My Ridiculously Inept Congresscommie (Who Now Faces Arrest!)
 

Just got "The 4th District Chronicle" from the Cutest Little Communist In Congress. Just a quick glance at it...

Page One: main article...just her general idiotic rantings...no surprises there


Page Two: "Congress Hears Gripping Stories Of Heroism, Policy Failure and Discrimination" Hmmm...hard-hitting article perhaps? Nope. No specifics. No heroism. No discrimination. No policy failure. I guess I'm just supposed to believe it because the headline says so...


Also on page 2: "REGISTER EARLY. CONGRESSWOMAN HOSTS FIFTH ANNUAL WOMEN'S SISTER TO SISTER" Limited Seating. Register Early. Oooh. Better pass this on to SWMBO. When is it? Oh. It was December 5th., 2005.




Guess it's too late to register early...



On to page three:
"CONGRESSWOMAN MCKINNEY WORKING HARD FOR THE FOURTH DISTRICT" Her web site proudly proclaims of our district "The District is the most ethnically diverse district in the southeastern United States." You sure wouldn't guess that by the pictures of Congresswoman McKinney Working Hard For The 4th District. There are five pictures of Congresswoman McKinney Working Hard For The Most Ethnically Diverse District In the Southeastern United States. 35 faces can be seen in those pictures. 33 of them are black. The two white ones are the mayor of Clarkston and a white school board member. I guess I should be glad I'm not a part of the 48ish percent of her district that is not black.



Page Four...

Lots of "Legislation Introduced By Congresswoman McKinney." The watchful eye notes, though, that there's no "Legislation PASSED That Congresswoman McKinney Introduced." Hmmmm...I wonder why that is. Could it be because the rest of her colleagues, even the ones in her own party, see her for the FRUITCAKE she is???




Page Five...

Headline: "Congressional Office DELIVERS!!!" Lots mroe pictures of the Congressional Office DELIVERING for the various black people in the picture. Hey, there's even a photo op with C.M. and Isaac Hayes. I wonder if Ol' Isaac DELIVERED a little sumpm-sumpm to her.




Page Six....

OH MY GOODNESS, WHAT IS THAT??? A PICTURE OF....WHITE PEOPLE!!!! Oh, never mind. That's the 9/11 Commission. The article is ripping them.



Page Seven...

Ahh....the ol' District Day schedule, with an explanation that "district days are periodic meetings planned by Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and staff to allow for individual visits by constituents...We encourage you to attend and ask questions, raise concersn and have those questions and concerns addressed." Cool! So, when's the next one?

Oh, these are the District Days from May 2005-November 2005. Maybe Congresswoman McKinney should DELIVER a time machine to my house so I could attend some of these.



Page Eight....
(You're not going to believe this one unless I quote it verbatim. I've also included color and relative font sizes used on the actual page.)



Just damn. Glad to see her soliciting the convicted felon vote.

Better make sure for the next one if SWMBO needs a sleeping bag or not.

Make sure you send a copy of this to Neal, just in case he hasn't gotten his yet ;)

Is this a joke? Well, I mean other than the fact that Cynthia McKinney is a joke in and of herself...

Ahhh - the aisle bird rears her ugly head again! I can never decide if I am happy that I don't live in her district, or if I am sad that I've never gotten to vote against her...

I would like to state for the record that the only election during which we were in Ms. McKinney's district, she lost in the primary. Then we left, and she came back.

I would like to also state for the record that I was not a Republican crossing party lines for a primary vote. But hey! Maybe everybody else was.

Imagine the uproar if this thread had been started by Bubba Wheels.

He wouldn't have provided any of the quotes from the newsletter, and later would have referenced something completely different to draw attention away from his initial, impossible to defend statement.

Nope. Everything I posted is 100% accurate from the newsletter I received today.

And yes, I'll be composing an e-mail to Boortz in the morning, just in case it hasn't gotten to him.

I'm going to be out of the office a good bit tomorrow, but I'll try to remember to scan the convicted felon section.

I wasn't thinking about Bubba, I was just thinking that if ANY white person had started this thread, that person would be an automatic racist. Hell, we're we probably honorary racists for even pointing that out.

Look out!!! It's the FOFC Justice League!!! Hide!!!


