Dennis Kucinich says he’s insulted. The congressman and long-shot presidential candidate says it’s “an insult to the voters, and the height of cynicism for candidates to refuse to take the public stage and subject themselves to public scrutiny.” The congressman’s fuming because prominent Nevada Democrats, and several presidential candidates, have forced the cancellation of an August presidential candidate debate, sponsored by Fox News. One small problem with the congressman’s attack on politicians who refuse to debate is that Kucinich, himself, has refused to publicly debate any challenger to his seat in years. 

Most recently, Mike Dovilla, Kucinich’s GOP general election foe in 2006, was stood up by the congressman at two separate scheduled debates: First, at the prestigious City Club of Cleveland (where Dovilla debated Kucinich’s empty chair) and then at a major candidates forum, hosted by the League of Women Voters (LWV) at Cuyahoga Community College. Both times, Kucinich claimed “scheduling conflicts” prevented his participation. The previous April, the congressman stood up Barbara Ferris, his 2006 Democratic primary challenger, at another City Club forum. Ferris was so angry that, after leaving the event, she traveled to Kucinich’s Lakewood (Ohio) district office and, in ffull view of a group of veterans and a local TV crew, challenged the congressman to debate. (He refused). And in October 2004, Kucinich failed to show for still another City Club primary debate with Ferris (running then as an independent) and Ed Herman, the GOP challenger. Despite having confirmed his appearance beforehand, at the last minute, he cancelled saying “the people already knows where I stand”. How’s that for arrogance? I could go on but suffice to say, Rep.Kucinich has not debated a single challenger to his congressional seat since he was first elected to Congress in 1996. Talk about Chutspah.

Given his career-long track record of refusing to debate his challengers, Kucinich owes a public apology to the Nevada Democratic leaders, and the presidential candidates, whom he slandered unmercifully. Kucinich’s vicious attack has to be the heighth of hypocrisy and should be condemned by the voters in Ohio’s 10th district as well as his national supporters.

New Yorker,
You want to be safe; you need someone to protect you; your terrified of the big bad “wolf,” you want someone big and tough—-LOL.

You sound like a scared dog, running around with your tail between your legs. Is your paranoia, caused by FOX news, or do you actually believe the White House press releases--you don’t deserve to be protected; your ignorance will never allow you to feel safe—-there will always be a new enemy to attack. 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1800575/posts

A miserable racist like Rudy doesn’t deserve to be president, and we certainly don’t need another crooked administration; Bush and his cronies have put Tony Soprano to shame. 

And isn’t interesting, that the NYC Fire Department hates creepy Rudy: “Considering Rudy Giuliani’s image as the hero of Sept. 11, 2001, and the nation’s ultimate first responder, burnished yet again by the warm reception he received at a firehouse during a recent campaign swing through South Carolina, it might surprise many of his supporters to learn that the country’s largest union of firefighters hates “America’s mayor” with a passion.”

So “New Yorker,” maybe you need to be protected by a slime ball like Rudy Giuliani; but I would feel safer with a President who has REAL backbone and some vestiges of decency.

Love the way democrats go after the private personal affairs of a candidate when they see how popular he is. You sound just like the right wing Republicans who went after President Clinton for his acts of sexual misconduct. Rudy has done great things as New York City’s mayor for 8 years. He showed great leadership on 9/11 when the rest of the politicians in this country were in total confusion.
Yes, Rudy deserves to be President. His leadership is necessary to keep the United States safe against terrorism. Do you really think Hillary can protect us? LOL !  Rudy is also a liberal/moderate Republican and has no objections to women retaining the right of choice in the case of abortion. This of course will give him great difficulty with the Conservative Republican voters.
Bottim line, Rudy vs Hillary, no contest as to who the United State’s foreign enemies fear most and would hate to see get elected.
Need I say more for Rudy to become our next President ?

Frank, I just hate to burst your bubble, but here’s some more info about your friend Rudy:

Giuliani is a comic book fantasy character created by MSM.  On September 10, 2001 is popularity was zero—-his second wife, Donna Hanover, was about to throw him out of Gracie Mansion; because he kept bringing his girlfriend Judi (now is third wife) to the Mayor’s residence.

