Ousted former Rep. Cynthia McKinney, who punched a Capitol Hill police office last year when he tried to stop her from strolling through a checkpoint because he didn’t recognize her, is suing liberal columnist Cynthia Tucker, Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s parent company, the managing editor, and the publisher.
McKinney says Tucker libeled her by trying to “spin this incident into a felony by falsely alleging that [she] assaulted the officer with a weapon.” (Source)
McKinney claims that contrary to what Tucker wrote, she didn’t “slug” the officer with her cell phone. With a “closed fist,” perhaps? What a waste of money, time, and energy. The lawyers are getting rich and the broad continues to make a fool of herself.
Just goes to show you that liberal types have issues with each other, too… 
Let’s see…I mentioned Tucker in Righteous Indignation and Liberal Op-Ed Pages and Christians, Journalism and Blogging and McKinney in Twice As Hard.
(Hat tip: Legal Times Blog)
Warning: This review contains MAJOR spoilers.
J.K. Rowling’s epic tale about an orphan boy who discovers he’s a wizard at age 11 comes to an end in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.
The seventh and final book in the series sold a reported 11 million copies in the first 24 hours on sale, which broke the record for fastest-selling book. Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince held the previous record at nine million.
The seven-book series has sold more than 325 million copies worldwide. The first five books have been made into top-grossing movies, and Rowling has been named one of the richest people in the world.
Not bad for a former divorced welfare mother who nursed cold cups of coffee in a café while writing the first book.
Read the rest at Townhall.com.
Update (7/31): When a religion reporter called Deathly Hallows “unambiguously Christian,” he was referring to the “Christian” concept of substitutionary sacrifice. I’m going to take a semi-educated guess and say that Christianity is unique in this regard: a sinless Savior who sacrifices himself to pay for the sins of others.
Is substitutionary sacrifice a major (or minor) feature of other religions? Discuss here.
Tuesday, July 31: A response from PRCalDude:
“I’ve debated illegals online about the fact that they claim to be Christian yet violate our laws to be here. They see no problem with this because they are Roman Catholic and they don’t know the Bible. When I refer to Romans 13, they have never read it. In the Roman Church, the authority of the Pope and the Magisterium comes before the authority of Scripture. Therefore, when Cardinal Mahony and Roman clergy in Mexico tell them it’s alright to come here, they take that as ‘The Word of God’ rather than Romans 13.
“I’d like to add that for this reason, some churches won’t even admit illegal immigrants into their congregation. The Orthodox Presbyterian Church came out with this ruling on the subject [PDF document] which basically stated that they were not admissible for their failure to obey the ruling authorities. Then there is this take from De Regno Christi:
“‘President Bush has secured his legacy. The promise of immigration reform has degenerated into amnesty. How should Christians think about the issue?’
“This is an excerpt from the Understanding the Times Committee Report to the Reformed Presbyterian Synod in 2006. The controversial report was received as information. I am the author:
Wars and Rumors of War: Border Security
While American soldiers are fighting in the Middle East, and army of illegal immigrants is invading the homeland. Of course, the invasion of our southern border is not a military conquest but it does have grave cultural and economic implications. The RPC recognizes the moral dilemma involved in the discussion.
First, as Christians, we must remember that we were strangers who dwelt in Egypt. When Israel inherited the land of promise, they were called upon to remember this history of subjection when dealing with aliens in their midst. As such, we should be tenderhearted to those in need and show liberality toward those who seek refuge.
Yet, our sympathy is moderated by the unwillingness of illegal immigrants to show respect toward the American system of ordered liberty. Radical leaders of the pro-immigration movement speak of reclaiming the southwest for Mexico. Thus, as millions of illegal aliens cross the border under the flag of Mexico, the question is not how can we deal mercifully with needy refugees, but rather how can the United States defend its historic, cultural, and linguistic heritage? The moral law of God maintains the individuals inherent right to self-defense. Do nations and cultures have no such right? Such a conclusion would appear absurd.
“A year later, I say amen.
“Unfortunately, even in Reformed circles, there is very little Biblical thinking on the matter.”
[click to continue…]
I just got word that last night, an amendment to the Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development appropriations bill, which would bar preferences in federal contracting, passed the House of Representatives.
Color me stunned!
The language, introduced by Congressman Tim Walberg, reads: “An amendment to prohibit the use of funds be[ing] used by the Department of Transportation to promulgate regulations based on race, ethnicity, or sex.”
