Third Party & Independents Archives

Playing The Race Card Yet Again

Once again a black person is using their race to explain their inappropriate actions. Rep Cynthia McKinney, accused of striking a Capitol Hill police officer, stated Friday that the officer started the incident by “inappropriately touching and stopping” her after she walked past a security checkpoint. Joined at her side were the usual suspects, Harry Belafonte and Danny Glover. And why was the touching and stopping ‘inappropriate’? Why else, because the policeman is a white male and she is a black female.

Now, let’s move away from the fantasy to the reality and describe what seems to have actually happened in the real world, not the one where Cynthia McKinney apparently lives. While visiting an office that she does not work in and does not frequent that often, and while not wearing an idenfitying lapel pin that members of Congress usually wear to identify themselves, McKinney bypassed the checkpoint. The officer, noticing that she had skirted the checkpoint and was unable to identify her, called for her to stop. When she refused, he chased her down and grabbed her shoulder. She responded by turning around and punching the police officer.

As she states:

"Let me be clear. This whole incident was instigated by the inappropriate touching and stopping of me, a female black congresswoman," McKinney said. "I deeply regret that this incident occurred."

The sad part is that this is practiced by members of our elected officials, such as McKinney, successfully using the method in order to get themselves in a position of power and making sure that they are allowed to do whatever they want without any reprisals simply because they are perpetual 'vicitms' when they are most often people who have had a privileged background themselves

Of course, this happens more and more frequently because no one is willing to step to the plate and call it what it is. The tactic is used by those who want to convince those who are not as intelligent or learned in psychology and history. Instead, they seem to target their constituent, the people who they can get to support them, the people who go through their days making decisions on emotion, fear and hatred of those who are different than them.

The worst part, though, is that with all of the crying ‘racism’ that occurs in this manner in order to acquire and keep power by those who prey upon the uneducated real instances of racism are dismissed out of hand by the educated and aware and people are truly victims of such despicable actions are left to themselves and the perpetrators are free to continue their evil ways. And by not calling out those who prey upon those uneducated among us we who are aware of what is going on but fearful of being labeled as racists ourselves as the expected tactic of the powermonger are only letting the situation get worse, letting the real racism go unchecked out of our fear.

The reality is many of us who see what is truly going on are going to be labeled as racists by these people anyway. Even though, as is with my case and with many I know, there are no racist bones in our bodies, if we don’t support every cry of racism by the true racists who use the race card to acquire and maintain power, we will be targeted and attacked in order to convince their followers that they shouldn’t pay attention to our words since we are supporters of the ‘white devil’.

Emotion.

Why have to earn your position of power or learn to deal with the ramifications of your own actions when you can instead manipulate and tear others apart for your own gain? Why be aware of the facts behind a situation when you can just listen to the cries of racism and support it out of hand, directing your anger and frustration with your own lot in life at a now identified villain? Why pay attention to the damage that your insane accusations will do to our society and specifically the race relations that have been getting worse for the past 30 years, not better, precisely BECAUSE of this type of behavior?

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain…

Posted by Rhinehold at April 3, 2006 2:59 PM
Comments
Comment #137661

Rhine…

The most important part is:

“While visiting an office that she does not work in and does not frequent that often, and while not wearing an idenfitying lapel pin that members of Congress usually wear to identify themselves, McKinney bypassed the checkpoint.”(emphasis mine)

This is the attitude of people who believe that rules and laws made are for someone else…not them.

Of extra note…the cop told her to stop 3 (three!) times and she ignored him.

Security has been extra sensitive since 9/11 and also since the two cops were shot in the capitol building.

The next time someone cuts in front of you in line at McDonald’s…make sure it’s not her…because if you say something about it…YOU’RE A RACIST!!!

Posted by: Jim T at April 3, 2006 4:17 PM
Comment #137663

The test of racism or sexism is substitution. Reverse the roles and see what you come up with.

If you think it is reasonable for a black female police officer to stop a white male congressman who breezes through without showing identification and then ignores orders to stop, you can’t think it unreasonable in the reverse situation.

Based on the sources, it looks like the Congresswoman and Harry Belafonte are behaving in a racist manner, not the cop. Unfortunately, I bet it is the cops who will end up having to apologize and the taxpayers will have to pay for the whole lot of them to undergo sensitivity training.