Most ethnic groups in NYC hated him—-they considered him a racist fascist. http://www.openair.org/alerts/artist/nyhitl2.html

MSM’S super-fantasy figure was considered a creepy mayor who did not have a “pot to piss in,” but he became a main benefactor of 9/11—-isn’t it interesting how a penniless major, who didn’t supply his policemen and fireman with working radios—-hampering their interdepartmental communications, became a multi-millionaire:  “The only thing Giuliani has run since leaving office is the booming franchise of Giuliani. He has written a huge best seller and made a small fortune giving speeches all over the world. He has run a lucrative consulting business, one that enables him to fly down to a place like Mexico City for a few days, explain to them how they can reduce the crime rate and then he pockets big change.” http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1776815/posts

“Witnesses who escaped from the tower tell a vastly different story than Mr. Giuliani. They say that in the north tower’s final 15 minutes, only a handful of civilian office workers were still in the bottom 44 floors of the building, perhaps no more than two or three dozen. Many of the firefighters who remained in the towers were between the 19th and 37th floors, having made slow progress up the stairs in their heavy gear.
It is clear, witnesses said, that even after the south tower collapsed, many, if not most, of the firefighters had no idea that they were in dire peril, or that it was time for them to leave. In contrast, police officers received strong guidance from their commanders to get out of the building, the commission reported, thanks in large part to the information sent to the ground by police helicopters.”

Polly, the similiarities to Giuliani end with “I have failed at two marriages”. Given the success Giuliani’s police policies had on crime reduction in New York, which significantly beat the national crime reduction trend, I don’t think most New Yorkers would call his tenure a “wash”, as that improvement alone benefited all New Yorkers (except maybe the criminals).

And Kucinich? According to Wikipedia: “Melvin G. Holli in consultation with a panel of experts, placed Kucinich among the ten worst big-city mayors of all time for reasons of temperament and performance in the book, Best and Worst of the Big-City Leaders 1820-1993 “

Why has Truthdig.com kept this advertisement for a fringe candidate up for 2 1/2 months?  Kucinch has a) no chance (has an incumbent Congressman ever been elected President?) b) a spotty resume c)public perception is that he’s a bit of a nut. d) He’s never shown himself to be an effective congressman or mayor. His colleagues won’t give him any positions of control, which means he cannot negotiate the currents and eddies of politics and power, even in the Democratic Party.

For all the Naderite-types who believed Ralph when he said there wasn’t a dime’s worth of difference between Bush and Gore, we now see there was a Constitution’s difference between them.

I would LOVE to see Gore sit on the sidelines for several months, then, after it gets bloody, come in as the candidate to unify ALL Democrats and Bush-haters

“My tenure as a mayor was pretty much a wash for everybody and I have failed at two marriages. So my resume isn’t that great.”

Frank,
Are you sure you are not posting a comment about Rudy Giuliani?

(an imaginary conversation with Dennis Kucinich):

Me: Dennis, why are you running for President?

Kucinich: Well, Frankly, what else can I do? This congressional gig is getting old and I’m not really going anywhere in congress.  I don’t hold any chairs and I’m seen as more of a fringe oddity than a leader in my party. Outside of politics, I have no job experience in the real world so a significant corporate career is unlikely. My tenure as a mayor was pretty much a wash for everybody and I have failed at two marriages. So my resume isn’t that great.  I guess I may as well run for President.

Me: I see…

I guess liberals would rather elect a candidate who has been pre-screened and approved by corporate and foreign interests. The same interests that got us into the Iraq war.
Personally I would rather vote for the one who is not a puppet of these interests which is why I support Kucinich.
I put my money where my mouth is and sent $100 to him through http://www.kucinich.us.
You should too. Send him something, whatever you can, even if it’s not much.
I do not work for his campaign. I just want to bring democracy back to America.
Rabbit

Two of the more celebrated speakers at the recent anti-Iraq war rally in Washington were Jane Fonda and Dennis Kucinich. Ms. Fonda remarked that it was the first antiwar rally that she had participated in in 34 years. From 1969 to 1973, Fonda was one of the highest profile activista against Richard Nixon and the Vietnam war. She was also an advocate for native-american rights as well as a supporter of Huey Newton and the Black Panthers.