In other words, these agencies can’t consider race, ethnicity, or sex when hiring contractors with federal funds. No more set-asides.
Ward Connerly, chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute, said, “Congressman Walberg was one of the few politicians in Michigan who stood on principal during last year’s campaign for the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, and he deserves much praise for his leadership in carrying the will of the people of Michigan to the entire nation.”
The spending bill also passed last night, but the two Houses have to reconcile their versions of the bill before anything is set in stone. The language of the amendment might become law.
Despite the clear language of the law — “It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer…to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin…” — it is standard practice for federal government agencies to hire a certain percentage of “preferred minorities” under an unofficial policy that allows discrimination against whites and non-preferred minorities.
To some blacks, this sounds fair. But when whites become a racial minority and the government regresses to openly discriminating in favor of them, they’ll understand (as their grandparents and beyond understood) why the practice is so foul.
(That’s not likely to happen, though. Once Hispanics become the nation’s majority race, ethnicity, or whatever you want to call them, the white-guilt altruistic ethic of giving minorities unearned benefits will be extinct. Hispanics aren’t burdened with white guilt.)
The idea of affirmative action, as it was conceived (and here), is not discriminatory. Perhaps government agencies concerned about “diversity” will implement actual affirmative action and do away with lowered standards for minorities, which were put in place by white people so white people could feel paternally good about themselves.
Let’s drink a non-alcoholic toast to equal standards for all!
Several months ago, the D.C. Circuit ruled D.C.’s hilariously ineffective handgun ban unconstitutional. Last week, D.C. mayor Adrian Fenty said the city government will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
I hope the court refuses to hear it.
If I’m still in D.C. when the gun ban is lifted, I plan to buy one. Or two. Why should cops and thugs have all the fun?
Related posts:
A 12-year-old girl was plied with vodka and gang-raped by four men, and the New York Times leads the story with how good a football player one of the rapists is and props up the idea that racism might be the reason the district attorney is going after him.
Why on earth would the “newspaper of record” do that? Because the accused gang rapists are black and the alleged victim is white.
In the Duke “rape” case, the NYT published story after story, month after month, parroting the district attorney’s lines and tried its best to lend credence to disgraced and disbarred Mike Nifong’s case against three white men. The liberal journalists seized every opportunity to demonize the men accused and slant stories to that end, while setting the poor-oppressed-black-rape-victim narrative in stone.
The headline “Charge against a Player Raises Question of Justice,” should read “Delayed Trial For Gang Rape Victim Raises Question of Justice.” That’s what should be important, not whether some black rapist gets to play ball.
But we know that black-on-white crime bores the heck out of liberals, so to spice things up, they turn the issue on its head and focus on poor oppressed black football players.
Clay Waters of Times Watch, gets to the point much better than I do: “Faced with a black athlete as a suspect and an alleged rape victim who is white, the Times displays a concern for ‘racial overtones’ totally absent in its shoddy coverage of the Duke lacrosse ‘rape’ hoax.”
Indeed. Why wasn’t the NYT concerned about racial overtones in the Duke case, when it was clear to anyone with half a brain that Nifong indicted the white men accused of raping a black woman (with no DNA matches) in a heavily black city to win what otherwise would have been a tough battle to retain his job?
As I said, boring. The libs needed to spice things up, writing snide stories about “rich” white lacrosse players and oppressed black strippers.
The rape victim, now 15, won’t get any sympathy from left-leaning newspapers because she’s white and her rapists are black. Believe whatever you want, but it’s really that simple.
(Hat tip: KC Johnson)
Related post:
Back on the east coast! Catching up with east coast stuff. Regular (irregular?) political posting will resume.
In the meantime, read my quick first impressions of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (filled with SPOILERS), and share yours, too.
11:03 a.m. PDT: In my last Townhall column, I mentioned Georgia’s new immigration enforcement laws, which purportedly were enacted to curb illegal “immigration.”
That state’s illegal alien population reportedly doubled between 2000 and 2005. Overwhelmed by non-assimilating, non-English speaking foreigners, Georgians have chosen to deal with the glut themselves.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that drivers who can’t show proof of residency (with a valid Georgia driver’s license or state ID) cannot register cars. The new law went into effect on July 1. From the article:
If [car dealers and tag services] have built their business on people who are here illegally, I’m sorry, but at some point they had to realize that was not going to continue,” Rogers said.
The license plate law closes a window that gave motorists 30 days to get Georgia driver’s licenses after moving to the state. In the interim, a driver could register a car with an out-of-state or international license.
