Cynthia McKinney

Kos, Kucinich, and the Overton Window

Bob Fertik — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 13:42:17 -0400

Perhaps someone can help me, because I really don't understand why Kos regularly attacks Rep. Dennis Kucinich as being "loony" or something similar. Here's the latest:

Here's what too many people still don't understand -- there's nothing loony about the netroots. This isn't fertile territory for the McKinneys and Kuciniches of our party. This is fertile territory for the Howard Deans of our party -- sensible, pragmatic progressives who aren't afraid to be Democrats. Why? Because we're the nation. We're not clustered in DC and NYC, we're spread out over all 50 states, and we know better than anyone what it takes to win in our own backyards.

We didn't rally around Webb, Tester, Schweitzer, Trauner, Brown, Massa, Burner and so many other moderate Democrats because they were little Kucinich clones, but because they were perfectly suited for the states and districts they seek to represent. It's that simple. Howard Dean wasn't an anomaly. He was our ideal.

We are not the elites, we are America, and we're situated squarely in its ideological center. We proved it in 2006, and we'll prove it again next week.

Don't get me wrong - I'm a huge fan of Kos on 98% of the issues. (I've mainly differed with him on impeachment, which he consistently opposed to prove Democrats could "govern", ignoring the substantive issues that could only be addressed through impeachment.)

But Kos is making a huge mistake in attacking Kucinich - in terms of raw politics, progressive policy, and even media strategy.

Kos's political mistake is that Kucinich is one of the few Democrats who is able to reach out to voters who stand to the left of the Democratic Party. If we had a parliamentary system like most of the world, these voters would readily join the Green Party because they believe deeply in saving the planet, ending war, and promoting economic and social justice. But because third parties are not viable in the U.S. under current rules, these voters reluctantly support Democrats.

As a sophisticated strategist, Kos understands the Democratic Party needs to be a "big tent" that covers a wide spectrum from Greens to Blue(Dog)s. So why does he want to throw Green-leaning Democrats out of the tent by attacking Kucinich?

Kucinich also appeals anti-corporate supporters of Ralph Nader, to non-fascist libertarians who otherwise support Ron Paul, to supporters of the Marijuana Party, to the numerous followers of popular spiritualists like Marianne Williamson who have no political champions, and even to believers in UFO's. Obviously none of these are large groups, and they don't get much TV time (except on Larry King and the offbeat channels), but in close elections these voters can make a difference, especially in The Great American Heartland.

There is also a practical consequence of throwing Green-leaning Democrats out of our "big tent" - they can produce third-party challenges that can swing close elections to the Republicans. There are at least three such challenges now: against Nancy Pelosi in CA08 (by heroic peace mom Cindy Sheehan), Kathy Dahlkemper in PA03 (by BlueAmerica candidate Steven Porter), and Christine Jennings in FL13 (by 2004 netroots favorite Jan Schneider). Pelosi is unlikely to lose her seat becasue of Sheehan's challenge, but Dahlkemper and Jennings may well lose their challenges because of lost third-party votes.

Beyond raw politics, the case against attacking Kucinich is infinitely stronger in terms of progressives policies.

It's impossible to compile a list of progressives issues on which Kucinich has been the leader - often the only Democrat willing to speak up and say on TV or the House Floor exactly the kinds of things the best progressive bloggers are writing.

Bush's invasion of Iraq - an epic historic disaster
Bush's threatened invasion of Iran - a mega-disaster that would dwarf Iraq
Bush's assault on our Constitutional rights, including warrantless wiretapping
Bush's assault on our election system
Paulson's Plunder - Bush's planned giveaway of $700 billion to banks and the wealthiest Americans
The need for single-payer health care
The need to impeach George Bush and Dick Cheney for their historic crimes

Obviously Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid never address these issues, nor do their lieutenants. But even the most "progressive" Democrats are silent, or at best mumble so quietly they are never heard: Russ Feingold, Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, John Lewis, to name just a few.

