Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
McKinney Blazes NC Trail With Incendiary Speech
Presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney has moved from blue to green, and similarly, she demonstrated her move to the left side of the political spectrum in a speech she gave in Durham: "It's time to move from protest to resistance."
McKinney, a former six-term Democratic congresswoman turned newly minted Green Party candidate for president, spoke at two events Tuesday, laying out her policy stances on more than a half-dozen issues.
Before a receptive audience of 25 at The Know Bookstore & Restaurant on Fayetteville Street, McKinney, who represented Georgia's 4th District but who now lives in California, spoke for nearly two hours about ballot access, voter fraud, a George W. Bush impeachment, wartime spending, college debt, corporate lobbyists, Hurricane Katrina, and the racial gap in home ownership.
The speech appeared to be more of a policy talk than a presidential speech, and Green Party officials set McKinney's aspirations low: besting Nader's 2,000-odd votes that he received in the 2000 election in North Carolina. N.C. Green Party co-chair Jan Martell said she was "hoping" the party had collected 500 signatures by Tuesday, the deadline for McKinney to qualify as a write-in candidate. Meanwhile, McKinney raised $600 in contributions, according to party officials, and checks, collected in a Tupperware bin, were made payable to Power to the People, her election committee.
McKinney was eager to discuss electoral politics in general. She pointed to Mexican presidential candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who established a secondary government in Mexico City following his narrow defeat in 2006, as a model action compared to Al Gore's and John Kerry's concessions in 2000 and 2004.
She also cited the ascendancy of Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez and other leftist leaders in Latin America as evidence of the "power of the people" being heard at the voting booth.
"What's the difference between us and that?" she asked. "The blue pill we've been asked to swallow."
She blamed the mainstream media, in part, for distributing the pill, and for allegedly distorting events ranging from Martin Luther King Jr.'s life to the genocide in Darfur. She called the latter a "cover story of atrocity that no one can disagree with" that media outlets focused on in order to justify U.S. occupation of Sudan. (While some foreign aid and humanitarian organizations urged the U.S. to intervene the humanitarian crisis, detractors, including the Canada-based Global Centre for Research on Globalization, have taken a stand similar to McKinney's.)
"Did you ever stop to think that every one of those corporate entities has as bottom line?" she asked. "We've got to figure out another way to get our information, so we can think outside the box."
At several points in her speech, McKinney hesitated to complete her thoughts because of the presence of a video camera and reporters. She pointed out that 9/11 happened shortly after the World Conference against Racism in South Africa, in which a proposal on slavery reparations had been considered. While McKinney said she was not "suggesting any linkages," she added that black interests were "taken off the table" following the terrorist attacks. "If in fact there is a program to deny black people in this country from selecting their own leaders, then there not only should be reparations, but we are dealing with genocide."
McKinney drew national attention following 9/11 when she said that President Bush deliberately ignored warnings of the attack because his allies would stand to profit from the War on Terror. Following those comments, she lost her House seat in 2002, though she was elected again in 2004 and went on to organize hearings on 9/11 and the federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina.
Earlier in the day, she spoke to a half-dozen supporters and members of the media, in front of the downtown post office in Durham. There, she said that Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain had offered war as the only solution to the foreclosure crisis.
In an interview after the two speeches, McKinney said that, despite Obama's plan to remove troops from Iraq, the presumptive Democratic nominee would continue combat missions in Afghanistan, and look to Iran and Pakistan as potential future theaters of operation.
"The push toward war is still very real, and people need not to accept the-what do you call it?-bait-and-switch," she said.
Willie Muhammand, who attended both speeches, said in an interview that he would vote for McKinney, though he hadn't voted for anyone since Richard Nixon in 1960.
"Anybody who stands up against our government, in the open, I'm behind them. I stand up for her, because of her outspokenness years ago," he said.
© 2008 Independent Weekly
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

121 Comments so far
Show Alla_to_z July 25th, 2008 2:41 am
Thank you for enlightening me!
I would hope that McKinney did not blatantly call the Darfur atrocities fake. It doesn't actually state that, anyway. It implies it, but there aren't words in this article that say a fake, blatantly. It's distorted.
I do think that what's happening in Darfur is real. Saddam Hussein was also a tyrant, in my view. So yeah they both need to be ousted. But not by imperial powers who exploit the situation to their own economic advantage.
I don't think I know quite enough about Darfur to say that the U.S. has twisted the facts. I could very well see that though; they seemed to often paint Saddam as a fundamentalist and he wasn't.
Vote for Mckinney and Nader too but you won't get them.
Because the corporate masters love the 3rd parties because they prevent progressives of uniting enough to really have more power to change the system for the better.