Also effective July 1 was a separate, 2006 law requiring increased verification of legal status in Georgia for a variety of other purposes, including to work in some jobs or qualify for welfare.
While no one knows how many illegal immigrants are in Georgia, a government estimate put the number at about 470,000. Nationally, most illegal immigrants are from Mexico, followed by El Salvador, Guatemala, India and China, according to a 2005 Department of Homeland Security report.
Genao, 34, has a green card and has lived in the United States eight years. If business doesn’t pick up, he might return to his native Dominican Republic to tend to a car dealership there.
Adiós!
4:00 p.m. PDT: The black firefighters group (society? guild?) in New York City decided to join the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) lawsuit against the New York City Fire Department. (Source)
Because black applicants fail the employment test at disproportionate rates, DOJ is challenging the test’s validity. The black firefighters group believes “the SAT-style test has little to do with fighting fires and has prevented many black and Latino applicants from getting the jobs they deserve.”
The goal is to dumb down the test so blacks can pass it or to eliminate it altogether. What a noble and proud pursuit! Regular readers know how I feel about this sort of thing, but in case it slipped your mind, see this post.
9:12 a.m. PDT: I’m scheduled to appear on NPR’s “News and Notes” segment with two other bloggers today at 1:00 p.m. EDT. Topics include the Fairness Doctrine, Illegal Immigration, and “I got a crush on Obama” and similar videos. I typically don’t follow You Tube “girls of the campaign” stuff and other nonsense, but I had to suffer through a few videos to prepare for the segment.
It’s ironic that I’ll talk about the Fairness Doctrine on NPR. Whenever I blog about the dead policy, I usually mention NPR as a “liberal” station that likely would not survive if it had to compete in the free market rather than rely on taxpayer funding.
10:35 a.m. PDT: The topic line-up changed while I was on the air. No immigration. I had to shoot from the hip when the host talked about a BET video which purportedly encourages black kids to read. The video is raunchy, however, and some are shouting, “Racist!”
Update (7/20): The audio’s up.
1:17 p.m. PDT: This report should surprise no one. Anyone with half a brain can figure out that if Central Americans are crossing the southern border with ease, Muslim terrorists can and have been doing the same thing.
In related news:
The terrorist network Al-Qaida will likely leverage its contacts and capabilities in Iraq to mount an attack on U.S. soil, according to a new National Intelligence Estimate on threats to the United States.
The declassified key findings, released Tuesday, laid out a range of dangers — from al-Qaida to Lebanese Hezbollah to non-Muslim radical groups — that pose a “persistent and evolving threat” to the country over the next three years. As expected, however, the findings focus most of their attention on the gravest terror problem: Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida network.
The report makes clear that al-Qaida in Iraq, which has not yet posed a direct threat to U.S. soil, could become a problem here.
Let’s link it up: Al-Qaida likely will use or is using smugglers to import Muslim terrorists into the United States. But the man in the White House doesn’t want to build a fence or install more agents on the border or enforce current immigration laws or allow profiling. Instead, he wants Congress to write new laws to grant amnesty to illegal aliens and encourage more to flood the country. And he pays lip service to border security. I can’t plead ignorance or drunkenness. When I voted for Bush the second time, I knew his true position on border enforcement (as opposed to his sound bites), but I certainly wasn’t voting for John Kerry.
Fighting the so-called war on terror and securing the southern border are forever linked, despite what politicians say. American men and woman are dying in the Middle East for “democracy,” while the enemy sneaks in the back door here at home.
I say we need to resurrect the policy of internment.
7:11 a.m. PDT: Even if I lived 1,000 years, I’ll never understand how reporters can describe still-at-large thugs without mentioning race with a straight face.
It stands to reason that if someone has committed a crime, especially a violent crime like murder, rape, or armed robbery, and hasn’t been caught, his height, build, style and color of his clothing, the kind of car he was driving, etc., are crucial to aiding his capture. But his race, especially the color of his skin — light, dark, ruddy, etc. — is just as crucial in identifying and capturing him.
So why do liberal journalists go out of their way not to report a thug’s race? Are they uncomfortable with disproportionate crime rates among blacks? Are they embarrassed by it or afraid that some loud-mouth “civil rights” type will charge “Racist!”? Discomfort and embarrassment aside, isn’t it a reporter’s job to report facts? That two at-large armed robbers are black is a fact that needs to be reported. People in the community need to be on the look-out. Omitting race as a descriptor is irresponsible, PC be damned.
