In the parlance of Usenet, IANAL (I am not a lawyer), but even still, I'll bet I could have offered her better legal advice than her lawyer did (if she was sufficiently competent to have one--not a safe bet). Of course, I'd be a lawyer who doesn't buy into her legal theory of "play the race card at the beginning of the game." So it's also unlikely that she'd hire me, given the nature of the lawyer she would choose.

Anyway, if I were her lawyer, in addition to advising her to not hire a private thug to accompany her on Capitol grounds, here's the speech I would have written for her yesterday.

Esteemed colleagues, and the American people.

I wish to apologize for my actions last week in striking a Capitol police officer who was simply doing his job, and doing it well.

I was in a hurry and distracted, and didn't hear verbal requests to stop, or realize that they applied to me, because I thought that I had clearance to pass, as a member of Congress, and didn't realize that I didn't have my required lapel pin on. I was surprised when he grabbed my shoulder, but that is no excuse for my behavior, and I realize now that there was no other way for him to get my attention.

Our Capitol police force has a great responsibility to ensure the safety of Congresspersons like myself, our staff, and this historic and priceless building in which we all work for the American people. As a result of this incident, in these troubled times of threat against our great nation, I also now realize that careless behavior like mine, in both neglecting to wear my pin, and in paying insufficient attention to security locations and procedures, simply makes their job that much harder.

I want to apologize not only to the officer that I carelessly struck, but to this body as a whole and to the American people whom they represent. I understand that I violated the law, and that such violations are not vitiated by apologies--nonetheless, I am deeply sorry.

Moreover, I also wish to apologize for my accusations over the past few days of inappropriate behavior and racism against the Capital police force. They are hard working, and diligent, and undeserving of such, and as they follow their orders in enforcing the rules, so should I have in following them. I was upset about the incident and fearful of its potential consequences, but again, that is no excuse for this unjustified slander against them.

I hope that they, my colleagues, and the American people can forgive me, as I will have difficulty in forgiving myself. I can only promise that having said all this, that I will not repeat this offence, and that I will go before the courts and accept whatever penalty the law demands for my thoughtlessness. As a member of Congress, who makes the laws, I realize that I must set an example for other citizens, and now fully intend to do so.

Thank you for this time, Mr. Speaker.

As I said, if she'd had competent legal advice (doubtful, because she's not the sort of person who would solicit such), that's what I'd advise she'd say, and if I were really competent, I'd persuade her to say it.

Such a speech would have completely defused the political situation. Such a speech would guarantee that in whatever court proceeding resulted, she would do no time, and get off with an admonition and at worst a probation. Such a speech would remove the situation that has been such a gift to the Republicans, removing the distraction from what the Dems have thought was a political advantage over the past several days. Such a speech would remove the possibility of even a censure by the House, let alone an expulsion (which they remain perfectly within the authority of the Constitution to do, because there's little conduct more disorderly than hers, both in the original event and in the demagoguery that has followed it). Such a speech would have at least temporarily stopped reminding people of everything that is despicable about the race-baiting wing of the Democrat Party.

Unfortunately, such a speech is one that Cynthia McKinney is constitutionally incapable of delivering, and one that her fellow Democrats (or her lawyer, chosen precisely because he'll pander to her base political creed) is incapable of persuading her to deliver. Such a speech would be rare for a politician in general, but for a person like Cynthia McKinney, it is inconceivable. Hence we got instead the utterly predictable, "he started it," "I regret that it happened" (not "I did anything wrong") speech she gave yesterday.

Yes, Rand, but you are not an oppressed minority.

The majority of the people she is representing, those who voted for her, have quite likely grown up with the understanding that they have gotten a raw deal, are being discriminated against on a daily basis and that this state of affairs was unfairly predetermined long before they were born by a racist system set up to keep the people in power, in power. The accepted response in this community to this hostile and agressive worldview is one of equal hostility and agression.

Her agressive manners and mannerisms are an effective political tool, since they give her respect while not requiring any debating ability, or even the necessity to make sense, except in the victim context.

Ironically, at this time in history, this is a very counter productive behavior, and is the very thing perpetuating the condition.

I haven't noticed any mention here of Randy Cunningham. He took huge bribes for directing defense dollars to a contractor. And he's gone to prison. Yet nary a mention here. Seems like his actions are a little more serious than McKinney's.

I'm glad that Randy Cunningham went to prison. I was at the time.

Are you happy now?

How long ago was that? How much was I required to say about that, at the time, and now, to satisfy you?

Oh, and how much did Randy Cunningham blame his problems on "the man"? As I recall, he actually made a tearful apology.

By the way (you know, just as an aside) are you a moron?

Well, look at the bright side. She's not out bird hunting with her friends.

She's not out bird hunting with her friends.

Do you have a point that's non-idiotic?

Damn Rand, the National Cretinism Society seems to have your number for daring to criticize their pink clad Goddess!

"I haven't noticed any mention here of Randy Cunningham. He took huge bribes for directing defense dollars to a contractor. And he's gone to prison. Yet nary a mention here. Seems like his actions are a little more serious than McKinney's."

PERHAPS YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED ANY MENTION HERE BECAUSE DISCUSSING RANDY "DUKE" CUNNINGHAM IS NOT REALLY GERMANE TO THIS THREAD??? YA THINK????

And Adolph Hitler's crimes are more serious than both of them put together!!! Perhaps we should discuss him and complete a Godwinesque trifecta?

Here is a clue Goober! This thread is about Cynthia McKinney, not Cunningham! There is no equal time requirement to cover your ludicrous, thinly veiled attempt to cover for her uber-retarded actions.

