Cynthia Tucker: Voters can see through McKinney

[wyldwolf]

In a few precincts of American politics, voters still applaud the utterly futile gesture of defiance, the confrontational rhetoric that pleases only true believers, the fist shaken in the face of an opponent who neither notices nor cares. Apparently, such empty gestures — signs of impotence, really — have come to be seen as "speaking truth to power."

That helps to explain the remaining, if faltering, appeal of U.S. Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga.), whose supporters are nothing if not naïve. They have turned Theodore Roosevelt's maxim — "Speak softly and carry a big stick" — upside down.

McKinney speaks loudly but has accomplished little in her 12 years in Congress. That's because her outrageous rhetoric and loopy antics distance her not only from the Republican majority, but even from many of her Democratic colleagues. She has few allies.

she frittered away her promise, recklessly playing the race card and picking fights not only with opponents but also with those who should have been allies. In 1997, when she was challenged by John Mitnick, a Jewish Republican, she allowed her father, a spokesman for her campaign, to engage in blatant anti-Semitism. In 2000, her Web site posted her inflammatory analysis of Al Gore as having a low "Negro tolerance level."

By contrast, her colleague, U.S. Rep. John Lewis, who represents Georgia's 5th District, has the moral authority to get things done. He, too, is a vocal critic of the invasion of Iraq. He, too, has frequently disagreed with the policies of President Bush. He, too, is a Democrat — a member of the minority party. But when Lewis threw his determined efforts behind extension of the Voting Rights Act, it passed.

It's the difference between infamy and influence.

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/tucker/stories/073006.html

[Lerkfish]

1. wow, like three threads today you're attacking mckinney

that I know of.

someone has a cause, and its to "purge" and "purify" the democratic party.

ironic.

[wyldwolf]

3. ask yourself this

Have I attacked McKinney or have I posted legitimate editorial and factual news content?

[Lerkfish]

4. ask yourself this

what is your agenda?

I just calls em as I sees em.

[TomInTib]

7. See #5 and help me out on this.

I always respect your views, Lerkfish.

You and I are normally on the same page, but I believe Cynthia has finally worn out her welcome.

I see her as totally ineffectual except for her flame-thrower quantities.

[Lerkfish]

13. I'm just honing in on the hypocrisy

certain people who have tangled with people like me who have argued against Lieberman, seem to be doing the same with Mckinney.
what I'm doing in this thread is returning to them the same arguments they've used against people against Lieberman.

They first accuse them of wanting to "purge" or "purify" the democratic party, then they accuse us of having an agenda.

I just wanted to point out that many do not like their own tactics turned on themselves.

:)

As far as mckinney herself, I have not stated either way. I think the issues with her have more to do with her personality or perceived personality than whether she's supporting issues that are important to the country or the party.
That is where I think the pro-lieberman and I disagree: My objections to Lieberman are because of his actions and his votes and who he's sided with (bush against democrats), but what he is like personally has no bearing on those objections.

However, what I see people posting in these threads are all very personal indictments of her -- "lunatic", "flake", etc. which seem to be independent of how she approaches the issues.

AS such, I felt this witchhunt, over several threads today, seemed worth using their rhetoric against them to make a point in irony. Unfortunately, they've not recognized it as such yet.

I have some very basic issues that concern me. I'm not in Mckinney's district, nor am I in Lieberman's district. I am against this war, I am against the curtailing of civil rights, and I am against according this administration any more power. I am against torture as a foreign policy. My understanding is that Mckinney more closely matches my views on these issues than Lieberman. If I am incorrect, then someone feel free to point that out.

[TomInTib]

19. Thanks, Lerkfish..

gotcha.

[Lerkfish]

21. no problem

I find I do this sometimes, but often the audience doesn't "get it". However, it pleases me at any rate to put the shoe on the other foot see how they like walking in it awhile. I'm never disappointed. They ALWAYS don't like to be treated how they treat others.