Dennis Kucinich’s activities 34 years ago were dramatically different than Fonda’s: In the early 70’s, Kucinich was candidate a Cleveland city council seat who resorted to some pretty racist tactics against his opponents. Kucinch handed out campaign literature featuring a photo of Black City Council President George Forbes leering at one of Kucinch’s white female opponents with the title “What’s Going on Here?” As the Cleveland Plain Dealer describes, “It showed a lascivious-looking picture of Forbes gazing at a picture of Mary Rose Oakar (who was later elected to the U.S. Congress), who is white”. According to accounts in the Plain Dealer, it said Oakar was a pawn of Forbes and elements “east of the river,” a reference to Blacks and the racial dividing line of the Cuyahoga River.” In fact, Kucinich regularly attacked white politicians who supported Blacks in office as “puppets.” In 1974, Kucinich criticized political rival Ron Mott for voting in favor of instituting Martin Luther King Jr. Day as a legal holiday.

This may be a shock to Kucinich’s current supporters but, sadly, it’s very true. It should also be noted that Kucinich, although a very controversial public official, never publicly expressed any dissatisfaction or anger about the Vietnam war in those days. The war, apparently, was not on his radar screen in those days because he obtained a medical deferment for an alleged heart condition and was classified 4-F (unfit for military service). Funny, that heart condition never seemed to affect his ability to run for office TWENTY-FOUR different times in a 34 year political career.

Dennis is a good candidate, but he’s about to be truly destroyed in a nasty way by corporate media and the extreme conserative south.

I’m voting for wesley clark, sorry dennis, your good, but just not that great.

I think the only way Kucinich or any other good candidate will ever win an election is if people stop turning to the corporate media.

It’s a matter of personal responsibility. Nobody forces us to swallow the lies of Faux News or any other supposedly ‘fair and balanced’ media corporation. We must turn our heads away from the corporate media and instead get our news from alternative media, such as blogs. The corporate media can say whatever they want, but if people stop listening and more importantly stop voting based on what they say it doesn’t matter.

Instead of dwelling on the past we should look toward the future and steering this country in a better direction, not towards war.  We should let our representatives know that we care about such issues as global poverty and the Millenium Goals one, of which is to eliminate global poverty by 2015.  According to the Borgen Project only $19 billion is needed to feed the rest of the world for the year.

Kucinich would make a wonderful president.

But his programs would take money away from the following industries:  big pharma, military, oil, auto, insurance, banking, and food, all of which is damned well justified.

But you would see those industries tell the media owners:  “You give this man one ounce of good publicity, and you’ll lose our advertising dollars.”

Now can you see the NY Times, the Post, CNN, Time, LA Times, NBC, CBS, Fox, etc., suddenly putting the future of this country before their profits, and supporting Dennis Kucinich?

They’ll destroy Kucinich overnight, just as they did Howard Dean.  We’ll be reminded of who controls this “democracy”.

It would be nice to have SOME candidate bring up the issue of restoring those lost basic Constitutional Rights that have been shoved out of the way and under the carpet. Pretending they aren’t gone doesn’t bring them back.

I’ll continue to support Kucinich anyway ...

I figure I’ll learn to spell his name.

I’m very glad to see you’re getting in the race Dennis! Now, how do we win this thing? I assume one step at a time. If the corporate media won’t give you fair air time then do what Dean did and use the internet. After all the people who are really interested don’t listen to them much anyway. Also left wing radio is a national stage. I realize you don’t want to belittle yourself by attacking your competition but in regards to Iraq for example Hillary has been the flip flopper. Edwards reminds me of Damien on the omen. Barack is a corporatist, and backed by Oprah. That’s scary. Anyway, good luck you have my total support!