When Kucinich fights for these causes, he does so with full command of the facts and with a calm and polished delivery that works in the most hostile forums - including Meet the Press (where Tim Russert attacked Kucinich for saying our invasion was primarily about oil, as of course it was) and FOX News.

Which brings me to the Overton Window - the concept that the only policy options that get taken "seriously" are limited to the center of our political debate. Since Barry Goldwater, conservative Republicans have staked out policy positions as far to the right as possible, and forced the "center" to move their way. We can see the success of that strategy now when a small 3% increase of the marginal tax rate on people making over $250,000 is called "socialism" - and Joe Biden gets attacked for laughing at the absurdity of the claim.

Dennis Kucinich is the only Democrat who stakes out policy positions to the left of the Overton Window. If we want to move the window to the left, we need dozens of Kuciniches all pulling the window in the same direction.

Kos himself points out the need to move our issues from the "loony" fringe to the mainstream:

Ah yes, us loony bloggers, fighting for universal health care, to protect social security, to keep our government from unconstitutionally spying on us, and to promote a sane foreign policy that doesn't unnecessarily cost us blood and treasure. You know, loony things supported by a majority of the (apparently also loony) American people.

By attacking Kucinich, Kos not only undercuts Kucinich's own efforts, but also discourages other Democrats from helping him in what of necessity needs to be a collective effort.

Surely Kos understands this. Like I said at the top, I just don't understand why he keeps doing it.

Update 1: Here are some responses to Kos from Kossacks, all of which are plus rated:

As someone way to the left of Obama, (8+ / 0-) by JSC ltd

I am tired of being stigmatized by having Obama shoved over into my pigeonhole.

Alas, nobody outside Ohio (besides me) seems to appreciate Kucinich.

...

Kos is wrong (9+ / 0-) by Chammy Nooks

I would wager that the majority of people that read this website agree with Kucinich's policies far more than those of the "moderate" Democrats that Kos mentions.

Single-payer healthcare. Clean energy such as solar and wind power, rather than the oxymorons of "clean coal" and "safe nuclear". Withdrawal of U.S. troops from the 100+ countries that they currently occupy. Economic policies that actually aim to eradicate poverty.

The ideological center is not a good place to be. The language makes it sound reasonable, but if there is a spectrum where one extreme wants to kill 100 babies and the other extreme wants to kill zero babies then the reasonable "center" would advocate killing 50 babies. I want no part of the "center".

...

but why? I love kucinich, I don't get it, I (4+ / 0-) by erin r

agree with everything he ever says!

I feel like if he's going to insult Kucinich so indiscriminately then he owes us an explanation. Is it personal?

McCain does not support the troops

by erin r

Update 2: Atrios implicitly addresses Overton:

I think Beltway people on both sides are surprisingly bad at, well, politics. They tend to view things through the concept of the political spectrum as dictated by the Villagers, unaware that people in the rest of the country, aside perhaps from political junkies, don't really see things that way. It isn't actually Cokie Roberts' world.

Even if Obama wins the biggest Presidential landslide since 1964, it won't be Obama's world either because the Overton Window is so far to the right that Obama's place in the spectrum is indistinguishable from "Socialist." The only way to make it Obama's world is to create space on the left through clear and serious people like Kucinich.

Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney's Articles of Impeachment

CactusPat — Sun, 10 Dec 2006 09:06:19 -0500

As her last act as a US Congresswoman, Cynthia McKinney filed articles of impeachment against Geroge W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Condi Rice on Friday December 9th, 2006. Saying in her prepared statement that she was not allowed to make on the House floor, "With a heavy heart and in the deepest spirit of patriotism, I exercise my duty and responsibility to speak truthfully about what is before us...", she formally introduced the articles of impeachment.

