Taking Down Cynthia McKinney
One less radical black voice in Congress. One less champion of labor. One less brave soul unafraid to jump the traces of political orthodoxy. Cynthia McKinney, five-term US rep from Georgia’s Fourth District, was beaten in Tuesday’s Democratic primary by Denise Majette, also black, a former judge, put in with the help of lots of money from American Jewish groups and by a hefty Republican cross-over in Georgia’s open primary.
Don’t you think that if Arab-American groups or African-American groups targeted an incumbent white liberal, maybe Jewish, congressperson, and shipped in money by the truckload to oust the incumbent, the rafters would shake with bellows of outrage.
Yet when a torrent of money from out of state American Jewish organizations smashed Earl Hilliard, first elected black congressperson in Alabama since Reconstruction, you could have heard a mouse cough. Hilliard had made the fatal error of calling for some measure of even-handedness in the Middle East. So he was targeted by AIPAC and the others. Down he went, defeated in the Democratic primary by Artur Davis, a black lawyer who obediently sang for his supper of the topic of Israel.
Then it was McKinney’s turn. A terrific liberal black congresswoman. Like Hilliard she wasn’t cowed by the Israel right-or-wrong lobby and called for real debate on the Middle East. And she called for a real examination of the lead-up to 9/11. So the sky fell in on her. Torrents of American Jewish money showered her opponent, a black woman judge called Majette. Buckets of sewage were poured over McKinney’s head in the Washington Post and the Atlanta Constitution.
Here’s how it worked. McKinney saw what happened to Hilliard, and that American Jewish money was pumping up Majette’s challenge. So she went to Arab-American groups to try to raise money to fight back. This allowed Tom Edsall to attack her in the Washington Post as being in receipt of money from pro-terror Muslims. Lots of nasty looking Arab/Muslim names suddenly filled Edsall’s stories.
Now just suppose someone started looking at names in the pro-Israel groups funding Majette who by mid-August had raised twice as much money as McKinney. Aren’t they aren’t supporting and helping fund terror that has US-made F-16s machine-gunning kids in Gaza? What’s the game here? It’s the reiteration of the same message delivered to politicians down the years, as when Senator Charles Percy went down. Put your head over the parapet on the topic of Israel and the Palestinians and we’ll blow it off.
Oh, and when furious blacks start denouncing the role of outside Jewish money in the onslaughts on Hilliard and McKinney, what then? First stage: imply the money from Jewish-American groups came in reaction to money from Arab-American groups, as with this typical AP paragraph: “Middle East politics played an unlikely role in the race. McKinney drew campaign financing from out of state, including money from pro-Arab groups, while Jewish groups helped fund Majette’s campaign.The race echoed the Alabama primary this year that cost Democratic Rep. Earl Hilliard his job. Hilliard received support from Arab groups after supporting a Palestinian state, while his young opponent had the backing of pro-Israel groups.”
Then there’ll be intricate articles with intricate exit poll calculations promoting the conclusion that the money from the Jewish groups “wasn’t a factor”. Then there’ll be an avalanche of hysterical columns about the ever-present menace of black anti-Semitism.
August 26th, 2002 at 5:35 pm
Alexander,
You modify what happened, sir. You write:
“Here’s how it worked. McKinney saw what happened to Hilliard, and that American Jewish money was pumping up Majette’s challenge. So she went to Arab-American groups to try to raise money to fight back. This allowed Tom Edsall to attack her in the Washington Post as being in receipt of money from pro-terror Muslims. Lots of nasty looking Arab/Muslim names suddenly filled Edsall’s stories.”
You have the sequence of events backwards. This is not an opinion. It is fact.
Majette did not recieve any substantial funding from outside Georgia until late July. Late in July Majette’s funding was about 98% from right here in her own district. As early as April about 78% of McKinney’s money came from out of state, with a significant part of those funds being from people with names that a reasonable person might think belonged to Arabs. McKinney’s Arab money was there before Majette was even a candidate.
Is your complaint that Majette received money from Jewish orgainzations and Jews or just that she eventually ended up with more Jewish money than McKinney had Arab money?
Of course money was a factor. But ten times the amount of money by itself would not have unseated her. I have written my take on why it is that McKinney lost. You can have a copy if you would like to have me send you one. Campaign donations and a much higher than normal republican participation in the democrat primary were both factors working against McKinney but neither one of them separately and possibly not taken in tandem are the reason that Cynthia McKinney will not represent the 4th District in the House.
I know from what I read of Cynthia McKinney’s take on this race why she thinks she lost, and she does not have a clue. From what you have written here it appears to me that neither do you.
August 26th, 2002 at 7:00 pm
why does every article on this web site blame everyone but themselves? ms. mckinney lost because she is out of step with mainstream america. that does not make her a bad person, just wrong. again it is not the fault of the white, jew or black. it is the fault of ms. mckinney.
August 26th, 2002 at 7:19 pm
why does every article on this web site blame everyone but themselves? ms. mckinney lost because she is out of step with mainstream america. that does not make her a bad person, just wrong. again it is not the fault of the white, jew or black. it is the fault of ms. mckinney.
Actually, if you’d read Cockburn’s piece carefully, he doesn’t blame anyone for McKinney’s defeat. Certainly McKinney’s comments ran the risk of alienating her from her political base; a situation which in other contexts has been called heroic and brave.