Kellina—-your comments are insightful and as you said idealistic—-hoping to find honesty in politics, is like believing in Immaculate Conception, well, maybe it does occur if we count In Vitro Fertilization.

As long as we are being idealistic, I say let’s get someone like Cynthia McKinney to run for the Presidency. She took a stand with her questions about the gov’t’s role in 9/11 (and got crucified for it). I admire her greatly. I was so sad that she lost in the ‘06 primary—she keeps getting defeated by a republican machine campaigning for republicans to “jump the line” and vote, in the democratic primary, for “anybody but McKinney.” The district is too full of democrats for the republicans to beat her fairly, so they do dirty tricks. See “American Blackout” (google video).

Max Cleland is terrific, too; he was on the “Omission Commission” but resigned when he realized that the report would be a white-wash.

We need a third party; I agree. In general, the repubs and dems are just alike. I think the previous comments have it nailed.

Stonefruit’s (#45682) given me an idea (which probably many of you have thought of- and rejected ) that, to obtain those measly 5% of votes to qualify for the financial support, we only need to convince a very known personality to head our movement.
How about Jimmy Carter, who recently, has practically been ex-communicated from the Party by Nancy Pelosi because of his book? He is entitled by the Constitution to have another go at the Presidency.
The hell, we have all the winning issues at our hands,our insane wars of agression, our budding fascist police state, the subjugation to AIPAC, our torture culture, our passion for rendition and lawlessness etc
If we dont saddle our candidate with the hyper-progressive relics and declare a moratorium on gay marriages, domestic violence,racism,child abuse, school violence etc, we might win much more than 5% What on earth is wrong in claiming that certain problems are not so urgent (or are endemic) compared with those which are imminently menacing the existance of our republic.(I am sure that Nader lost lots of votes looking too cute to be believed)
Bismark once said that some problems should be left for the next generations to be solved lest they die of boredom.

One possible way allowing third parties to get a shoe in, is Instant Runoff Voting. Attempting to play this card this late in the game may seem futile, but what doesn’t after two Bush terms.

Naturally, both Democrats and Republicans hate any hint of instant runoff voting. Both parties, which are of course the same party, loathe any concept that threatens their self serving death grip on the American experiment.

Feeling more comfortable sticking our heads in the sand at this point is understandable. But working for and spreading the word about instant runoff voting might feel like a productive way to pass time.

http://www.calirv.org/

“I can count on one hand the politicians I truly respect and admire in the House and Senate (too bad they murdered Wellstone), those who are right on almost all of the issues and who aren’t whores to the transnational kleptocracy.”

Stonefruit,
An excellent analysis—-but is multiple-parties the answer or is it campaign reform—-if all candidates received THE SAME FUNDING and were not compelled to be harlots to big business, we would see diversity and an assortment of differing voices.  And perhaps, if MSM interrupted their Prozacian programs and showed a series of serious debates, the public might be become politicized.

But most importantly of all, as you pointed out, if an honest politician manages to circumvent a system endemic with corruption or even “reformed” corruption, he/she might very well land up like Wellstone.

Kucinich is a wise, compassionate, fully-evolved human being who says everything I could ever dream a politician would say.  I can count on one hand the politicians I truly respect and admire in the House and Senate (too bad they murdered Wellstone), those who are right on almost all of the issues and who aren’t whores to the transnational kleptocracy.  He is one of them.

Here’s the double-bind though.  Only the “major parties” (i.e. the two wings of the Money party) have the funding, personnel, organizational strength and access to the Media Echo Chamber to put people in the white house.  However, ever since Clinton destroyed the last vestigial traces of difference between the democrats and the republicans, the democratic party has proven itself beyond all shadow of a doubt to be the tool of opportunistic, poll-driven hacks with unconditional fealty to ruthless, blood-soaked, never-ending Israeli apartheid and no appetite whatsoever for defending the classic ideals of democracy (or even their own party) or challenging the status quo of corporate supremacy, perpetual war, the wholesale evisceration of the constitution, systematic criminality as routine government, an economy teetering on the brink of collapse, a bankrupt federal government, and the relentless devastation of the environment.  They have become Republican lite, but with legal abortions and a few meager morsels set out in an extremely modest “buffet of poll-tested social programs sure to please Democratic Party interest groups while not offending too many other Americans.”