The people united can never be defeated, but the 3rd party myth guarantees that the people will not be united.
when Nader and Mckinney and the other 3rd parties unite you will see progressives with more power.
Parties are what divides us... if you really want progress vote for the most progressive that has a chance to win.
There is only one party in reality and we can go forward or back... progress or regress.
A third party vote will help McBush and if he wins the Greens and Nader will deserve him.
Under Obama progressives can unite for the future and learn how to support the most progressive.
Third parties are good for education but when it comes to voting, they all help the regressives.
Jim Glover July 25th, 2008 4:27 pm writes "The people united can never be defeated, but the 3rd party myth guarantees that the people will not be united."
-Conclusion: It's better to go with the 2-party myth so we continue getting the same: Democrats and Republicans standing united, hand-in-hand, in bipartisan bliss, screwing the hell out our country and our Constitution.
J I M _ G L O V E R,
Please do consider the unprecedented possibility of something novel occurring ( because of "blow-back" ):
If even 70% of Americans actually voted in 2008,
the likelihood is that nearly all of those "new" people would be voting for the new 3rd party candidates.
Jim,
I hope your are not the same peace activist and folk singer, because your statements would seem absurd coming from that person. Do you support war? Why would you support a war candidate and not a true peace candidate such as Cynthia?
Under Obama, progressives will get what all minorities in the Democratic party get, next to nothing. Progressives, blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans, etc, etc, keep getting the same if not worse. What makes you think Obama will change course?
See above for the ten key Green Values; do you ascribe to them? If you do, how can you support someone that is for more war, more violence?
I do agree with you that there needs to be more unity among progressives, but it is too bad your theory on democracy is regressive, your hopes of peace are regressive, and your candidate ( Obama ) will do little if anything for true change.
If you want to see Cynthia McKinney at work for the people, watch the documentary AMERICAN BLACKOUT. See it free at http://www.freedocumentaries.org
You can contribute to her Power to the People campaign at www.runcynthiarun.org - every little bit helps (she's not raising a million $$$ a day like Obama)!
Finally an article about McKinney. CD execs must have realized how fake they look covering a 4 way prez race like there are 2 candidates... Is Ron Paul still in? Perhaps it's a 5 way prez race and I'm mistaken.
Nader is going to be a horrific spoiler this year messing up McKinney's chances.
I did a bit of research a while back that verifies Nader being under the thumb of certain financially powerful entities.
I'm fairly certain McKinney is the ONLY candidate who isn't out for cash and power and protection, but rather running on principle and for morality.
Not like it matters in the least with the vote rigging as extensive as it has become. Plus they could make her disappear and replace her with a plastic surgerized look alike "yes-woman" in a split second if ever the person placed as president entertained disagreement with the financial dominant...
Finally an article about McKinney. CD execs must have realized how fake they look covering a 4 way prez race like there are 2 candidates... Is Ron Paul still in? Perhaps it's a 5 way prez race and I'm mistaken.
Nader is going to be a horrific spoiler this year messing up McKinney's chances.
I did a bit of research a while back that verifies Nader being under the thumb of certain financially powerful entities.
I'm fairly certain McKinney is the ONLY candidate who isn't out for cash and power and protection, but rather running on principle and for morality.
Not like it matters in the least with the vote rigging as extensive as it has become. Plus they could make her disappear and replace her with a plastic surgerized look alike "yes-woman" in a split second if ever the person placed as president entertained disagreement with the financial dominant...
Finally an article about McKinney. CD execs must have realized how fake they look covering a 4 way prez race like there are 2 candidates... Is Ron Paul still in? Perhaps it's a 5 way prez race and I'm mistaken.
Nader is going to be a horrific spoiler this year messing up McKinney's chances.
I did a bit of research a while back that verifies Nader being under the thumb of certain financially powerful entities.
I'm fairly certain McKinney is the ONLY candidate who isn't out for cash and power and protection, but rather running on principle and for morality.
Not like it matters in the least with the vote rigging as extensive as it has become. Plus they could make her disappear and replace her with a plastic surgerized look alike "yes-woman" in a split second if ever the person placed as president entertained disagreement with the financial dominant...
Finally an article about McKinney. CD execs must have realized how fake they look covering a 4 way prez race like there are 2 candidates... Is Ron Paul still in? Perhaps it's a 5 way prez race and I'm mistaken.
Nader is going to be a horrific spoiler this year messing up McKinney's chances.
I did a bit of research a while back that verifies Nader being under the thumb of certain financially powerful entities.
I'm fairly certain McKinney is the ONLY candidate who isn't out for cash and power and protection, but rather running on principle and for morality.
Not like it matters in the least with the vote rigging as extensive as it has become. Plus they could make her disappear and replace her with a plastic surgerized look alike "yes-woman" in a split second if ever the person placed as president entertained disagreement with the financial dominant...