Cockburn’s point is about the role of the Jewish lobby in preventing even the slightest consideration of U.S. support for Israel, including flooding a congressional district with money from outside the district — which is a significant issue no matter what the underlying facts — and, more strikingly, trying to slander McKinney as a terrorist sympathizer.
I don’t know whether Cockburn’s recitation of the facts and the chronology of the funding patterns is correct, but I suggest it doesn’t particularly matter. The point is clear that the NYT, Wa Post, and Atlanta Journal Constitution ran slanderous attacks on McKinney because she received funding from groups which may have been Arabic or Muslim.
That was likely a cause in McKinney’s defeat, and it’s worth considering, which is all Cockburn has done.
August 30th, 2002 at 6:15 pm
I’m black and i don’t hate the jews or the president although i didn’t vote for him. Cynthia was outside of the black mainstream and was rightly defeated by another black person who is more concerned about black people than giving voice to groups on the terrorist watch list who publicly maintain that america must be dstroyed.
September 9th, 2002 at 7:06 pm
Mr. Cockburn’s article is overburdened by factual inaccuracy and bias. As one reader has already commented, Arab support for McKinney came long before Jewish support for Majette. Arab support for McKinney, and McKinney’s request for that support, had nothing to do with the Alabama race. Second, I challenge Cockburn (or Kendall Clark) to cite any article in the Washington Post or Atlanta Constitution that defamed McKinney. If the actual facts about the candidate are rancid, the fault lies with the candidate, not the messenger. Agree with it or not, McKinney’s letter to the Saudi prince requesting millions of dollars (turned away by Giuliani) was a proper consideration for the electorate. So was McKinney’s statement that George W. Bush knew of the pending attacks before 9/11 but did nothing. You may call such statements “courageous,” but many agree with Senator Zell Miller, who called them loony.
As for bias, while Cockburn deems McKinney “a terrific liberal black congresswoman,” her opponent is relegated to “a black woman judge called Majette.” (Just imagine if she had been White? OR JEWISH!!!!). Has Cockburn ever bothered to learn about Majette? Is it possible that Majette, a Yale educated judge, was simply the more attractive and qualified candidate. Is it possible that the Georgia voters, both black and white, were tired of McKinney’s consistently embarrasing behavior and wanted more moderate representation? Has Cockburn bothered to wonder why high profile African Americans who had previously supported McKinney turned their backs on her in 2002? Is Cockburn aware that a large percentage of McKinney’s former African-American supporters voted for Majette? Does Cockburn believe these voters are so stupid that they cannot make up there own minds and instead were controlled by Jewish money? Is it fair to say that Cockburn’s own biases regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict affect his views both of Jews in general and this issue in particular?
Kendall Clark makes a simply incredible comment in his follow-up: “I don’t know whether Cockburn’s recitation of the facts and the chronology of the funding patterns is correct, but I suggest it doesn’t particularly matter.” What?! It does not matter whether a writer’s facts, the basis for his entire argument, are accurate? So the only thing that matters is that outside Jews gave lots of many in a race involving a black incumbant? And that is the problem? But if it were blacks outside of the district giving money, that would be fine?
Kendall Clark makes another fantastic statement: “Actually, if you’d read Cockburn’s piece carefully, he doesn’t blame anyone for McKinney’s defeat. … Cockburn’s point is about the role of the Jewish lobby in preventing even the slightest consideration of U.S. support for Israel ….” Obviously, both Cockburn, and Clark, are laying “blame” at the feet of Jews. Both also ignore the fact that instead of “stifling” debate as to Israel, the voters were clearly presented with the arguments, and given the CHOICE to vote for their preferred candidate.
September 16th, 2002 at 9:23 pm
I support the article written by Mr. Cockburn as fair, accurate, and politically responsible. Interestingly, he is not the only one who thinks this way about the election. It was foul. Judge Majette would not have been a credible candidate at all if not for Jewish money from a political action committee, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. With a $12 million dollar budget and 65,000 activists, it’s the largest PAC in Washington. It has caused the defeat of numerous politicians; however it was sued in federal court some years ago because it was not abiding by the federal campaign contribution laws. It is not even properly registered with the Federal Election Commission.
The system that allows money to determine election races is already problematical, if not outright corrupt, but to allow *massive* out-of-district political contributions to defeat a candidate on behalf of a foreign power (Israel), is very dangerous. It allows a PAC to buy an election, and another country to subvert American elections.
Regardless of the impression being given by some, the facts that white Republicans voted in crossover votes and redistricting took place before the race were not the decisive factors in her defeat; PAC money turned the tide as it always does if in large enough amounts.
If Black people and Arabs did take action to remove a Jewish congressman, you can bet there would be an uproar and serious retaliation to boot. But many of these Jewish organizations control or have major influence over Black civil rights organizations like the NAACP, SCLC and others so you have not heard a peep. They would be de-funded by their patron Jewish business and political leaders if they tried to organize anything, so they have allowed McKinney and Hilliard die.
We are now hearing “rationalizations” for her defeat by right-wing conservative flacks. There are also numerous apologists for Israel in the Black community within the NAACP civil rights groups and others,[that hypocrite Julian Bond is one] who will counter-attack any critic or pretend that what we are seeing actually did not happen, or even call for “unity” with these Zionists when no such unity is possible. I will just say that Cockburn got it right, and laid it out very well.
I am also a Black person, who writes an occasional article for the National Newspaper Publisers Association, trade organization for 200 Black newspapers, called “The Rest of the News”.
Lorenzo Komboa Ervin