Perhaps we could also discuss the disappearance of Chuck Cunningham from the timleline of "Happy Days' after the first season AS THAT IS AT LEAST AS NON-GERMANE TO THE CONVERSATION!

You go, Mike! :-D

Great "speech," Rand. Too bad she hasn't the brains (and clues) to make it.

Rand Said "Do you have a point that's non-idiotic?"

I love you RAND! I LOVE the giggle points when a VERY bright guy goes urbane.

Well, lets talk about "oppressed minorities" while "the Vietnam war affected everyone" those people who had more than 2 years of service WERE deliberately overlooked by the Pussified US nation that thinks Ward Churchhill was the hero of the time, despite lying everyday about who he was.

My father was dicked over, denied his TRAINED position because of his service, and he gave up, because he had a wife and a kid, later Kids (I was an afterthought) Is My Father, a VOLUNTEER for the Vietnam Era Military an Oppressed Minority? After all, to this day, American's in VERY high positions, like. . . candidates for the Presidency of the United States of America have called him a War Criminal, a Liar, a Murder, and many more things. Have modern Racial Minority's had to live through that?

Is my dad a member of that group?

i too wonder why you care so much about this, it seems like a fairly simple misunderstanding/overreaction or a series of them. whereas theres numerous instances of deliberate malfeasance, even ones that threaten fundamental principles of our democracy.

You know, here's an idea for all these people who want to whine that I'm not posting about what they want me to post about. Quit reading my blog, and go start your own.

Rand,
the people who post here and whine about your content don't need to start their own blogs. They can go to Huffinton's goon ball blog and suckle at the breast of non-thinking, liberal talking point, BUSH IS EVIL, RAND SUCKS TOOism.

It's people like you who have the liberals on the run. It's people who post here who shout down the liberal hand wringers and who are voting them out of our lives, slowly but surely. It's the blogs that are causing some people to come out of the silent majority closet and go to their keyboards and type that they are mad as hell and they're not gonna take it any more!!

McKiney is part of the problem, blogs and the political activism they have renewed amongst conservatives and libertarians are the answer.

Look out SINthia, we're coming for you!!

"whereas theres numerous instances of deliberate malfeasance, even ones that threaten fundamental principles of our democracy."

I agree, Rand should post more about the corruption surrounding John Conyers. Let me help you.

http://wizbangblog.com/2006/03/01/rep-john-conyers-accused-of-unethical-behavior.php

dont get annoyed so easily. im not trying to tell you what to do. i wasnt telling you what to post, merely commenting that the cynthia mckinney scandal is not all that important (which is on topic).

ujedujik,

Take note, the Republicans do a pretty good job of getting rid of its members when they go off the reservation. Remember ex-speaker Gingrich?

The Democrats largely just hug theirs harder.

ujedujik,
you must be kidding me!! She is exactly the problem. Typical Liberal Dumbocrats who assume they are above the law. Any time they think they see a law or rule broken by a conservative, we get a Congressional Inquiry.

But lapses in security, and BJs in the White House are "his personal business" and "not all that important".

Would you feel this way if that assaulted cop was your son or that the assualted mouth belonged to your daughter?

I know the Lewinski thing was more than 15 minutes ago, but if McKinney and her ilk can complain that Washington and Jefferson owned slaves 230 years ago I can complain about Slick Willy getting his personal pole spit shined. Slavery was legal, is what Monica did to him legal in D.C.?

Where I live that is still considered illegal by statute as a crime against nature. I won't get into how often the law is enforced. After all, we just got the lottery here and I am still not sure what the governor, or lottery supporters, had to do to get it passed.

mike- how do you define "going off the reservation"? i personally would say that what cynthia mckinney has done is nothing compared to what the bush administration has done, and she has at least apologized for it, whereas they are continuing to break laws, in a deliberate premeditated manner. you have to be delusional if you dont recognize that republicans are first and foremost loyal to the party, much more so than democrats (thats why you always hear about democrats looking "confused" on an issue--because they dont all agree all the time). and as for how much the parties "hug" those who do wrong in their own party, how about all the investigations into the bush administration that the republican congress has stonewalled?

steve- tons of politicians have extramarital affairs (including several who were investigating clinton, as well as numerous former presidents), i really dont care, it shouldnt have much to do with politics.

you have to be delusional if you dont recognize that republicans are first and foremost loyal to the party, much more so than democrats

After all of the lockstep defense of Bill Clinton's corruption, anyone who can say anything like this has to be delusional.

specifically the investigations i was thinking about are phase 2 of the investigation into how pre-war intelligence was used in the run up to the iraq invasion (has been stonewalled for over 2 years), and the investigation into the illegal warrantless nsa-surveillance (feingold only introduced the censure resolution after it was clear the investigation was going nowhere). there may be more that im forgetting though.

Sorry ujedujik, we only get one reality and you ain't playing in it!

I don't think Rand was irritated by the whining, I think he was irritated by the dictatorial nature of the statement. In essence, whats his ass, made a holier than thou statement dismissing Rands rational, and not at all offensive comment concerning the speech she should have given. Instead of addressing the issue of McKinney's criminal behaviour and the easy resolution to the situation without charges, the clintwhit mentioned Randy Cunningham.

I don't believe Rand has a problem with people disagreeing with him, even vociferously and obnoxiously, but rather, he is a rather bright person, and became somewhat disgusted that someone thinks they can win an argument with something akin to "your shoes untied!" instead of engaging in the debate that should exist within the comments section.

Sorry, too much time being reason, I have to watch some p0rn and contribute my fair share to planned parenthood into a dirty sock.

BTW, anyone have any idea why g0ro in any combination is a denied combination of letters in this comment server doohickey majig?