I need to come up with super hero names for the FOFC political crusaders on both sides.

I scanned her webpage, and her wikipedia entry, and found no evidence of communism or even that much evidence of far left political leanings. In fact wikipedia says she is one of the biggest Katrina relief advocates and works tirelessly to keep conventional weapons out of the hands of dictators and those that fail to respect human rights. She was also instrumental in having the UN create a commission on the Rwanda genocide. I do see though that she is a co-sponsor of Conyers' resolution to impeach Bush.

I noticed you dropped your direct criticism of SD for posting this (no biggie, I'm guilty of it myself occasionally, thinking better of things), but still, you're going to have to do better than Wikipedia and the Congressperson's own website as an effective defense against some of the more outlandish things she's done (I seem to recall her thinly veiled suggestions that Bush was actually responsible for 9/11, for example).

Besides, I should leave it to SD to speak further to your counterarguments, since, you know, he actually lives in Ms. McKinney's district and thus actually sees what impact her representation has on his daily life.

Btw, no matter what else, I don't think it is a problem at all to remind ex convicts that they do still have the right to vote if they fulfill certain requirements.

Apparently, that was a made-up quote:

http://www.alternet.org/story/16172/

McKinney did push for an investigation into what warnings the Bush administration had of 9/11, something that should have been standard procedure.

Let's see what the little communist has to say...

No specifics.

No specifics.

Pictures of her main constituency, black people. The horror, the horror.

Or probably more plausible is the fact that Republicans control a solid majority of the House, so most Democratic resolutions never even see the light of day?

No specifics.

The horror of more black pictures. Oh, and a sexual jab, wonderful.

Her newsletter is a little behind. Must be a communist.

I don't see anything inherently wrong about reminding someone that they can vote, even if they are felons.

So the only concrete criticism is that she sends out her newsletter with out-dated meetings on it. I can't help but think that if someone posted something this empty about Bush, that it would be ridiculed mercilessly, and rightfully so.

Obviously you missed the *suggestion* that her main constituency is black and, oh by the way--remember that convicts can vote, too!

That's hilarious, yet sad. Like a burning clown.

tee-hee.

You shush up MrBiggs, if it wasn't for this I would have had a hard time this week without my regular 'Tucker, GA Update.' It's not as good as ramblings on the high school football team we all know and love but it will work for me.

Hot update Cringer - did you hear the 3rd string backup DT's was thinking of attending math class when spring weight training was going on ? :D

:eek:

Nobody made that suggestion until you did. Most felons that are ignorant of voting laws are poor, poor people tend to vote Democratic. It's interesting that the first thing you think of is to relate blacks to felons.

The Communist Party USA was "very excited" about McKinney's campaign in '04.

http://www.cpusa.org/article/articleview/586/

That doesn't make her a communist of course, but I think it's a fun term to throw around... you know, kind of like "racist".

Heh. I'm not going to be drawn into an argument on the initial stuff. As far as I'm concerned, it is axiomatic that McKinney's rantings are idiotic, and that her philosophy is very much communistic. Everything else from there is just laughing at her. :)

I also find the "core constituency" comment laughable, too. If a white politician in a district that was BARELY (very key word there that somehow MrB just completely decided to overlook) majority white posed only in pictures with white people, and only showed pictures of black people in the context of an article written to run said black people down, there'd be hell to pay. There's no arguing that.

Actually, I'm fairly sure that the 4th District also includes part of Gwinnett County, I think. I'm not even sure the *District* is majority black. DeKalb *County* is majority black by a very small margin, but the Fourth District could well only be a plurality.

Right...someday I'll compose a tally of all the info I have provided with links and all the info you've done the same with. But I can tell you right now, you lose. Keep enjoying your ignorance, though, they do say its bliss.

I eagerly await your findings.

By the way, how does it feel to think you've given a great zinger, but when you go to high-five, there's no one there to complete it?

I don't usually attempt that over the internet, causes cuts on my hand when it hits the computer screen. But if your here just to look for 'buddy strokes', more power to ya bunkie!

So, if I don't directly say it, but only indirectly suggest it, it's okay in your book?

BW, I'll high-five ya, if only to spite cartman.