Posted by: Jack at April 3, 2006 4:33 PM
Comment #137665

Jack, nah! Not in this heightened security awareness. The cops were doing their job, and Americans will back that, by and large, regardless of the race of the participants.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 3, 2006 4:40 PM
Comment #137672

Well, at least she didn’t shoot him in the face with a shotgun…

Posted by: Betty Burke at April 3, 2006 5:16 PM
Comment #137677

David:

Thought you might get a kick out of the following quote from a WaPo article:

McKinney, a sixth-term congresswoman who represents suburban Atlanta, struck the officer according to one account, a police official said, adding there were conflicting accounts. The officer, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the incident, spoke only on condition of anonymity.

Well, seeing as there was only one officer involved, it doesn’t appear that he’s all that anonymous.

Betty:

I’m not sure what Cheney’s situation has to do with this, unless its just a gratuitous attempt to deflect. Cheney made a stupid mistake for which he should be ridiculed, and he took full responsibility for his actions.. McKinney’s actions were far more intentional, and now she is trying to defend them on a racial basis, thereby blaming the cop. And the connection you sought to show was……?

Posted by: joebagodonuts at April 3, 2006 5:33 PM
Comment #137686

This whole thing is “he said, she said”. Who really knows what the hell happened in that corridor? It could have been just as she said, just as he said, or in reality might lie anywhere in the space between their two viewpoints.
Personally, I’d be interested to know if there were any bystanders who might shed a bit more light on the incident.
What I do know is this: politicians aren’t always angels, and neither are cops.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 3, 2006 6:47 PM
Comment #137691

Adrienne,

No one is disputing what happened, as I can see. She bypassed security, she freely admits it. And when ‘touched’ by the police officer she hit him. She is not desputing that either. But she has explained the situation as being inapropriate, that he had not right, as a white male police officer to lay his hands on her, a black female congresswoman.

Where are you reading anywhere that anyone is suggesting that the police officer did anything out of the ordinary or wrong, other than he shouldn’t have dared touch her?

Posted by: Rhinehold at April 3, 2006 7:25 PM
Comment #137698

Adrienne:

I’d agree with you in part. We may not know the full story, or the full context of the story yet.

What I find troubling is McKinney’s response to it. In one significant sentence, she managed to play not only the race card, but also the gender card, not to mention placing all the blame on the policeman (“The whole incident was instigated by the inappropriate touching and stopping of me — a female, black congresswoman,” McKinney said at a news conference…). Her attorney is also placing the race card, and pursuing the police brutality card (Cynthia McKinney, like thousands of average Americans across this country, is … a victim of the excessive use of force by law enforcement officials because of how she looks and the color of her skin,” said one of McKinney’s lawyers, James Myart Jr).

While we don’t yet fully know the facts of the situation, and as such should wait on judgement, McKinney’s comments stand on their own merit. Since the event was allegedly caught on tape, we’ll most likely be able to have a good idea of where the fault lies.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at April 3, 2006 8:00 PM
Comment #137699

“No one is disputing what happened, as I can see. She bypassed security, she freely admits it. And when ‘touched’ by the police officer she hit him. She is not desputing that either. But she has explained the situation as being inapropriate, that he had not right, as a white male police officer to lay his hands on her, a black female congresswoman.

Where are you reading anywhere that anyone is suggesting that the police officer did anything out of the ordinary or wrong, other than he shouldn’t have dared touch her?”

Actually whatever happened sounds like it’s all pretty much in dispute to me.
Did she try to tell him who she was? Did he not give her the moment necessary to explain or present proof of her identity? Did she hit him, or not hit him? If she did was it actually an expression of anger and violence, or was she merely irritated with his demeanor and attitude toward her and so, pushed his hand away?
I guess I’d just like to know a bit more before dishing out a judgement on the incident.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 3, 2006 8:11 PM
Comment #137701

Paranoia is a part of Black Mentality.

Posted by: Aldous at April 3, 2006 8:16 PM
Comment #137703

I bet there is a video of this event. These places almost always have such things.

I don’t think there is a dispute about the basic facts. It is only her intepretation.

Where I work, I walk past the same guards every day. Sometimes I leave my ID in my coat and the guard always stops me. He has never had to tell me twice, but I would hope that he would stop me if I didn’t.

If you do not present your proper ID to the guard, it is ALWAYS your fault. Those who are too arrogant or stupid to show their IDs make it harder for everyone else.

No matter what the circumstance, she should feel embarassed and speak no more of the situation. The fact that she does shows her personality flaw and the fact that she tries to play the race card shows it even more.

