[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [mob] Cynthia McKinney Parkway petition

Thus spake Glenn Everette ([email protected]):

> On 9/14/2002 at 9:36 AM Robbie Honerkamp so eloquently wrote in Re: [mob]
> Cynthia McKinney Parkway petition :
> 
> To be honest I didn't know that discussions were encouraged here. I've
> never any before. 

We've had a few in the past. Discussions are fine on the list, especially
as quiet as it's been recently.
 
> Thanks for explaining the reasoning but the people of her district elected
> her. Nearly all of the complaints I've heard about her have been from
> people outside of her district. 

I don't know- there were a lot of Denise Majette signs up around here this
year making it look like plenty of 4th district folks had complaints.

> Anytime I hear anything on the radio it's
> always negative. It almost to the point of being dehumanizing. I don't like
> Newt or Bob Barr either but I don't hear people going around calling them
> a-holes or skanks over the airwaves. 

That's what you get for listening to the radio. Talk show hosts aren't
supposed to be balanced, rational people because that doesn't get them
the ratings they need. Newt keeps to his own projects these days so he's
not a hot topic for talk radio, but Barr was talked about quite a bit thanks
to his 'accidentally' firing a gun at a rally. Even Boortz came out against
him this year.
 
> And he's right about white republicans
> disenfranchising African American voters. Didn't one the PAC's that
> supported Bush cross-reference felons with the Florida democratic rolls to
> prevent them from voting? While I'm sure that they didn't just purge
> African Americans but I'm pretty dang sure they focused on the the counties
> with the highest percentage of African American voters first. 

> If you were
> there to register voter and you felt uncomfortable that's one thing. But to
> whip it up into "I feared for my life" is something else completely
> different. 

We were ticked off. We came there to register voters, not to become
scapegoats for some stupid state law.

> But they did speak *with* you and your CR friends. If you thought it was
> wise to leave your table before how is it now wise to go up to speak to the
> same people who just dissed you? 

We went up and introduced ourselves outside. Jesse was cordial while Cynthia
didn't want to talk to us.
 
> So in essence she retracted her earlier statements? 

She didn't retract them at all, she said that she took 'poetic license'
with the events. I could take poetic license with the events too and say
that she punched Hugh and left him bloody on the street. While it might be
'poetic license' it's also a lie (and unfair to Hugh, who probably is
deleting these posts without reading them, oblivious to the fact that
he's mentioned in them.. :)

> Well what about Newt
> making all those "Family Values" speeches while committing adultery with
> one of his staff members? I don't recall him retracting any of those
> statements. 

No, and he was incredibly hyporcritical. You also note that he's no longer
in office either. 
 
> >It's things like that that put her on my bad list. Her father isn't
> >exactly an example of sanity either, yabbering on about a jewish
> >conspiracy against them. 
> 
> But Jews from outside of her district did heavily finance her opponent.
> They also did the same with another African American congress person in
> Alabama because they questioned our foreign policies that are heavily pro
> Israel. I have questions about our foreign aid to Israel too regarding why
> we're providing billions and billions of dollars to a nation that has the
> 16th largest GDP in the world. 

I agree and I think the US shouldn't spend one more penny on support for
Israel. The pro-Israeli lobby does have the right to promote their issues,
though.

As much as Cynthia's father likes to blame the "J-E-W-S" for his daughter's 
defeat, the fact is that she did it to herself. She apparently forgot that 
there are quite a few Jewish folks living in her district and they actually 
have the right to organize and vote for her opponent. As for Majette 
recieving money from outside her district, McKinney got most of her money 
from outside the district as well, quite a bit of it from supporters of 
Arab and Muslim issues (and there's nothing wrong with that either).

Perhaps she also forgot a few other things. She considered herself a bit
of an expert in foreign policy and spent taxpayer dollars in earlier terms
jetting around making friends with African dictators. She then returned to
the US speaking to Congress about how the US should support people like
Charles Taylor and Laurent Kabila, who she termed as a new generation of
leaders that the US should support who actually turned out to be two
leaders who have kept much of the continent in useless bloody wars over the
last decade while filling their pockets with money. There are a lot of
Africans in her district as well, and most of them are tired of seeing
their countries ruled by dictators.

This election she also played dangerous politics after 11 Sept. Begging
Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal for the ten million dollars that New York was
ridiculous.
 
> This is the point that I'm trying to make. So people are willing to help
> sponsor a bill  specifically directed at one person out of spite? That
> bothers me because I don't think it's fair. And all I think it does is just
> polarize more African Americans against Republicans for their absurd
> pettiness. Aren't' conservative supposed to be about saving tax payer's
> money? Well who's going to pay to have all those signs removed?

Why are taxpayers paying for politicians to kiss each others rear ends
in the first place? The road was renamed in 2000 after an amendment was
tacked on HR1321 to rename it? If you look at the resolution:
http://www2.state.ga.us/Legis/1999_00/leg/fulltext/hr1231.htm
you'll notice that the sections in question (sections 3-16 through 3-27) 
don't fit with the format of the other parts because they were added
after the bill had been introduced. Did Rep. Ray do this to get a favor
from Billy McKinney? It's likely, but who knows for sure.

One person might consider renaming the road spiteful while another might
consider it removing something that shouldn't be there in the first 
place. Republicans have already tried to rename it once and failed:
http://www.ganet.org/services/newleg/legsearch.cgi?year=2001&bill=HR794

How much does it cost to remove a sign? It shouldn't cost much, but with
government involved I'm sure there will be twenty people spending a day
to take each sign down. There might be a better solution- to instruct
the DOT to stop maintaining the signs. When they are damaged, don't
replace them. Or maybe we should support a new bill- if a politician wants
to name something after another politician, the cost should come out of
their paychecks.

Robbie