In another irritating episode of men-in-their-thirties style coverage, the University of Michigan’s college newspaper, The Michigan Daily reports that a man was mugged at gunpoint near campus by two men, described as “average build, about six feet tall and wearing black hooded sweatshirts with the hoods up.” Check it out: a story that includes the color of the gun — black — omits the color of the robbers.
(According to the Department of Public Safety, the suspects are black. The Michigan Daily had access to the alert, so the reporter knew the race of the suspects when she wrote the story.)
At this point in our warped society, are we simply to assume that all such criminals are black? Is the omission of race code for “black”? Whatever the practice is or isn’t, it’s certainly dumb.
The Michigan Review, the alternative student newspaper, calls out the PC-stupidity-duplicity:
After years of trolling for a racially-sensitive admissions process, the Michigan Daily has seemingly come to the realization that race just isn’t that important – at least when it comes to armed robberies near campus…The Michigan Daily – where skin color is central to college admissions, but not relevant to armed robberies.
Unless you’ve been living in a cave for the past few years, you’ll recall that Michigan has been the center of a contentious battle to eliminate/keep lowered standards for blacks and to continue/discontinue racial discrimination, first with Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger, then with Proposition 2, which barred race preferences in government hiring and admissions. Strangely enough, race is all-important in college admissions and “diversity” on campus, but when it comes to reporting crime, people are colorblind!
We shall overcome eventually, I suspect.
Also see Colorblindness Comes To Michigan … Sort Of
8:18 a.m. PDT: Months ago, I read a strange story about a university president covering up the rape and murder of a student in her dorm room. Why would he do such a thing? I wondered. Was he trying to prevent widespread panic? Did he lie about the crime because the murderer was black and the victim white?
The woman’s own parents thought she may have died from an aneurysm, then they heard she’d died of asphyxiation. They didn’t know that she’d been found lying on the floor with a pillow over her head or that her underwear had been removed. (Source)
Despite the “foul” circumstances of the woman’s death, the university sent out an e-mail assuring students that no foul play was suspected. How was that possible?
An idiot-student named Orange Taylor was arrested and charged with killing the woman. He was living off-campus, having been barred from living on campus because of burglary and assault incidents. (10 to 1 he was an “affirmative action” student, but that’s another topic for another post.)
Whatever the university president’s reasons were for covering up the crime, he violated something called the Clery Act, which required him to report the crime to the students. Yesterday, the Eastern Michigan University Board of Regents fired John Fallon. The case had been investigated by the Department of Education and an “independent law firm.” (Source)
Good riddance to bad PC rubbish. And I hope the thug gets the chair, or whatever they have in Michigan.
3:04 p.m. PDT: Whenever I hear a man apologize for telling the truth because some idiotic group puts pressure on him, I want to vomit.
But I won’t be retching today.
Pat McCrory, the mayor of Charlotte, North Carolina, wrote that too many black youth were imitating the gangster lifestyle in their behavior and dress, a true statement. (Charlotte Observer) McCrory noted that 60 percent of Charlotte’s gang members are black.
A local chapter of the long irrelevant NAACP was in an uproar over the statement. The president of the local branch said McCrory had painted “African American youth with a broad swath that cuts deep in many of our communities” and “demanded” an apology. McCrory has refused. Why?
“Because my comments were accurate. Period,” he said.
That’s a gentlemanly way of saying, “Kiss my a**.”
Too many black “youth” eschew education and decent living, while embracing a lifestyle that glorifies criminal activity, triflingness (yes, there’s such a word), and having illicit and zero-responsibility sex with as many women as possible. The resultant children are sentenced to fatherless homes and instability. That, too, makes me sick to my stomach.
But daring to name a thing is worst than being the thing, in this twisted society.
Blacks cannot complain about what white people may or may not be doing to them when they don’t even care about their own children. I’ve lost patience with it, and I advise everybody — no matter what color you are — to stop being afraid of the truth or of black people making demands. Take it from an insider: the bark, as loud and annoying as it is, is much worse than the bite.
Kudos to Mayor McCrory for telling the truth and refusing to take it back. I hope he stands his ground.
A Charlotte Observer reader responds: “As the African American mother of a son, I take no offense at the mayor’s statement. Let’s face it, he has simply brought to the front the language and behavior we have allowed our children to adopt. Instead of attacking the mayor, let’s attack the problem. Our African American youth need our help.”
Related posts:
