Today’s debate was a bit more focused on the job duties of a congressional representative than their first nationally broadcast debate. I saw it on C-SPAN. It started with Hank Johnson and even the questions from the moderator to McKinney exposing that she has been an ineffective representative for her district. The moderator mentioned that 11 out of the 16 bills McKinney proposed during her current term had no co-sponsors. Which means nobody else cares to endorse almost 70% of what she’s put forward in Congress this term.

Johnson hammered McKinney about her disrespect of a US Capitol Police officer. McKinney tried to play as if she was an abused woman. Saying something like “what is a woman to do when she it grabbed from behind?” Can you say Liberal Elitism? Obviously she feels no officer can ever stop her and does not distinguish one calling her to stop from the words of anyone else on the street.

Hank Johnson is OK with security screenings and feels people in Congress should have their papers open to inspection upon request under the same rules as someone on the street that might be subjected to a search. Given the events with that nut William Jefferson I am glad he said that! It is ridiculous that papers not deemed Top Secret can’t be searched.

McKinney complained about Hank Johnson’s relationship with developers. Hank Johnson pointed out that those “evil hated developers” are the ones that bring jobs and business to a community. Hank wants to work WITH the business community, to attract business growth that would bring jobs to his district, unlike McKinney who condemns many in the business community. She only mentioned support for small businesses. The way she fights against tax cuts I’d have never known she supported anyone with a marginally successful business!

During the debate the moderator asked a question that often leaves Liberals/Progressives at a loss for words. And it’s sad that such a simple question would be an issue for anyone planning to be a US Congressional Representative! “Can you name 2 circumstances in which you approve of the use of US Military Force?” (They were asked to name 2 within the past 25 years.) During McKinny’s response to the question she tried to once again play games with the government’s knowledge of 9/11.

The moderator was having a hard time getting McKinney to give an answer and even tried to give her an answer mentioned by Hank Johnson - Afghanistan. Here’s how McKinney started her response once the moderator did that.

…
Moderator: Can you name 2 circumstances in which you approve of the use of US Military Force? How about Afghanistan?

McKinney: Mr. Johnson mentioned Afghanistan and the pursuit of Osama bin Laden.

Moderator: How about you?

McKinney: But I just recently checked the FBI web site. And the FBI web site does not even say that Osama bin Laden is responsible for September 11th, for the September 11th attacks.
…

Hank Johnson was able to think of several instances he approved of after some thought, but McKinney could not think of 2. She could only muster up that she voted for the use of force in Afghanistan. But given her statements about 9/11 and bin Laden, I feel that vote was simply done to avoid the MASSIVE HEAT she would have received if she did not. I don’t know why she’s trying to play games with the government’s view of bin Laden. The FBI’s page for bin Laden does not mention 9/11, because it only list what he has been indicted for, so of course it would not mention 9/11 given he was already indicted for crimes before 9/11. Why waste money indicting him for 9/11 when he’s admitted it and troops were sent to search for him and his organization? I’m so sick of McKinney playing games like this, I can’t wait to see her lose.

McKinney thinks the border should be secured via “foreign policy”. What the heck?!!! She’s trying to enforce work regulations on foreign countries, in hopes of it preventing people from wanting to come to the USA. In other words, she’s not trying to secure the borders. Hank Johnson supports the effort to secure our Southern border.

On the Middle East, when asked Hank Johnson mentioned again that Israel has a right to defend its self. McKinney was not asked this question directly, but volunteered to answer it. And she responded that “any nation” has an inherent right to defend its self. This a B-S response, to speak in general terms when the discussion is focused on Israel! Because it does not admit that Israel’s current action against Hezbollah is being done in self defense. She’s playing a game of everything being morally relative and that’s why she never does as much as others in Congress to denounce the acts of nations sponsoring terrorism. That is why people with ties to nations involved in terrorist acts against the USA have been supporting her. Like CAIR she covers for the enemy.

When asked, “In the world is America a force for good or ill?” Hank Johnson said “good” after being pressed on the question. McKinney said American “can be” that force for good. She would not explicitly say that America is a force for good. All I could think is “can you say America hater?” Because it’s obvious the woman hates not only the Bush Administration, but the nation she lives in. No wonder she always seems to favor the will of Islamic Radicals!

Hank Johnson pointed out in his closing statement that he is proud to be an America and loves being here in America.

If I can get the full audio or video of the debate I will post it myself or link to it if it is hosted somewhere else. Let me know if you can find a copy.

I think Richard Belcher did a great job moderating this debate. It was like trying to catch greased pigs and he was holding their feet to the fire. Fortunately for Hank he came out looking much better than McKinney once the fire hit him.