The American experiment with democracy is all but over and the most pressing item on the “democratic agenda” is adding a few dimes an hour to the minimum wage?!

Clearly, the party is beyond redemption.  Therefore, any attempt for a decent human being to seek the presidential nomination through it is utterly pointless, especially as the media simulacrasphere, as the marketing arm of The Powers That Be, will never allow the appointment of any president willing to challenge the ongoing rapine of the world by those Powers. 

Kucinich is a dear, dear fellow but either hopelessly naive about the power of his ideas to move the party towards them and therefore to stupid to deserve any votes or (whether he would admit it to himself or not) a full-blown stalking horse to keep the most sane, intelligent, compassionate faction of the democrats (i.e. the “progressives” and the “anti-war wing") ineffectually embedded in a party that cares not a whit about them and therefore he is to wily and/or deluded to deserve any votes.

And none of us who supported him with such intense enthusiasm in 2004 forget how quickly and effortlessly he rolled over into the hateful, insipid, disgusting “anybody but Bush” camp and lined up dutifully behind the Skull and Bone warmongering Kerry, asking nothing at all for his support - and receiving it in abundance.

I fully agree with comment #45037 by Peter RV “If his loyalty to the Party is more important to him than to the Country, he can forget my support.”

I campaigned for the man in 2004 but unless he bolts from the party, he can kiss my support goodbye. 

In this I agree with, of all people, the Chimp-in-Chief, the Unitary Decider himself, the man who hears voices in his head telling him to kill 600,000 Iraqis, George W. Bush: “Fool me once, shame on - shame on you. [Pause.] Fool me - you can’t get fooled again.”

All we need is for a party to get 5% of the vote and then they get $12 million for the next presidential election.  Then maybe we can have what many actually functioning democracies enjoy - multiple parties.

Kucinich has been my hero of government for years and a voice of reason crying in the wilderness.  Go Dennis!!!  I will gladly campaign for u.  Add John Edwards to the list as VP and the american people are the winners.  It’s time someone kicked the little emperor and the “crazies” right out on their a$$es.  God speed Dennis.

What a fun website and what a fun discussion about Dennis Kucinich. So much energy spent running down Kucinich would seem better spent on thugs currently in charge of both political parties. Of course he doesn’t stand a chance. What’s that got to do with it? At least the guy stands out a little bit. He deserves some credit for that.

If all the inner workings and vote stealing somehow fumbled and did allow Kucinich to be elected, I’d want to be the beneficiary of his life insurance policy.

But we don’t have to worry about that. The last time Mr. Kucinich ran for president he was universally and judiciously ignored. Cleverly, the media didn’t spend time criticizing him or calling him names. The media was loathe to even mention the name Kucinich. Never before have I seen an orchestrated back turning and ignoring so well pulled off. It was as if there was no such thing as a Dennis Kucinich.

The least likely to win candidates and those with little or nothing to say, were given vastly more air time and credence than the (not really even their) Dennis Kucinich. But being ignored to death is better than being put to death, which is what would happen in short order, if he ever did get elected.

Unless Kucinich is willing and able to thwart the pro-Israel fanatics who are determined to keep dragging into self-destructive wars for Israel’s benefit, he will be ineffective.

He has shown no such willingness.

I’d say we’re pretty much doomed as a country. Our tombstone will read “Here lies the corpse of the USA - committed suicide for Israel (see next grave)”.

Kucinich would certainly be an enormous improvement over all Democratic candidates but since he will never be the Party’s candidate (whom are we kidding?),it is legitimate to ask him what are going to be his post-convention intentions.
Is he going to pull Howard Dean spectacle and field his anti-war followers behind the official pro-war candidate, acting as a Trojan Horse in the anti-war camp? Or, is he going to run as an independent? He has to give a clear answer to these alternatives before I would consider rooting for him.
Democratic and Republican parties have reached an unprecedented level of moral bankruptcy that I can’t possibly imagine voting for either of them, ever again.
If his loyalty to the Party is more important to him than to the Country, he can forget my
support.