Crim

I wasn't referring to your computer porn viewing habits, I was talking about high-fives.

Yay for the US Census Bureau:

	Congressional District 4 (109th Congress), Georgia
Total:	629,690
White alone	225,604
Black or African American alone	337,146
American Indian and Alaska Native alone	1,570
Asian alone	26,853
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone	324
Some other race alone	24,384
Two or more races	13,809

White alone: 35.8%
Black/AA alone: 53.5%
AI/AN alone: 0.2%
Asian alone: 4.3%
NH/PI alone: 0.1%
Other alone: 3.9%
2+ races: 2.2%

Next time she should get all 324 pacific islanders together for a picture. That would throw people off a little.

Wow, I feel 'elated.' Thanks.:D

Thanks for the hard numbers. That's pretty close to what I suspected, and my point holds: flip-flop those numbers for white alone and black alone as I mentioned earlier, and you have people screaming about "the most overtly racist politician since the Jim Crow era."

Don't you know? It's impossible for a black person to be racist.

Well now, that sure would be something.

Wow. I didn't get that connection at all and still don't see it... but i guess we all bring our own biases with us and that leads us to read things differently. *shurg*

You've obviously never met my relatives in Chicago. ;)

I have a feeling we'll see this thread again when the next Pol-related banning comes up. Or maybe one of Bubba's.

Maybe it can be all "two for tuesday" and the thread can be started by Bubba AND have him get banned in it.

You keep using 'communism', I do not think you know what that word means.

The district is 53% black, 35% white. Nationally, 90% of blacks and 40% of whites generall vote Democratic. Which means that 48% of the population is black people that would vote for her and 14% of of the population is white people that would vote for her. In other words, her constituency is almost 4x black compared to white. Not barely.

As to your 'no argument' suggestion, if my Rep had all white people in her newsletter I doubt I would notice, much less go on a message board and make a rant about it and call her a communist. Out of all the wingnut Rep's out there, I'm sure one has white people in his/her newsletter, and I've never heard anything about it.

I think there are many people that don't truely understand what 'Communism' means.. it has taken such a warped definition in general, but especially since you need to define if you mean Marxism or Communism in the sense of what was done in Russia, China, etc.

1. IF those numbers are right for THIS community (which I'm quite sure they're not), then you'd be saying the Congresspeople should only represent those who vote for them, not everyone in their district?

2. That ain't the way it works in DeKalb County. There are lots of middle and upper middle class blacks around here (its one of, if not, THE wealthiest majority-black area in the country), and there are also LOTS of wealthy white liberals. Those numbers might hold true in the far northern reaches of the county, where it's a more normal/stereotypical mixture of wealthy white conservatives and poor black and Latino liberals, but in the bulk of the county, a good number more blacks vote conservative than normal, and a good number more whites vote liberal than normal. This county used to be heavily majority white, so most of the white people who stayed are quite liberal.

Anyway, I don't want to get caught in an argument of minutiea where I have to defend which definition of a word I used. My only point is that your attacks are nothing but name calling. This congressman is 'inept', a 'communist', etc, because she is to the left of center. Meanwhile, you take people that have researched and pointed criticisms of what Bush has done and call them out for trolling, at best, or ban them, at worst. If someone created a post calling Bush a fascist because of one of his recent speeches, didn't include the speech, but made rambling disections of it including terms like 'idiotic rantings' and suggstions that Bush banged Condoleeza Rice, I doubt you'd accept, 'it's axiomatic' as a rationale.

You're right I wouldn't. Deal with it. Can't? There is an alternative.

:)

Agreed. This is a pet peeve of mine. Even worse is when people use Socialism, Marxism and Communism interchangably.

Yup. I went for a period of being very fascinated with what Marx's true feelings were versus what "capital C" Communism was. It's something that has always been an interesting conversation for me (and maybe worth a thread of it's own), although it's been awhile so some of the facts are somewhat hazy to me... but quite clearly the three are very different, yet more often than not like you noted are used interchnageably....

FWIW, I'm not saying anyone in this thread does or does not understand the word, but clearly we have multiple people using different definitions, therefore.....

Is there a worse thing for a mod to do than to admit total mod bias for his own thoughts and those that think like him?

