic Party should just change its name to Chickenshits Inc. I'm sure Auntie Majette will be another good close-mouthed spineless Congresschairfiller as the Bush Agenda goes forth unimpeded.
As Alexander Cockburn points out below -- as does, in a less strident fashion, a Page One story in today's NY Times -- what enabled the courageous Congresswoman's opponent to get her message out was a massive infusion of out-of-state cash from the American Jewish lobby. "Put your head over the parapet on the topic of Israel and the Palestinians and we'll blow it off."
Tragic.
The Attack on Cynthia McKinney (Cockburn, Counterpunch)
As Alexander Cockburn points out below -- as does, in a less strident fashion, a Page One story in today's NY Times -- what enabled the courageous Congresswoman's opponent to get her message out was a massive infusion of out-of-state cash from the American Jewish lobby. "Put your head over the parapet on the topic of Israel and the Palestinians and we'll blow it off."
Tragic.
The Attack on Cynthia McKinney (Cockburn, Counterpunch)
Just look at the numbers --it was Georgians voting that turned McKinney out. In the district 45% of the registered voters came out -- by far the highest in the state.
Blaming it on Jewish money is the outrage. McKinney dug her own political grave -- she and her family need to get over it -- this from her father, Billy McKinney, about his daughter using an old endorsement from ex-Atlanta Mayor Andrew Young: "That ain't nothing. That's nothing. Jews have bought everybody. Jews ... J-E-W-S" GOOD RIDDANCE (he himself was forced into a runoff for his reelection to the state house)
One person's courageous Congresswoman is another's loudmouth -- "Just yelling and making any statement you want and thinking as long as you're black, people are going to vote for you, well, we're not that stupid."
Blaming it on Jewish money is the outrage. McKinney dug her own political grave -- she and her family need to get over it -- this from her father, Billy McKinney, about his daughter using an old endorsement from ex-Atlanta Mayor Andrew Young: "That ain't nothing. That's nothing. Jews have bought everybody. Jews ... J-E-W-S" GOOD RIDDANCE (he himself was forced into a runoff for his reelection to the state house)
One person's courageous Congresswoman is another's loudmouth -- "Just yelling and making any statement you want and thinking as long as you're black, people are going to vote for you, well, we're not that stupid."
Interesting article about the aftermath of the GA race. This does not bode well for convicted perjurer and impeached federal judge Alcee Hastings, D-FLL. It DOES encourage those who are interested in good government for ALL, instead of divisive demagoguery for a few.
Link to NYTimes article
Link to NYTimes article
[quote]Originally posted by gmginsfo:
does not bode well for convicted perjurer and impeached federal judge Alcee Hastings[/URL]
The problem is Hastings doesn't have a primary opponent -- and the new district looks to be as reliably Democratic as, say, the California 8th district
does not bode well for convicted perjurer and impeached federal judge Alcee Hastings[/URL]
The problem is Hastings doesn't have a primary opponent -- and the new district looks to be as reliably Democratic as, say, the California 8th district
McKinney's father's statement is crass and out of bounds... but as Cockburn says in his column, imagine if black or Arab groups had targeted a Jewish House member. Deviance from unqualified support for the militarized state of Israel, and its abuses, has become a career-ender in politics.
Bad Bucky, bad! No more recipes for you!
Don't count me out yet - stranger things have happened here in SF and the incumbent has already demonstrated her unwillingness to debate any of her challengers to date. Let's talk on November 6th and remember, by winning my primary, I've already secured my seat on the state GOP central committee, which meets the initial goal I set for myself and all moderates in the CA GOP. Anything from here on out is icing on the cake.
Don't count me out yet - stranger things have happened here in SF and the incumbent has already demonstrated her unwillingness to debate any of her challengers to date. Let's talk on November 6th and remember, by winning my primary, I've already secured my seat on the state GOP central committee, which meets the initial goal I set for myself and all moderates in the CA GOP. Anything from here on out is icing on the cake.
[quote]Originally posted by Bill W:
imagine if black or Arab groups had targeted a Jewish House member. Deviance from unqualified support for the militarized state of Israel, and its abuses, has become a career-ender in politics.
I agree with your point, Bill. Israel has become one of those issues where politicians feel they can't diverge from the standard policy, i.e. full support of the State of Israel.
Your first point is a little weak, though, simply because McKinney's opponent was black as well. If that hadn't been the case, this really could've turned into a racially divisive campaign.
imagine if black or Arab groups had targeted a Jewish House member. Deviance from unqualified support for the militarized state of Israel, and its abuses, has become a career-ender in politics.
I agree with your point, Bill. Israel has become one of those issues where politicians feel they can't diverge from the standard policy, i.e. full support of the State of Israel.
Your first point is a little weak, though, simply because McKinney's opponent was black as well. If that hadn't been the case, this really could've turned into a racially divisive campaign.