Finally an article about McKinney. CD execs must have realized how fake they look covering a 4 way prez race like there are 2 candidates... Is Ron Paul still in? Perhaps it's a 5 way prez race and I'm mistaken.
Nader is going to be a horrific spoiler this year messing up McKinney's chances.
I did a bit of research a while back that verifies Nader being under the thumb of certain financially powerful entities.
I'm fairly certain McKinney is the ONLY candidate who isn't out for cash and power and protection, but rather running on principle and for morality.
Not like it matters in the least with the vote rigging as extensive as it has become. Plus they could make her disappear and replace her with a plastic surgerized look alike "yes-woman" in a split second if ever the person placed as president entertained disagreement with the financial dominant...
rocyahsoul July 25th, 2008 8:11 pm
Nader is going to be a horrific spoiler this year messing up McKinney's chances.
-If the Democrats can't beat George McCain III (who looks old, frail and brain-dead, just waiting to be placed in convalescent home with nothing to offer the nation except wars for the next 100 yrs) then they need to fold their tattered and traitorous little blue tents and just join the Greens.
It is truly mind-boggling that the race is this close with the Republicans being so discredited.
If the Democrats can't win without the small 3rd party vote then it's time to throw in the towel. If they can't convince us to vote for them it's their fault to blunting Republican attacks by becoming just like them.
If you heard Obama speaking in Europe today you'd notice he sounds just like a hawkish Republican. I heard him threatening and saber rattling against Iran, trying to out McCain, McCain.
Votes need to be earned. Votes for Democrats are not some form of entitlement program. Dem supporters please quit the annoying and incessant whining.
First part of Cynthia McKinney's Green Party speech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=706U5ZN3Mvg
Why don't the Democrats just merge with the Republicans; they love their friends "across the aisle" so much and their bipartisan bliss together. There's very little difference between them anyway. Then people wouldn't be in such a quandary and confused about who to vote for.
All of Cynthia McKinney's speech:
http://www.youtube.com/user/GreenProgress
Poet,
I saw Cynthia McKinney on Democracy Now! being interviewed by Amy Goodman and thought she was very articulate and should be taken seriously as a candidate. Your standards and mine are probably different, but without the teleprompter, the coward-in-chief is the most inarticulate person ever to assume the position of the President of the US. I would have preferred a different VP running mate, but she is Cynthia's choice and they'll get my vote. I've had enough of the Democratic Party apologists making excuse after excuse about why they can't do anything to counter the Bush Crime Family...or do they really want to?
Green Party and proud of it!
Those who want to call Cynthia a spoiler and her speech incendiary are not looking deeply enough into any of the issues or events of our time. Cynthia has the integrity to speak the truth regardless of what it means to her career in this culture. I think she represents the only real change in direction we've seen on the political stage for decades, a real challenge to business as usual, but she also is representing a growing movement of truth seekers who are no longer willing to go along to get along because they know the history and they've seen the massive erosion of civil liberties occur with the Democrat's consent. She is not trying to defeat Obama so much as she is trying to expand the Green Party and win some power for the people.
A number of those posting on this site have taken the way her meetings in Durham were described by the reporter as accurate and also as representative of her pitiful level of public support. "Crowd estimation" is an old ploy of those wishing to promote or denigrate a candidacy, and this reporter, or at least the one who wrote the headline of his story, seemed intent in putting a label of "incendiary" on her speech and putting her position on the extreme left of a tiny number of radicals. The best comment I've seen on this string contrasts the 25 who heard her in Durham (if that is an accurate number) telling "the truth" in her speech (as she always does) with the hundreds of thousands who heard Obama tell lies that day in Berlin. I've been part of such a "pitiful" crowd for a McKinney speech (in Miami)and I didn't feel so weird or different for attending. I heard her say that the Green Party was getting her "on the cheap" for a projected budget of $100k (that's THOUSANDs folks)and her campaign simply doesn't have the PR funds to turn out huge crowds as does the Obama campaign with its mega-millions. Please think of that $600 collected in Durham the way you think of the "pennies" that kids send to some worthy cause and maybe you can see these pittances as the "widow's mite" that well could launch an unstoppable campaign for the people to reclaim their country from the corporations.
taillcap vericity and Lesserevilism, changeeebefforelate and any others who I have oppressed with my writing ,, I apologize if you think I am the problem because I point out the 3rd party myth and how it keeps us progressives and liberals and all Americans divided and that is the game and you guys fall for the Little League division of the System.
the truth hurts when you are pushing a myth...
I guess i am evil for writing for all to see That Obama is the Best realistic choice but you guys can only see EvillLLLLLLL
Happy voting and you guys haven't told us who your voting for ... it must be important would you like to share?