Unfortunately, I come here for the FOF talk and not your sophomoric political ramblings. I see that you have made a grand total of 9 posts in the Strategies section. Maybe you should find a new place to troll?

Once again, you're right of course. I've never posted any strategies, or game plan ideas, or drafting ideas, or test results, or findings, or dynasties, or anything else substantitive in my time at The Sideline and FOFC.

And so continues the vast, liberal left-wing conspiracy that has plagued this board lo these many years...

JiMGA was right. . . He was riiiiiight!

As long as I have been around, you haven't. 9 posts in strategies (5 were within 4 days of each other), haven't posted in Dynasty forum in 2 months. But whatever, my point wasn't that you should leave FOFC, just that you were a hypocritical mod, and you already admitted it so I have nothing more to add.

This sounds like the kind of "research" you were referring to earlier with regards to politics. Gee, I'm impressed.

I'm confused, what's your point?

That if you'd actually done in-depth research, you'd be fully aware that you were going down a road that would make you look like a world-class clueless idiot. If that's the kind of shoddy "research" you're talking about people doing, then I find it even funnier than I'd found it up to now.

...and I'd found it substantially funny up to now.

'Shoddy research'? You mean like spreading the rumor that jbmagic was Maximus in disguise based on your 'mounting evidence'? Or banning someone for having 90% political posts when the percentage was closer to 50%?

It's amusing how you get testy and go on the attack when you realize you are wrong, instead of actually admitting you are wrong. What's your next post, how I am a whiney schoolgirl? My point was that you were a hypocrite, you admitted you were a hypocrite, let's move on. If you agree with me, I don't understand the point of the ad hominem attacks.

ROFLMBAO!!! You are a funny, funny man. Perhaps you should check this link.

Wow.

...or this one. It might be a good idea to bookmark this one.

If it is sarcasm, it doesn't make any sense. See SkyDog, your post here was filled with empty attacks, full of fury and signifying nothing. It was empty, intellectually bankrupt, devoid of substance. You created an entire thread to complain about how your congresswoman puts black people in her photos of her local newsletter that nobody else here cares about. Then you proceeded to call her inept and a communist and suggested she had sexual relations with James Baker or someoene. It could have been written by a 5 year old. My feeling is that you are well within your right to do so, I don't think sophomoric political commentary falls under the 'asshat clause'.

However, you routinely go out of your way to stifle actual criticism, specifically with regards to Iraq. Off the top of my head, I remember you saying that me saying that most of the people were against the Iraq war was 'laughable' and 'trolling', even though the statement was backed by the polls. I remember you banning a member for posting a wire service article saying that a majority of the troops want to end the war. And even in the banning of another member that had some out-there religious views.

It's hypocritical of you to use your mod pulpit to ban certain views, while at the same time post empty attacks such as these.

If anyone in this thread is intellectually bankrupt, my vote goes to Cynthia Mckinney(sp?).

Duh. ;)

I bet you were a master debater in college.

Are you saying that because I'm white?

That may be the case, but nobody in this thread has introduced any evidence that suggests it.

Shorter SkyDog critique: Waaaaaah! Waaaaaah! My congresswoman is liberal!

EDIT: And again, that's all well and good to post a whiney thread about something you don't like, but don't also consider yourself the judge of political debate.

Well played. You still are a master debater, I see. Don't let people think you're not. Did you have to be trained by your intructor or does it just come naturally?

A serious question for you. Do you know anything about this congress lady's history?

All he needs to know is her party affiliation. That's how he makes his judgements.

I've read a lot about her, looking for her wild streak of communism, and couldn't find it. Looked at her site, wikipedia, Slate articles, etc. I've asked SkyDog a couple times to give more info about her communism, haven't seen it. Like I said many times, she might be an inept communist who had sex with James Baker, but no evidence in this thread has been put forth to suggest it.

I have to ask, what would have happened if someone had titled a thread:
{Sigh} My Rediculously Inept Presidenazi.

Given the history of the board, I'd have to say they're suspended.

I wll also have to say Skydog, poor form on the "Heh. I'm not going to be drawn into an argument on the initial stuff. As far as I'm concerned, it is axiomatic that McKinney's rantings are idiotic, and that her philosophy is very much communistic. Everything else from there is just laughing at her."