The news broke on Matt Pascarella's blog and GNN on Friday evening, quickly spreading to Truthout and the AP wire service. From there it has set the Blogoshere on fire. Here are the Articles of Impeachment filed by Congeresswoman Cynthia McKinney (edited from PDF file) against Bush, Cheney, and Rice... (more)

……………………………
(Original Signature of Member)
109TH CONGRESS
2ND SESSION
H. Res. 1106
Articles of Impeachment against George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, and other officials, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
_____________________________
IN THE HOUSE OF
REPESENTATIVES
DECEMBER 8, 2006
Ms. McKINNEY introduced the following Resolution:
_____________________________
RESOLUTION
Resolved, that George Walker Bush, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following Articles of Impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate: Articles of Impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of all the people of the United States of America, against George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, and other officials, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled that:

ARTICLE I. FAILURE TO PRESERVE, PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION

In violation of the oath of office, which reads: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” George Walker Bush, in his conduct while President of the United States has demonstrated a pattern of abuse of office and of executive privilege, and disregard for the Constitution itself. This conduct includes the following:

Manipulating Intelligence and Lying to Justify War.
In violation of the separation of powers under the Constitution and his subsequent obligation to share intelligence with the Congress, George Walker Bush, while serving as President of the United States of America, in preparing the invasion of Iraq, did withhold intelligence from the Congress, by refusing to provide Congress with the full intelligence picture that he was being given, by redacting information by, for example, removing portions of reports such as the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief, and actively manipulating the intelligence on Iraq’s alleged weapons programs by pressuring the Central Intelligence Agency and other intelligence agencies to provide intelligence such that “the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy” as revealed in the “Downing Street Memo.”

To this end, President George Walker Bush and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld created the Office of Special Plans inside the Pentagon to override existing intelligence reports by providing unreliable evidence that supported the claim that Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction posed an imminent threat to the United States of America. By justifying the invasion of Iraq with false and misleading statements linking Iraq to the attacks of September 11, 2001, and falsely asserting that Iraq had a nuclear weapons program for which it was importing aluminum tubes and uranium, these assertions being either false, or based on “fixed” intelligence, with the intent to misinform the people and their representatives in Congress in order to gain their support for invading Iraq, denying both the people and their representatives in Congress the right to make an informed choice, George Walker Bush, President of the United States, did commit and was guilty of high crimes against the United States of America.

ARTICLE II. ABUSE OF OFFICE AND OF 3 EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE.

In violation of his oath to “faithfully execute the office of President of the United States,” George Walker Bush, in his conduct while President of the United States, has consistently demonstrated disregard for that oath by obstructing and hindering the work of Congressional investigative bodies and by seeking to expand the scope of the powers of his office. This conduct includes the following:

Failure to Uphold Accountability.
In abrogation of his responsibility under the oath of officeto take care that the Laws be faithfully executed, by which he agreed to act in good faith and accept responsibility for the overall conduct of the Executive Branch, a duty vested in his office alone under the Constitution, George Walker Bush, failed to take responsibility for, investigate or discipline those responsible for an ongoing pattern of negligence, incompetence and malfeasance to the detriment of the American people.

Those whom George Walker Bush, as President of the 23 United States of America, has failed to hold to account include but are not limited to the following top-level officials in his administration:

(a) Richard Cheney. In violation of his oath of office to support and defend the Constitution, Richard Cheney, Vice President of the United States of America, played a key role in manipulating intelligence in the interest of promoting the illegal invasion of Iraq by pressuring analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency to “fix” their intelligence estimates of the danger posed by Iraq in relation to weapons of mass destruction, whereby Richard Cheney, Vice President of the United States, did commit and was guilty of high crimes against the United States of America.

(b) Condoleezza Rice, In violation of her Constitutional duty to share and provide accurate and truthful intelligence information with the Congress, as former National Security Advisor to the President, did play a leading role in deceiving Congress and the American public by repeating and propagating false statements concerning Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction program, including false information that the purchase of aluminum tubes demonstrated that Iraq was pursuing a nuclear weapons program, false information that Iraq was seeking to purchase uranium and false information that Iraq sought help in developing a chemical and biological weapons program; whereby Conoleezza Rice, Secretary of State of the United States of America, did commit and was guilty of high misdemeanors against the United States of America.

By neglecting to superintend the conduct of these officials and to hold members of the Executive Branch responsible for their negligence or violations of law, George Walker Bush, President of the United States, did commit and was guilty of high misdemeanors against the United States of America.