:)

I"m weird that way. I also like to point out possible counterarguments to what people post, but not necessarily because that's MY stand, but because I can see the alternate argument. I think way too often we put blinders on and refuse to see alternative arguments or don't want to see things from someone else's perspective.

and, I'm as bad as everyone else from time to time. But arguing this way is how I come to better understand issues.
My weakness is every once in a while, I like to poke people in the eye while they're poking others in the eye. A friend once described it as "Lerk has a habit of flipping out over morons". Not that everyone is a moron I disagree with, but my friend was making the point that I sometimes take umbrage at HOW someone argues, even if I don't care that much for one side or the other. I just feel if they dish it out, they should be forced to take it once in a while.

[TomInTib]

25. Even the devil's advocate needs an advocate, sometimes.

Might as well be you.

Tom

[God Almighty]

32. We all owe so much to McKinney & Johnson is backed by the Republicans

Just google his name and "Independent Conservative" or his name and Republican voters.

McKinney was there when we needed someone to votes against USA-PATRIOT and against the war and against the WTO and against NAFTA and for environmental protections for choice and against the Ohio electors. These are all positions that Johnson disagrees with.

The only reason Johnson stands a chance is because of the Republican vote (as its an open runoff) and Diebold. Even the pollsters speak of his Republican support.

I have to wonder what kind of Democrat agrees with the anti-choice Republicans on their choice for a Democratic nominee.

The last time McKinney lost a runoff, the Georgia Democrats didn't vote in the general election and Cleland lost and so did the Democrat running for governor. If Johnson wins, then the governor's race is over. The majority of Democrats in Georgia won't vote in November. But, maybe that's what you want.

[wyldwolf]

40. no proof in that, but you DO back Ron Paul, and there IS proof of that!

[ProudDad]

36. Ah, you drank the right-wing kool-aid...

[wyldwolf]

8. ok, I will

"Me, what is my agenda?"

"well, me, my agenda is to post information concerning a race almost in my backyard for people spread out across the country to read. Knowing that only two or three DUers live in that district, my agenda couldn't possibly be to influence that race..."

"Good answer, me, now do you think Lerkfish is going to answer the question you posed?"

"Highly unlikely, me, because his agenda must be to attack the messenger."

[Lerkfish]

15. read post #13

:)

[wyldwolf]

41. I did... so?

[LincolnMcGrath]

9. You've never explained how you mysteriously found the website story.

:shrug:

Was it legitimate editorial or factual news content?

[wyldwolf]

11. I was never asked

:shrug:

[tkmorris]

10. That rather misses the point

Regardless of how factual the links you have posted are, they are all critical of Ms. McKinney. Clearly you have an agenda.

Don't misunderstand, I am no champion for McKinney. Her situation is too complex and murky to make a judgement about her without a more careful examination of the facts, which to date I have not done sufficiently to pick a side.

You, however, have. You want her gone; this is obvious. There is no shame in that, own it. Stand up tall and just say so. I support your right to that opinion, just as I support those who want Lieberman gone.

[wyldwolf]

12. I have stated often I want McKinney gone

[Lerkfish]

14. which means I have accurately assessed your agenda.

n'est-ce pas?

[BootinUp]

17. Nothing wrong with this post

You don't like the article I take it?

[Lerkfish]

18. read post #13

[BootinUp]

20. Sounds like

you are carrying battles from one thread to the next. Why not debate the issues raised in the OP.

[Lerkfish]

23. you make a valid point.

however, I think I DID address the OP in that post I pointed out. I feel that critics of McKinney resort to terms like looney and to people that support her as naive, etc. Its perception of her personality that holds the biggest sway in the linked article.

I"m saying Mckinney is being witchunted. The attacks against her seem more in the pitchfork and torch realm than reasoned debate.

[BootinUp]

27. The main issue of the article

is that she has not been effective and has few allies in Washington. Further that this is a result of her boisterous style. You disagree, or you think that is not important?

[Lerkfish]

28. You're just repeating what I'm saying back to me.

are you not getting my point?