[quote]Originally posted by conor500:
Your first point is a little weak, though, simply because McKinney's opponent was black as well.
That was a political necessity: To find an opponent that had McKinney's demographic strengths (black, female) willing to be funded by Friends of Israel, American Israel Public Affairs Committee, etc.
Majette = Oreo, with a shmear? (including the smears against McKinney's Arab donors)
Your first point is a little weak, though, simply because McKinney's opponent was black as well.
That was a political necessity: To find an opponent that had McKinney's demographic strengths (black, female) willing to be funded by Friends of Israel, American Israel Public Affairs Committee, etc.
Majette = Oreo, with a shmear? (including the smears against McKinney's Arab donors)
[quote]Originally posted by Bill W:
Majette = Oreo, with a shmear?
Ooh, very clever. Too racial slurs in one!
Majette = Oreo, with a shmear?
Ooh, very clever. Too racial slurs in one!
[quote]Originally posted by Bill W:
Majette = Oreo, with a shmear? (including the smears against McKinney's Arab donors)
Finally, a few days after the fact, some justification for the complaint that the P&R forum is too nasty, abrasive, etc. How interesting that the first racially insensitive comment I've seen on this board comes from a bitter lefty, though I do completely support your freedom of speech and your "right," I suppose, to make such mindless comments. But you do seem a bit bitter over McKinney's loss, Bill. I'm so sorry.
Majette = Oreo, with a shmear? (including the smears against McKinney's Arab donors)
Finally, a few days after the fact, some justification for the complaint that the P&R forum is too nasty, abrasive, etc. How interesting that the first racially insensitive comment I've seen on this board comes from a bitter lefty, though I do completely support your freedom of speech and your "right," I suppose, to make such mindless comments. But you do seem a bit bitter over McKinney's loss, Bill. I'm so sorry.
Since Oreo is a name used by blacks for blacks, I disagree... its emphasis on one's inner character makes its purely "racial" nature dubious, don't you think? (And that is clearly not that you are Caucasian on the inside, but The Man on the inside.)
And a shmear is just a shmear (though I like my bagels dry).
The cross-voting in primaries is totally f***ed, as others have observed.
The issue about the P & R forum was attacking *other posters*. Less Coulter, more comprehension, Wm...
[ August 22, 2002: Message edited by: Bill W ]
And a shmear is just a shmear (though I like my bagels dry).
The cross-voting in primaries is totally f***ed, as others have observed.
The issue about the P & R forum was attacking *other posters*. Less Coulter, more comprehension, Wm...
[ August 22, 2002: Message edited by: Bill W ]
Bill, you're bitter and defensive.
"The next Congress will be full of complacent African-American parlor servants like Majette and Davis, dangerous extreme rightists like former cockroach exterminator DeLay and former sportscaster J. D. Hayworth of Arizona, pitiful morons like Florida's former Secretary of State and chief election rigger Katherine Harris, Republican moles and sleepers like Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman, and Democratic spineless amoebas like Richard Gephardt and Tom Daschle. They will stand ready to back Bush's military campaigns..."
Crushing Congressional Dissent: The Fall of Hilliard, Barr and McKinney
Crushing Congressional Dissent: The Fall of Hilliard, Barr and McKinney
Bill W., man, where on earth do you get the idea that Majette is so complacent? Is Ron Kirk of Texas also an "Oreo"? Personally, I like Congresspeople of the Loretta Sanchez-Chaka Fattah persuasion, but there are some moderate Democrats who are NOT lackeys nor pseudo-Republicans like Zell Miller. Are all moderate Black Democrats thus "Oreos"?
McKinney's father's comments were intemperate and hateful. He knows it, we all know it. She does have the right to criticize both W. and Israel, both as a citizen and as a member of Congress, but I think she also now realizes that there is a price to pay for doing so in such an overblown manner.
McKinney's father's comments were intemperate and hateful. He knows it, we all know it. She does have the right to criticize both W. and Israel, both as a citizen and as a member of Congress, but I think she also now realizes that there is a price to pay for doing so in such an overblown manner.
[quote]Originally posted by Bill W:
Since Oreo is a name used by blacks for blacks, I disagree... its emphasis on one's inner character makes its purely "racial" nature dubious, don't you think? (And that is clearly not that you are Caucasian on the inside, but The Man on the inside.)
There's another word that some black people use to call each other, but that doesn't make it appropriate in a civil discussion. And wait a minute - calling someone an "oreo" has nothing to do with color? So those cookies we eat are black on the outside and "the man" on the inside? No, they're white on the inside, and that's exactly what people are saying when they use that word. It implies that any person of color who "makes it" in the white world must be white on the inside or must "act white". Let's just be clear.