Wherefore, by their aforementioned conduct, George Walker Bush, Richard Cheney and Condoleezza Rice warrant impeachment, trial and removal from office.

ARTICLE III. FAILURE TO ENSURE THE LAWS ARE FAITHFULLY EXECUTED

In violation of his duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution of the United States of America to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” George Walker Bush, during his tenure as President of the United States, has violated the letter and spirit of laws and rules of criminal procedure used by civilian and military courts, and has violated or ignored regulatory codes and practices that carry out the law.

This conduct includes the following:

Illegal Domestic Spying.
In violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) [50 USC Chapter 36], George Walker Bush did clandestinely direct the National Security Agency and various other intelligence agencies, in secret and outside the lawful scope of their mandates, for purposes unrelated to any lawful function of his offices, to conduct electronic surveillance of citizens of the United States on U.S. soil without seeking to obtain, before or after, a judicial warrant, thereby subverting the powers of the Congress and the Judiciary by circumventing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) courts established by Congress, whose express purpose is to check such abuses of executive power, provoking the presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to file a complaint and another judge to resign in protest, the said program having been subsequently ruled illegal (ACLU vs. NSA); he has also concealed the existence of this unlawful program of spying on American citizens from the people and all but a few of their representatives in Congress, even resorting to outright public deceit as on 20 April, 2004, when he told an audience in Buffalo, New York: “any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires . . . a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so,” whereby said George Walker Bush, President of the United States, did commit and was guilty of high crimes against the United States of America.

In all of this, George Walker Bush has repeatedly and unapologetically misled the American people and has sought to undermine the system of checks and balances established by the Founding Founders. Wherefore George Walker Bush, by such conduct, and in the interest of saving our Constitution and our democracy from the threat of arbitrary government, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

Representative McKinney Introduces Articles of Impeachment

Chip — Sat, 09 Dec 2006 01:50:23 -0500

Outgoing Atlanta congressional representative Cynthia McKinney just took a historic stand as her last legislative act. She introduced into the House legislation to impeach George W. Bush for violating his oath of office to "faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" by committing high crimes and misdemeanors.

"Article I states that President Bush has failed to preserve, protect and defend the constitution. Specifically cited in this article is the charge that Bush has manipulated intelligence and lied to justify war: “George Walker Bush...in preparing the invasion of Iraq, did withhold intelligence from the Congress, by refusing to provide Congress with the full intelligence picture that he was being given, by redacting information...and actively manipulating the intelligence on Iraq’s alleged weapons programs by pressuring the Central Intelligence Agency and other intelligence agencies.”

This manipulation of intelligence was done, the charge continues, “with the intent to misinform the people and their representatives in Congress in order to gain their support for invading Iraq, denying both the people and their representatives in Congress the right to make an informed choice.”

Article II, “Abuse of office and of executive privilege,” states that President Bush has disregarded his oath of office by “obstructing and hindering the work of Congressional investigative bodies and by seeking to expand the scope of the powers of his office.” The President has “failed to take responsibility for, investigate or discipline those responsible for an ongoing pattern of negligence, incompetence and malfeasance to the detriment of the American people.”

This article continues by indicting Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in their actions to manipulate or “fix” intelligence and mislead the public about Iraq’s weapons programs. Ultimately, this article calls not only for Bush’s impeachment and removal from office but also asks the same actions to be taken against Cheney and Rice.

Article III states that President Bush has failed to “ensure the laws are faithfully executed” and that he has “violated the letter and spirit of laws and rules of criminal procedure used by civilian and military courts, and has violated or ignored regulatory codes and practices that carry out the law.”

Specifically, McKinney cites illegal domestic spying as a result of failing to obtain warrants thereby subverting congress and the judiciary in the process: “...by circumventing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act courts established by Congress, whose express purpose is to check such abuses of executive power, provoking the presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to file a complaint and another judge to resign in protest, the said program having been subsequently ruled illegal; he has also concealed the existence of this unlawful program of spying on American citizens from the people and all but a few of their representatives in Congress, even resorting to outright public deceit.”