Posted by: Jack at April 3, 2006 8:30 PM
Comment #137713

Jack:
“the fact that she tries to play the race card”

But what if the officer did speak or “touch” her in an unnecessarily rough or insulting way because of her race?
I find it rather laughable how a bunch of white folks (of which I’m one) think they can talk about black folks playing the race card with so much disdain, and act as though the accusation is never, ever warranted. What if she is totally correct, and you all are totally wrong? Is that impossible for you to fathom — being wrong? Is prejudice now so completely nonexistent in your view that “the race card” must automatically be looked on as a bunch of BS?
Just curious.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 3, 2006 9:28 PM
Comment #137716

IMO McKinney was just plain arrogant and stupid. She should respect the officer’s position in a security role. We all have to put up with it. She isn’t special.

Posted by: Loren at April 3, 2006 9:46 PM
Comment #137718

Adrienne

A cop working in the Capitol must have taken hours of sensitivity and diversity training. I am sure he is hypersensitive to race, as most of us are. I have not heard anyone (besides black commedians or dramas about race) use the N-word in at least 20 years.

What would be inappropriate touching? That phrase has specific connotations and she knows it.

As I said, I bet there is a tape. I hope that they release it. My experience with these guards is that they are more polite than they need be.

BTW - everyone has the right to talk about race and nobody’s perspective is the correct one. Some of us might not see racism where it exists, but others see it where it doesn’t.

I have been profiled for specific checking three times at airports, so has my daughter and son (both minors at the time). If I wanted to read racism into that, it would sure look like it.

Posted by: Jack at April 3, 2006 9:52 PM
Comment #137725
This is the attitude of people who believe that rules and laws made are for someone else…not them.

This is absolutely hilarious coming from a Republican. Please.

Posted by: American Pundit at April 3, 2006 10:14 PM
Comment #137738

Interesting that everyone commenting, who witnessed nothing, has made up their mind.

Let the investigation proceed.

Sounds mostly like stupidity on both sides, to me.

Posted by: gergle at April 3, 2006 10:34 PM
Comment #137739

I’m just happy that Tom Delay has now been officially unseated, through his annoucement that he is not running, even hough he won the primary. Now, I’m just waiting for the other shoe to drop. Hope he serves time in prison. Justice grinds slowly, but perhaps it still grinds.

Posted by: gergle at April 3, 2006 10:39 PM
Comment #137740

gergle:
“Interesting that everyone commenting, who witnessed nothing, has made up their mind.”

What am I, chopped liver? I said I needed more info before I’d want to pass judgment on either McKinney or the officer. The only thing that didn’t sit right with me both in the article and the comments, is the implied idea that the race card is always being used dishonestly whenever it is part of an accusation of poor treatment.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 3, 2006 10:43 PM
Comment #137776

Here we go again. Every time Congresswomen McKinney doesn’t get to do as she wants it’s because she’s Black and the Whites are all against her.
This incident has been all over the news here in Georgia. As yaall might expect, the media here is siding with her. The ‘Black leaders?’ are all up in arms about it and are calling for a full investigation in the matter. And of course her constitutes are all outraged. The rest of us wish she’d just shut up and disappear.
I’m personally tired of this here race card crap. It seems that unless you let the folks that use it do exactly as they want or get exactly what they want your a racist.
These folks think that the Whites are keeping them down because they’re not White. Fact is most of them are keeping themselves down because they won’t try to better themselves. If they put as much effort into trying to better themselves as they do in being victims, they most likely be running corporations.

Posted by: Ron Brown at April 4, 2006 12:39 AM
Comment #137784

McKinney’s laughable attempt at an apology-turned-to-pseudo-accusation is disgusting. The reason you know the officer acted appropriately is because she said she regretted what happened. Anything else and McKinney would be strictly calling for the guy’s head on a platter, not making some backdoor, weak, 7th grader, “Well, I messed up but it’s because he made me feel things that made me mad” apology.

Before we start talking about race or gender, she needs to enter the door of adulthood and make an unequivocal, humble apology. The rules are “wear your pin/ID or get stopped”. She broke the rules and then refused to deal with the minor consequences. Before she resigns her congressional post, she should resign from adulthood.

Posted by: Brian S. at April 4, 2006 1:05 AM
Comment #137862

“Is prejudice now so completely nonexistent in your view that “the race card” must automatically be looked on as a bunch of BS?”

