Sue Myrick and the Muslims

You'll find a great piece of writing at Creative Loafing this week about Sue Myrick, a sad excuse for a Congress person if ever there was one. Go read the whole thing. It's excellent.

Sue Myrick delivered a good show last week during her townhall meeting with nearly 200 Charlotte-area Muslims. I don't mean Sue's dog-and-pony show about the humongous, ultra-critical, super-scary imminent threat of domestic terrorism by angry Muslims. No, the show we're referring to was the part where Myrick acted as if she gave a flying damn about what local Muslims thought or said.

Share on Facebook

Rebuttal

Your "sad excuse" and "flying damn" commentary is very impressive. Are liberals ever factual or just sling mud?

Here is another article to read about a Charlotte muslim leader: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=126500

try again

when you've got something more reliable than Worldnetdaily. Talk about never being factual and slinging mud.

Progressives are the true conservatives.

Rebuttual to a Retarded GOP neo-con Tea Bagger

Your "sad excuse" and "flying damn" commentary is very impressive. Are liberals ever factual or just sling mud?* Back Bencher SuperBobCatRepub from Charlotte

Okay BobCat! Where is World Net Daily Birth Cert? Besides in Orange County California Disney World! And stop believing everything Alan Keynes tells you about Jesus being white from the Planet Palin!

What's this about talking

What's this about talking coffee pots?

I'm a moderate Democrat.

The new McCarthy

Myrick is so paranoid I think she actually believes this stuff after years of spreading her fear mongering against one group or another.
She got some attention on HuffPo for her wackiness earlier this week:

Rep. Sue Myrick: A Modern-Day McCarthyite on Islam and the Threat From Domestic Terrorism

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-e-jackson-jr/rep-sue-myrick-r-nc-a...

The Case of the Talking Coffee Pot

When Myrick was on Charlotte city council, she "revealed" more than once that she and her husband had prayed about whether or not she should run for office. They prayed and prayed and, one day, she was by the coffeepot in their advertising agency office when she heard a voice telling her to run. The problem is that she wasn't kidding. She really did take the "voice from the coffeepot" as an omen, ran for office, and the rest is unfortunate Charlotte area history. I wish I was kidding.
Later, she liked to tell the story of when she and hubby were at the beach, trying to decide whether or not she should run for mayor. They went into the dunes, made a makeshift altar, and prayed, and, she says, received an affirmative answer there, too. Again, I wish I was kidding, but this is the kind of lunacy Myrick brings to the table.

I probably shouldn't bring

I probably shouldn't bring this up but......Isn't she the one that had an affair that led to the breakup two marriages? I'm not trying to be judgmental here and I don't question someone's faith but if she is one and the same I'm wondering if this was the first husband or the second one. Did she backslide and find her way back to the church or did her faith begin after the marital vows were broken? I tend to question the sincerity of politicians that appear to use faith as a tool to promote and/or justify their ambitions.

I'm a moderate Democrat.

Well, um, Yeah !

There are many sites that confirm what you are saying.

Specifically:

There have been only a handful of minor scandals involving women in public office in America, and most of them have been due to love affairs, not casual--or commercial--liaisons. In 1989, when Sue Myrick was running for re-election as mayor of Charlotte, N.C., she confessed to having had a relationship with her husband while he was still married to another woman in 1973.

Sometimes, regardless of how sorry a person has acted or has been, they still get elected just because they are not a member of the "other party". Is it not time that changes regardless of party affiliation?