The article continues by citing public statements Bush has made that were blatantly contradictory to his policy and actions regarding domestic spying.

While the staff was editing the document, one advisor told me, “As we sat down and worked on this, a pattern became very clear...a pattern to specifically undermine the constitution and establish a unitary presidency.'”

Congresswoman McKinney, the first American woman to introduce articles of impeachment, made the following statement on the House floor.

Mr. Speaker:

I come before this body today as a proud American and as a servant of the American people, sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

Throughout my tenure, I've always tried to speak the truth. It's that commitment that brings me here today.

We have a President who has misgoverned and a Congress that has refused to hold him accountable. It is a grave situation and I believe the stakes for our country are high.

No American is above the law, and if we allow a President to violate, at the most basic and fundamental level, the trust of the people and then continue to govern, without a process for holding him accountable, what does that say about our commitment to the truth? To the Constitution? To our democracy?

The trust of the American people has been broken. And a process must be undertaken to repair this trust. This process must begin with honesty and accountability.

Leading up to our invasion of Iraq, the American people supported this Administration's actions because they believed in our President. They believed he was acting in good faith. They believed that American laws and American values would be respected. That in the weightiness of everything being considered, two values were rock solid: trust and truth.
From mushroom clouds to African yellow cake to aluminum tubes, the American people and this Congress were not presented the facts, but rather were presented a string of untruths, to justify the invasion of Iraq.

President Bush, along with Vice President Cheney and then-National Security Advisor Rice, portrayed to the Congress and to the American people that Iraq represented an imminent threat, culminating with President Bush's claim that Iraq was six months away from developing a nuclear weapon. Having used false fear to buy consent, the President then took our country to war.

This has grave consequences for the health of our democracy, for our standing with our allies, and most of all, for the lives of our men and women in the military and their families--who have been asked to make sacrifices--including the ultimate sacrifice--to keep us safe.
Just as we expect our leaders to be truthful, we expect them to abide by the law and respect our courts and judges. Here again, the President failed the American people.

When President Bush signed an executive order authorizing unlawful spying on American citizens, he circumvented the courts, the law, and he violated the separation of powers provided by the Constitution. Once the program was revealed, he then tried to hide the scope of his offense from the American people by making contradictory, untrue statements.

President George W. Bush has failed to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States; he has failed to ensure that senior members of his administration do the same; and he has betrayed the trust of the American people.

With a heavy heart and in the deepest spirit of patriotism, I exercise my duty and responsibility to speak truthfully about what is before us. To shy away from this responsibility would be easier. But I have not been one to travel the easy road. I believe in this country, and in the power of our democracy. I feel the steely conviction of one who will not let the country I love descend into shame; for the fabric of our democracy is at stake.

Some will call this a partisan vendetta, others will say this is an unimportant distraction to the plans of the incoming Congress. But this is not about political gamesmanship.

I am not willing to put any political party before my principles.
This, instead, is about beginning the long road back to regaining the high standards of truth and democracy upon which our great country was founded.

Mr. Speaker:

Under the standards set by the United States Constitution, President Bush, along with Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of State Rice, should be subject to the process of impeachment, and I have filed H. Res.1106 in the House of Representatives.

To my fellow Americans, as I leave this Congress, it is in your hands to hold your representatives accountable, and to show those with the courage to stand for what is right, that they do not stand alone.

Thank you.

###

Thank YOU, Representative McKinney, for speaking truth to power and for embodying the words of Reverend Martin Luther King:

"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy." -- Martin Luther King Jr., Strength to Love, 1963

McKinney Apologizes - Will Soledad and CNN?

Bob Fertik — Thu, 06 Apr 2006 14:29:56 -0400

Rep. Cynthia McKinney apologized on the House floor today:

"I am sorry that this misunderstanding happened at all, and I regret its escalation and I apologize," she said surrounded by colleagues.