Your thread was started with the obvious intent to antogonize those on the left. All you had to say was that she was a horribly inept congresswoman, but you threw in the Communism, trying to characterize the left as Communists. It would be no different than me labeling every rightist a Nazi. Obviously you can't be suspended, because no one would have the balls to do so, but I think some sort of public caning is in order.

That seems to be how most of the initial posters made their judgement.

This is the definition of a trolling statement. Furthermore, you are playing off your own prejudices. I am critical of Bush, that doesn't mean that I hate all Republicans and love all Democrats. It also doesn't mean that I am a partisan Democrat. The last two Senate races in PA I have voted for Santorum and Specter, I supported the GOP candidate for Mayor of Philly over Democrat John Street.

And I haven't even given an opinion of Cynthia McKinney, I haven't given a judgement of her, so to say I am making a judgement based off of her party affiliation is wrong on its face. I don't agree with a lot of the views of Cynthia McKinney. But I don't see any evidence of communism.

It's not trolling to point out that you are the most predictable member of the forum when it comes to defending Democrats or attacking Republicans. To respond by accusing me of being a troll is pure defensiveness, nothing more.

Not at all. I've poked fun at Cynthia in other threads, and they haven't come to her defense. It never occurred to me that anyone would be obtuse enough to view her as anything but the joke that she is, or be bothered to engage in any sort of debate regarding her.

Tee hee, you said master-debater...

I think Jeeber should lock this thread. :D

The reason I ask is... me being somewhat non-political, but relatively news informed, I thought it was pretty much an accepted fact by BOTH ends of the aisle that she is far left of left and has what many would call socialistic (and SD stretches that to communistic here) ideas even beyond that of some of the more liberal liberals.

I thought it was accepted that she is kind of the Democrat Ying to Pat Robertson's Yang, even by Democrats.

Please st.cronin, I do not defend all Democrats and attack all Republicans. Hillary Clinton gets lambasted on here, and I'm not jumping in to defend her all the time. I will defend Democrats against obvious lies, like Reid and the GOP's suggestion that he is part of the Abramoff scandal. I will defend Democrats whose positions get completely misreprented, like McKinney.

You see me as attacking Bush and religious right nuts, so therefore I must attack all Republicans. That just isn't true. The country is on a bad trend downward, and the country is run by Republicans, so there are a lot more Republicans that deserve to be attacked right now than Democrats. I've previously defended capsicum and JiMG (though I think I was wrong about JiMG), you can look all that up in my post history.

I said you were trolling because you entered a thread discussion just to make an obvious antagonizing personal attack backed up by nothing.

Like I said, that could be the case, but I haven't seen anyone yet explain that in this thread. I follow politics pretty closely, and I had never heard of her before I started doing research seeing why she was being called a communist.

I suppose if you have nothing to back up your attacks, you may as well just go ad hominem. Trying to discuss something with you is a little like trying to discuss something with Bubba Wheels. Just personal attacks and wild statements coming out of nowhere that are given no supportive evidence at all.

Then don't discuss it. I said before that as far as I'm concerned it isn't up for discussion or debate what a world-class lunatic she is. It is axiomatic. I enjoy laughing at her antics, and will continue to post them when she (inevitably) does something else that makes me laugh.

One thing I really like about this lady is she keeps all her congressional memo's on record and archived on her web-site. You have to appreciate that.

However, the flip-side, reading through though articles and memo's, notably about our foreign policy, you would think she plagarized Al Jazeera's work. Who said propaganda isn't effective? The terror-fundamentalists have some of our very own far leftists in lock-step with them.

And George Bush's foreign policy has given Osama bin Laden the Iraq he always wanted. Actions speak louder than words.

Pretty much. McKinney is possibly the only democrat I would categorically vote against no matter who was running against her. Similar to how I felt about Jesse Helms growing up in North Carolina, except Helms wasn't nearly as far out to the right as I perceive McKinney to be out to the left.

Sometimes i think that people are just looking for a fight....

And that's what I'd expect of most. She's an embarrasment to most Dems that I know, and the fact that some here defends her just shows there are many on the left on this board that are just as sold out as the right.