Incidents such as this ARE the reason many of us think BS when we see the race card being played.
I agree with you Adrienne, we should wait for all the facts to be presented. [as we should in all cases, even ones concerning a president we don’t like :) ]
But, if this turns out to be where the police officer was just doing his job in a professional manner, it will enhance that “automatic” response and will only hurt those who really have suffered a race related problem.
If the officer is found guilty, he will be fired.
If mckinney if found guilty, it will be swept under the rug as if it did not happen.
Whatever happened to standing up for the little guy if he was in the right?

Posted by: kctim at April 4, 2006 10:18 AM
Comment #137891

Everybody…

To address the post that states:

“This is the attitude of people who believe that rules and laws made are for someone else⦮ot them.
This is absolutely hilarious coming from a Republican. Please.

Posted by: American Pundit at April 3, 2006 10:14 PM”

Everyone here knows that the VAST majority of Democrats AND Republicans observe the laws and rules of our society.

This is how a subject gets sidetracked into meaningless partisan squabbles…and get nothing of substance discussed in a meaningful way.

Meaningless partisan squabbles are for Congress. Let’s make a pact here and now. Let’s do something Congress has the singular inability to do. Let’s discuss the subjects here without partisan smears, OK?

I’m going to do it from now on…and if any of you catch me being overly partisan, point it out to me and I’ll cease and desist and apologise.

Posted by: Jim T at April 4, 2006 11:33 AM
Comment #137912

I have a great respect for law enforcement and was shocked to hear that an elected official would strike an officer of the law. As far as I’m concerned, the only appropriate time to strike an officer is when he tells you to. I HATE when people play the race card. You get in someones way or treat them in way they don’t like, and BAM, you’re a racist. Being labeled as a racist could ruin this officers career, and maybe his entire life. I don’t know anything about him, but he might have kids to feed. Did McKinny think of that? Did she consider that she might be ruining someones life? Of course not, all she wanted was to save her self from whatever minor trouble she was in. A reasonable person would not only have stopped at the checkpoint, but they would NEVER strike the officer who stopped them. Police get the race card played on them all the time, and it’s unfair to them. Events like these DO make people skeptical about real racism. They make people question events that really happened the way they’re told. The police system has enough troubles as it is; It doesn’t need people accusing them of racism over such petty issues all the time on top of that.

Posted by: God at April 4, 2006 12:26 PM
Comment #137918

Rhinehold,

” is that with all of the crying ‘racism’ that occurs in this manner in order to acquire and keep power by those who prey upon the uneducated”

The cry of racism is so frequent?
Blacks have all the power?
Who are the uneducated you’re referring to?

“Once again a black person is using their race to explain their inappropriate actions.”

Happens all the time, right?
Using their race or inappropriate behavior?

“The tactic is used by those who want to convince those who are not as intelligent or learned in psychology and history. Instead, they seem to target their constituent,”

A black officials “uneducated and unintelligent” constituents would most likely be black, right?
Interesting.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at April 4, 2006 12:36 PM
Comment #137920

Are there times when the race card is legitimate?Of course there are.
When an employer hires a lesser qualified person to keep from hiring a better qualified person of another race. When an employer by passes a qualified person and promotes a lesser qualified person of another race. When a cop lets a person of his/her race get by with just a warning and arrest a person of another race for the same thing. These could be a good reason to bring the race card into play. They could be an indicator that the other party is racist. Specially if these actions have a pattern to them.
Just because some doesn’t get the job, or the promotion, or is arrested doesn’t mean that the other party is automatically a racist. But this is what those that play the race card every time someone of another race does something they don’t like want everyone to think.
And it just isn’t Black folks that play it either. All races have those that are guilty of it. My brother-in-law hired a Black girl for a position in our new company recently. A White boy had applied for the same position. He’s now claiming that my brother-in-law is racist because he did get the job and the girl did. The fact is, my brother-in-law and me both thought that the girl was the most qualified for the position. She has 2 years experience, the boy none. And we needed an experienced person.
My brother-in-law didn’t even know that she was Black until she showed up for work as I was the one that interviewed her. We had one other person that applied and actually had more years of experience but her work record wasn’t up to par. She seems to miss a lot of work and been fired 6 times in the last 4 years.

Posted by: Ron Brown at April 4, 2006 12:38 PM
Comment #137934
” is that with all of the crying of racism that occurs in this manner in order to acquire and keep power by those who prey upon the uneducated”

The cry of racism is so frequent?
Blacks have all the power?
Who are the uneducated you’re referring to?