Are you satisfied Soledad O'Brien? Then it's your turn to apologize to McKinney for your outrageous interrogation. Email O'Brien:

http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?2

Update 1: CNN is totally obsessed with this story. After spending 3 minutes on the true scandal of the day - Libby saying Bush authorized the NIE leak - Wolf Blitzer devoted another 10 minutes to McKinney, including new video of a CNN reporter hounding McKinney for a comment and provoking another scuffle with a McKinney aide. Blitzer commented that such scuffles with hounding reporters when are not unusual.

Update 2: FOX's Neil Cavuto says McKinney's apology was insincere. When will Cavuto apologize to George Soros for letting anti-Semite Bill O'Reilly go on his show to accuse Soros of waging "War on Christmas"?

CNN's Soledad O'Brien is a Racist

Bob Fertik — Wed, 05 Apr 2006 07:52:39 -0400

On 3/13/06, I called Soledad O'Brien out as a fascist for trying to portray Russ Feingold as crazy for proposing the censure of George Bush.

Today O'Brien also revealed herself a racist - and she needs to be called out on it and both apologize and make amends.

This morning she did her second interview in a week with Cynthia McKinney on McKinney's scuffle with the Capitol policeman. And from the very first second, it was clear that O'Brien's goal was to play prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner.

If there was a tree handy, O'Brien would have hung McKinney from it.

O'Brien's first interview helped make the minor scuffle into a national "scandal." No doubt egged on by the Republicans who control Congress, the Capitol Police are considering criminal charges so they can turn attention away from Tom DeLay and his corrupt Republican cronies.

Of course, no attorney would let their client undergo pre-trial interrogation on TV. But O'Brien thought she could boss and shame and harass McKinney into making a statement in defiance of her attorneys. Why did O'Brien think she could do that to McKinney?

Because McKinney is a black woman.

That's racism.

I've watched O'Brien nearly every morning for as long as she has been the anchor. She has never gone after a guest the way she went after McKinney.

If O'Brien wants to play Grand Inquisitor, that's fine. But let her start with people who've committed real crimes: like George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Bill Frist, and Tom DeLay.

If O'Brien wants the simple truth, here are some interviews she should do immediately:

George Bush: why exactly did you want war in Iraq and lie to Congress and the American people to start it?
Dick Cheney: why exactly do you support torture?
Donald Rumsfeld: why exactly did you allow chaos and sectarian death squads in Iraq?
Bill Frist: why exactly did you "diagnose" Terry Schiavo by video?
Tom DeLay: why exactly did you corrupt the entire Congress by selling every bill to the highest bidder?

These are the questions that really need answers in America today. If Soledad O'Brien is a journalist, she would ask them. If she's just going to try to destroy the career of an "uppity" black Congresswoman, she's a racist.

Soledad?

Share your thoughts with O'Brien here:

http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?2

Update 1: Joseph Cannon nails it.

So let me get this straight: Dick Cheney shoots a guy, refuses to accompany his victim to the hospital, and refuses to speak to a sheriff or any other outsiders for 15-or-so hours, by which point there is no way to determine objectively whether or not he was shnockered at the time of the incident.

None of which bothers our right-wing friends.

More recently, House member Cynthia McKinney, unrecognized by a Capitol Hill policeman, is grabbed from behind. She whirls around and either slaps the man or pokes him or pushes back; accounts differ. In fact, accounts differ to a suspicious degree: In one version, she whacks him with a cell phone. Sean Hannity says she punched the cop. I'm looking forward to the variant where she takes out her bullwhip and starts tossing ninja stars. In all versions, the bottom line is the same: It was okay for the cop not to recognize her, but unforgivable for her not to have known that the guy grabbing her from behind was a cop.

And that incident, according to our right-wing friends, constitutes an offense to God and man.

Update 2: Will Pit Bull O'Brien take on Rep. Jeanne Schmidt (R-OH), who was just caught lying repeatedly on her resume? How about Rep. Jim Ryun (R-KS), who refuses to explain his sweetheart deal on a Capitol Hill townhouse from Tom DeLay's former Chief of Staff (now soon-to-be-indicted) Ed Buckham?