Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (6777)	4/3/2006 8:22:40 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Respond to of 71588

MORE TROUBLE FOR MCKINNEY By Michelle Malkin · April 03, 2006 08:01 PM WSBTV reports that crazy Cynthia has admitted misusing taxpayer money to fly a celebrity down to Atlanta: Rep. Cynthia McKinney admits that she broke government rules by spending money to fly a celebrity to Atlanta. Channel 2 Action News has uncovered documents showing McKinney, D-Ga., spent about $1,000 of taxpayer's money to fly singer Isaac Hayes to Georgia to help dedicate a new office in Atlanta. The money came from a fund members of Congress are supposed to use for office supplies. Using the money to pay for Hayes' airline ticket and hotel expenses is a violation of strict congressional rules. Those rules state that taxpayer money can only be used for "travel by Members, Members' employees and vendors. A vendor is an employee of a private company that provides maintenance and support for equipment and software..." ...McKinney staffers say they will reimburse the congressional fund for the cost of Hayes' flight and hotel room. Guess this is all The Man's fault, too? Hat tip: reader Karl S. michellemalkin.com

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (6777)	4/5/2006 12:56:00 AM
From: sandintoes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

McKinney seems clearly to have been in the wrong. The officer approached her when she walked around a metal detector. As a member of Congress she is entitled to do so, but she was not wearing the lapel pin that identifies her as a member, and thus she committed a breach of security. (Slate reported in 2002 that "she refuses to wear her member's pin.") McKinney does not claim to have identified herself before the officer approached, so that as far as he knew, he could have been dealing with a terrorist or a dangerous psychotic. Nor has she publicly denied that she struck the officer. Indeed, when her lawyer says "she reacted instinctively in an effort to defend herself," he seems to be justifying the alleged assault rather than denying it. She seems to think she is above the law...she gets in one mess after another..