Yes, the cry of racism is all too frequent, especially invalid ones such as this.

I never said blacks have all the power, where did I suggest that?

The uneducated I am referring to are the uneducated. How much simpler than that can I make it? Those that refuse to use their brains or allow others to convince them not to use it for some reason or another.

“Once again a black person is using their race to explain their inappropriate actions.”
Happens all the time, right? Using their race or inappropriate behavior?

Yes, by some it does. Should I do a google search and find, just this year, where it was used inapproprately? And I mean using their race as a means of explaining away their inappropriate actions. I’m not sure what part of all of this you are having problems with? Perhaps you could, oh I don’t know, be a little more clear and actually spell out your points a bit instead of just repeating back what I’ve said in question form?

“The tactic is used by those who want to convince those who are not as intelligent or learned in psychology and history. Instead, they seem to target their constituent,”
A black officials “uneducated and unintelligent” constituents would most likely be black, right? Interesting.

Interesting assumption … I never understood why people think that a white elected official’s constituents are mostly white and a black elected officials constituents are mostly black… Perhaps you think people just vote for whoever is running and is the same race as the voter? I live in an area where my US Congresswoman is black and I am not, am I her constituent?

You also assume that it’s the black officials who are the only ones doing this and supporting it. It is most definately not the case.

Are you trying to suggest something that you’re just too incompetent to spell out?

Posted by: Rhinehold at April 4, 2006 1:01 PM
Comment #137937

Sorry about the format of my last comment, apparently some odd characters are showing up in the comments and have converted some

Posted by: Rhinehold at April 4, 2006 1:03 PM
Comment #138002

Aldous:

Paranoia is a part of Black Mentality.

More appropriately, Paranoia is a part of Black Reality.

The congresswoman related the other day on CNN that she had been inappropriately manhandled by a male white officer some years ago: no doubt there are circuits in her brain which react according to her previous experiences - just as there are in all of us. Let me relate a grimly humourous true story here:

Many years ago an acquaintance of mine who is a State Policeman was on Airport Duty at the Customs Area. An elderly German couple was having some difficulty with a Customs Officer, who wanted them to open one of their bags, which was locked with a key. Since they spoke no English, and the customs officer knew my friend spoke some German, he called the state trooper over to explain that they had to open the suitcase. “Ich bin mit dem Staat Polizei…” began my friend; the German couple, trembling with fear, hurriedly opened the bag and stood huddled together, awaiting the Worst…

The point is that Congresswoman McKinney has had problems being a Black Woman in America in the past, and just as Aldous says, she is likely hard-wired to respond according to her experiences.


Joe:

It was a J-O-K-E, okay? Jeez… :o(

Posted by: Betty Burke at April 4, 2006 5:17 PM
Comment #138047

Isn’t it great to be a minority? You can call other minorities paranoid fools and not get in trouble for it (which is what I’m doing right now).

Betty, I’ve had problems with racism before. I’ve also had problems with people being just plain crude and sadistic. The point is I can distinguish between the two and when someone is just being (for want of a better term) an ass, I do not assume it’s because they have something against the way I look.

It would be great if the world was made up of friendly people, but meeting people that do not like you— for whatever the reason— is inevitable.

Posted by: Zeek at April 4, 2006 8:26 PM
Comment #138089

zeek has a point lets see how the cards fall with this congrees person mckinney wish she would let go on some of the anger but not in her shoes and then that person had a job to do tuff call could have had a bomb i expect a camere got the pictures or tape on it shame should be better business up there to do

Posted by: FA STEPHENS at April 5, 2006 12:34 AM
Comment #138109

Oh by all means, let’s have another investigation. Let’s get to the bottom of this thing. I suggest a bipartisan committee with sufficient supervision by minority groups to ensure fairness and lack of bias intentional and unintentional. Furthermore, I propose that a symposium be convened of not less that 3 or more than 5 thinktanks to examine the incident and its underlying implications on modern society, while not ignoring the historical roots which contributed to the event.

Personally, as a taxpayer, I think it would be more cost effective to hire a staffer to follow her around announcing her identity to one and all.

We could do all these things or she could wear her congressional id badge.

Posted by: goodkingned at April 5, 2006 3:06 AM
Comment #138119

Betty:

I know it was a joke….just a bad one.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at April 5, 2006 7:18 AM
Comment #138132

Bad Aim deserves a Bad Joke…

Posted by: Betty Burke at April 5, 2006 8:48 AM
Comment #138167

While my first reaction is to lash out with comments claiming how ridiculous this entire issue is and take an anti Cynthia McKinney position, reason tells me to take a “wait and see” position until the official facts are known.

The way you put a stop to this kind of nonsense is that you vote out the politician and don’t purchase anything that benefits the singer or the actor.

We, the product users, voters, etc. have got to start using the on and off switches on things we can control.

Posted by: steve smith at April 5, 2006 11:08 AM
Comment #138172

Rhinehold,

I’m trying to figure out what is that you are saying.
”is that with all of the crying racism that occurs in this manner in order to acquire and keep power by those who prey upon the uneducated”

I am trying to be sure that the meaning I’m getting is the one you intended 1) All the crying of racism, i’m assuming you’re stating that minorities constantly use the race card ploy?
If this is your intention then I strongly disagree.

2)” The tactic is used by those who want to convince those who are not as intelligent or learned in psychology and history. Instead, they seem to target their constituent, the people who they can get to support them,”

Who are these masses of uneducated you’re referring to who support “those?” Danny Glover,Harry Belafonte? Her constituents? Black voters? Who would you say supports the “race card” users?

3)“Once again a black person is using their race to explain their inappropriate actions.”

Happens all the time, right?
Using their race or inappropriate behavior?

This sweeping judgement is in itself is inappropriate.
What if someone were to say: Once again white people(cops) are ignoring their friends inappropriae behavior(other white people) because he’s white.
You’d not have a problem with that?
Your statement was offensive. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt by asking questions to make sure I was accurately interpreting you statements. Name calling not needed.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at April 5, 2006 12:19 PM
Comment #138189

Rhinehold,

“Are you trying to suggest something that you’re just too incompetent to spell out?”

I hope I spelled it out.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at April 5, 2006 1:22 PM
Comment #138192

Adrienne:

We still have yet to know precisely what happened with Cynthia McKinney. Yet we do know precisely what her angle is. And she is claiming it to have been a racist attack. She says,”“Something that perhaps the average American just doesn’t understand is that there is a heightened sense of a lack of appropriateness being there for members who are elected who happen to be of color,” McKinney said, “and until this issue is addressed by the American public in a very substantive way, it won’t be the last time.”

Her lawyer said the following: “Her lawyer, James W. Myart Jr., said, “Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, like thousands of average Americans across this country, is, too, a victim of the excessive use of force by law enforcement officials because of how she looks and the color of her skin…Ms. McKinney is just a victim of being in Congress while black.”

Adrienne, I don’t see any way that this is a racial thing. Even if the Capitol policeman was wrong in grabbing her (which doesn’t appear to be the case as I see it), there’s no racial element to it.

Its never acceptable to strike a police officer. Its certainly unbecoming for a Congresswoman to strike a police officer. And for what? Because he asked her to stop and show identification?

I’m wondering how you see it from your viewpoint.

Betty:

There has been plenty of fun poked at Dick Cheney, and deservedly so. There’s a lot of good humour out there about his circumstance. His bad aim deserves good humour, not bad humour. No one deserves bad humour, except perhaps Carrot Top or Gallagher.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at April 5, 2006 1:35 PM
Comment #138583

I see that Congresswomen Mckinney has apologized for her actions. Now she needs to go to jail for a while to prove how sorry she really is.
Face it if that was you or me we’d be sitting under the jail right now and all the apologies in the world wouldn’t keep the judge from throwing the book at us.
And the Congress women for Georgia aint anymore above the law the you or me.

Posted by: Ron Brown at April 6, 2006 10:06 PM
Comment #138688

ron:

At this point, I haven’t seen what I consider a real apology. McKinney said : “There should not have been any physical contact in this incident. I am sorry that this misunderstanding happened at all, and I regret its escalation and I apologize.”

sounds to me like she is suggesting that the officer should not have touched her at all, and she regrets her escalation. I’ve seen more sincere apologies in my life. I’d have hoped for one from her, but it really seems more like political damage control from her. I’m disappointed, but….I’ll accept it.

I agree that it really should have little to do with whether they hold her accountable for her actions.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at April 7, 2006 9:57 AM
Comment #139593

No kidding. Pathetic.
However, I think at the very least, striking an officer should constitute a maximum fine (since no injury resulted from it). However, had the officer been physically injured, she should face a serious criminal charge.

Posted by: d.a.n at April 10, 2006 2:04 PM
Post a comment