The foreign policy in Iraq has nothing to do with Osama bin Laden. Iraq harbored and paid terrorists, but apparently not Osama Bin Laden. Although Bin Laden did have free reign to roam across Iraq as need be and to set up camps along the Iraq/Iran border as well, that wasn't in Saddam's control. Another reason why it's good that Saddam is gone.

well, duh

I was in this thread before you were, so neener neener.

Grant, he didn't defend her. What he said was that Ben presented no evidence for his "arguement" other than his standard " I know better" (or couldn' be bothered to, fair enough). I personally think McKinney is a nut job because I've read some of her stuff before, but I fail to see where Bigglesworth said that she's some sort of saint. Also, I'm not sure how a guy who voted for Santorum and Specter (I think the former is a complete scumbag) is a far-left guy.

This thread is simply sky rocketing up the "Worst. Threads. Ever." charts at an unbelievable pace. It's bound to break the Top Ten in the next few hours.

Snakes on a Thread?

lol

Ben never made an "arguement." Mr. B did, but Ben refused to debate what is known. I don't blame him. This was a "make fun of a nut" thread, pure and simple. Mr. B is trying turn it into "Ben is a facist" thread, which is silly. In the history of this board, right-wing nuts have been banned more than left-wing nuts by a wide margin. Mr. B spending time fighting whether she's a "commie" (btw, does anyone really think she's a commie? Isn't that hyperbole? Do the left really think Bush is a Nazi?) is a waste of time.

The sad thing is I agree with Mr. B some of the time. But when he comes into threads like this and starts this crap, it makes me less likely to want to take his side in the future. Agreeing with him is becoming like agreeing with Bubba. It makes you second guess yourself.

My congressman is rediculously fat. Good Ole Phil English.

Heh!!!

All we need now is for Sam Jackson to yell:

"I want this motherf**king thread off this motherf**king board!"

Good ol' Cynnnnnnnnthia, never a slow news day when she's around

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/met...tmckinney.html

Police say McKinney struck Capitol officer

By BOB KEMPER
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 03/29/06

WASHINGTON — U.S. Rep. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia struck a Capitol Hill police officer Wednesday morning after the officer, not recognizing her as a member of Congress, tried to stop her from stepping around a security post, police said.

The incident "has been brought to our attention and it is being investigated," said Sgt. Kimberly Schneider, spokeswoman for Capitol Hill police.

The officer who tried to stop McKinney, a DeKalb County Democrat, was not immediately identified. But congressional and police officials said the man intended to press charges against McKinney.

A deputy police chief and a representative of the House's sergeant-at-arms visited McKinney's congressional office Wednesday afternoon. Neither commented to reporters.

McKinney's office had not made any statement about the incident by late Wednesday afternoon.

A spokesman for the sergeant-at-arms was not immediately available for comment.

McKinney frequently does not wear the special congressional lapel pin that would have immediately identified her as a House member.

Police usually keep pictures of members at each checkpoint to help them identify members of Congress, who are allowed to step around the metal detector and X-ray machines placed at every entrance of the Capitol and congressional office buildings. However, McKinney has dramatically changed her hairstyle since her official House picture was taken.

The incident occurred when McKinney was entering the Longworth House Office Building. Her office is in the neighboring Cannon building.

This is not the first time McKinney has had such a run-in with Capitol Hill police.

When she first arrived in Congress in 1993, a Capitol Hill police officer failed to recognize her because she was not wearing the congressional pin. Police put pictures of McKinney up at each security checkpoint to ensure it didn't happen again.

McKinney also once ran into problems at the White House when Secret Service agents tried to stop her as she entered the grounds to attend an event with President Clinton. McKinney suggested that the incident was racially tinged, claiming the Secret Service did not stop a white male aide who was accompanying her.

Hehehehe.

That's actually consistent with the encounter I had with her a few months ago. She seemed pretty indignant that I didn't immediately recognize her on the security screen.

you're lucky she didn't take a swing at you.

Thanks.

You just gave me a visual image of SD going medieval on her.

Sadly, that's one of the highlights of my otherwise PITA kind of day.
But a highlight nonetheless.

was he wearing the patriotic panties?

Oh dear lord, Cam. After seeing you go off on the TV folks the other day just imagining you saying things like that makes me bust out laughing... :D