"boisterous style". :shrug: Do we consider the style of any other representatives?
I cannot speak to her effectiveness, as that is harder to measure. A lot of what gets decided and negotiated is not seen on the floor.
but I would say that the nature of the objections to her seem more based on innuendo and slander than whether her stand on the issues is consistent with the constituents who elected her in the first place.

I think "boisterous style" is evident in countless other politicians. I never see that used as basis to determine whether they're fit for office.
Do you?

[BootinUp]

31. Thea article isn't saying that

she has alienated you or me. It is saying she has alientated her colleages. I'm probably not going to be here for much more of this discussion just that its getting late.

[Hosnon]

42. Or perhaps she's not worth a damn? nt

[RogueTrooper]

43. It is a measure of the intensity of interest in a subject

The number of threads on a particular subject that is.

someone has a cause, and its to "purge" and "purify" the democratic party.

I take it you are not a supporter of Ned Lamont, then? ;-)

[MrBenchley]

45. Wow, like the far left never attacks sane Democrats

The hypocrisy of the far fringe is on fine display

[onehandle]

2. I think she's done.

I've been all over our district in the last week or two and I see Johnson signs everywhere and only one McKinney sign last week.

[nickshepDEM]

39. And she has no one to blame, but herself...

Adios, Cynthia...

[TomInTib]

5. How anyone here can continue to defend McKinney is beyond my ken

I would like to hear/see just one positive piece of legislation that she has sponsored and that the Dems have stood solidly behind.

If there has been any, I will gladly apologize for my ignorance on the subject.

[still_one]

6. frankly after her encounter with a security guard

said everything, and it wasn't comlementary. Since it was on film she had to settle, and appologize for her actions

Of course I am not from Georgia, so it is up to the people in her district to determine if she has served them well or not

[niyad]

24. since I missed it when the cpd finally released the alleged tape, would

you be good enough to provide a link?

[Lerkfish]

26. yes, I would like to see that tape as well.

linky?

[BootinUp]

16. Sadly true. n/t

[oasis]

22. My suspicions that the cop incident was a setup has been confirmed.

As for Cynthia Tucker, she's just another jellyfish journalist in the mold of Tom Freidman.

[BootinUp]

29. She's got the credentials

and covers the beat in Atlanta and Washington politics. I think her opinion is at least as worthy of a read as yours.

[BayCityProgressive]

30. McKinney

while right on many issues is not a good politician. She really doesn't work well with others and gets nothing done. I say this as someone who was very happy to see her speak at anti-war protests last summer. If she was my rep I would consider what is she really doing for my district?

[BootinUp]

33. I agree.

I was speaking of Tucker in that last post.

[sleipnir]

34. You speak the truth. But, be careful. You'll be labeled....

as a hater of McKinney.

She's not a good politician and I think the constituents of the district deserve better leadership.

And based on the recent polls, (McKinney is down by 30 points in one poll, Lewis' lead is almost insurmountable at this point) it looks like they're going to get it soon.

[oasis]

35. Tom Freidman's got the credentials too. A little light in the spine dept.

That's what I think of jellyfish journalists like Freidman, Bob Woodward and Tucker.

[BooScout]

38. Uh no it's not.....

Tucker has a long time running fued with McKinney as anyone familiar with Atlanta area politcs well knows. Her opinions are more than biased in her campaign against McKinney.

[BootinUp]

44. How do you define feud?

I know, because she writes articles that are critical of McKinney, right?

Guess what. She is doing her job.

I haven't seen one post in this thread that makes any effort to debate the issues raised in the article. I guess thats because it hits pretty close to home.

[wyldwolf]

47. I'm well aware of Atlanta area politics, and I know of no fued

[BooScout]

37. Cynthia Tucker hates McKinney....

...always has.....always will.

[liberalitch]

46. I know a white guy who lives in her district.... he voted for her before..

.... But he said because of the frequency with which she plays the race card, she has lost ALL credibility with him. He says as a white constituent AND TAXPAYER...... he doesn't feel that she cares about him because of his color.

He used to lived here in Bobby Scott's district.... Rep. Scott is fantastic and all of his constituents feel that he does such a good job he often (not always) runs unopposed. Why fix what ain't broken?