Since Oreo is a name used by blacks for blacks, I disagree... its emphasis on one's inner character makes its purely "racial" nature dubious, don't you think? (And that is clearly not that you are Caucasian on the inside, but The Man on the inside.)
There's another word that some black people use to call each other, but that doesn't make it appropriate in a civil discussion. And wait a minute - calling someone an "oreo" has nothing to do with color? So those cookies we eat are black on the outside and "the man" on the inside? No, they're white on the inside, and that's exactly what people are saying when they use that word. It implies that any person of color who "makes it" in the white world must be white on the inside or must "act white". Let's just be clear.
SIGH! Another political discussion degrading into a fight amonst pollsters.
Fantamos: Apparently you didn't read the disclaimer at the end of my Yankee comment.
Fantamos: Apparently you didn't read the disclaimer at the end of my Yankee comment.
[quote]Originally posted by fantomas:
Bill W., man, where on earth do you get the idea that Majette is so complacent?
Not complacent... she smells reactionary to me. Supported wingnut Alan Keyes in 2000, unless the Counterpunch is article wrong. Fine, I'll abandon all cookie metaphors, and stick with Wayne Madsen's term -- she's a parlor servant.
[quote]
Are all moderate Black Democrats thus "Oreos"?
No... unless "moderate" inevitably means right-wing... She and her ilk (with single-issue savior Bob Barr gone from his gavel) will hasten the destruction of what civil liberties remain.
Bill W., man, where on earth do you get the idea that Majette is so complacent?
Not complacent... she smells reactionary to me. Supported wingnut Alan Keyes in 2000, unless the Counterpunch is article wrong. Fine, I'll abandon all cookie metaphors, and stick with Wayne Madsen's term -- she's a parlor servant.
[quote]
Are all moderate Black Democrats thus "Oreos"?
No... unless "moderate" inevitably means right-wing... She and her ilk (with single-issue savior Bob Barr gone from his gavel) will hasten the destruction of what civil liberties remain.
[quote]Originally posted by Bill W:
No... unless "moderate" inevitably means right-wing... She and her ilk (with single-issue savior Bob Barr gone from his gavel) will hasten the destruction of what civil liberties remain.
Bill W., I didn't know about her support of Keyes, which is troubling. Does his show still come on? I used to watch it because *he* was so hilarious at times.
The erosion of our civil liberties was already underway, however, under William Jefferson Clinton, with Herr Barr and Lady McKinney in office, when the previous administration promoted and furthered its wiretapping and Internet surveillance programs.
There are a few Democrats *and* Republicans left who are not rolling over and playing dead. Some of them will win in November 2002 too.
No... unless "moderate" inevitably means right-wing... She and her ilk (with single-issue savior Bob Barr gone from his gavel) will hasten the destruction of what civil liberties remain.
Bill W., I didn't know about her support of Keyes, which is troubling. Does his show still come on? I used to watch it because *he* was so hilarious at times.
The erosion of our civil liberties was already underway, however, under William Jefferson Clinton, with Herr Barr and Lady McKinney in office, when the previous administration promoted and furthered its wiretapping and Internet surveillance programs.
There are a few Democrats *and* Republicans left who are not rolling over and playing dead. Some of them will win in November 2002 too.
Several sources indicate that Denise Majette did indeed support Alan Keyes in the 2000 Republican primary. Being gay, I find this troubling in itself. Moreover, & significant for a congressional district with a large gay electorate, she is silent on gay issues. So the 4th district goes from a reliable supporter on gay issues to a representative who is iffy at best, which makes me wonder about the attacks on Cynthia McKinney that I read in Atlanta’s Window Media-owned Southern Voice. I also noted in something else I read, but can’t confirm, that she was once a Republican.
She stakes out fairly safe, mainline Democratic Party positions on most issues (pro-choice on abortion, for example), but on other issues she seems more centrist than liberal (lukewarm on affirmative action, supports welfare reform) and on a few issues is downright illiberal (supports repeal of the estate tax and tightening of bankruptcy law as it pertains to individuals). And in all cases she employs a lot of politician’s double-speak.
Overall, her expressions of liberalism appear to be due to the political exigency of running in a heavily Democratic district and seem insincere. In other words, she is a “safe” Democrat who will get in line and not make waves.
She stakes out fairly safe, mainline Democratic Party positions on most issues (pro-choice on abortion, for example), but on other issues she seems more centrist than liberal (lukewarm on affirmative action, supports welfare reform) and on a few issues is downright illiberal (supports repeal of the estate tax and tightening of bankruptcy law as it pertains to individuals). And in all cases she employs a lot of politician’s double-speak.
Overall, her expressions of liberalism appear to be due to the political exigency of running in a heavily Democratic district and seem insincere. In other words, she is a “safe” Democrat who will get in line and not make waves.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.