This is old news now…

Frank, your so called “viable candidates” are funded, picked and chosen by broad spectrum of rich and powerful special interests. Take your pick, middle and lower classes would end up losers.

If you want substance and what’s good for America, go for under funded candidates including Kucinich. These candidates are not liable and have no obligations to the rich and powerful.

Mainstream media can’t be trusted. They are the voice of rich and powerful. They have no choice. Their sources of income come from corporate advertising expenditure. They had to do what they are told.

Kucinich is an absolute zero as a presidential candidate. Anyone who thinks otherwise is hopelessly naive and out of touch.

I wish Truthdig would stop wasting page space on him and cover some viable candidates for 2008.

Kucinich stands for the highest ideals of the human condition—non-violent activism in favor of human dignity and fundamental civil rights.

Supporting these ideals in a candidacy is dismissed as impractical or horse-manure or a rat-hole of funds or impossible without changes in campaign finance laws, but, is it better, then, to tolerate or forgive slavery, the killing fields of Iraq, starvation and homelessness? 

Is that more worthy because it’s perceived as more practical, easier?

Is money better spent supporting a candidate who is willing to compromise on a few more thousand lives lost in Iraq and few more children sold in slavery and a few more years of genocide in Darfur ad elsewere and few more hate crimes and violence in the US against gays, blacks, muslims and women?

Is compromise of our best ideals a value we look to in our leaders?  Is that really who we want to reward with our votes and our dollars?

The measure of what’s achievable is what has been accomplished in the past.  Let’s strive ruthlessly for the highest ideals—doggedly fight to create a world that works for everyone—and perhaps we will accomplish more than we might dare hope.  In the process we may redefine our measure of what’s achievable.

Child Slavery Threat To Justice

This was a very interesting article I found on The Conservative Voice. Do you think slave labor should be a moral issue in trade deals?

TCV-In the US, slavery was outlawed at the national level in 1865. “Oppressive child labor” was outlawed at the US national level in 1938. Yet child labor persists around the world as national and multinational companies seek lower labor costs and greater profits. Adult consumers around the world benefit with cheap goods made with child labor.

Will worldwide morality over this issue become so great that all countries will banish child labor forever as they did the once prevalent black slavery? Or will the benefits that accrue to consumers and corporations by child labor prevail? Will economics trump morality or not? Stanly asked. Read the rest of this entry »

Until there is public financing, Kucinich doesn’t have a chance—-the public’s superficial analysis of a candidate is dependent on the campaigners appearance more than their intellect i.e., tall, attractive and of course male, all the attributes that will never portend a successful presidency.

Let me see if I got this right. Spinoza says:

1) “The only thing that makes Kucinich great is his pacifist platform.

2) “The point is that Kucinich is intellectually correct.

3) “We have to fight liberal scum and I don’t think Kucinich is the person to do it.

4) “[W]e should not worry too much about elections and worry about fighting fascism by any means necessary.  Get guns and get bombs.  FIGHT FASCISM.”

I think I got that right. Didn’t I get that right? I’m wondering if I got that right. Somebody help me here: Did I get that right? I believe I did.

The only thing that makes Kucinich great is his pacifist platform. It is people like Mr. Montague that makes me despair for the human race.

The point is that Kucinich is intellectually correct. Only a pro-active world wide peace campaign can end war mongering and capitalist imperialism.

We have to fight liberal scum and I don’t think Kucinich is the person to do it. He is too wedded to the Democrat Party. I think Ralph Nader (or any Green candidate would be better at it.

But in the near term only reactionaries can win in our anti-democratic political system.  Therefore we should not worry too much about elections and worry about fighting fascism by any means necessary.  Get guns and get bombs.  FIGHT FASCISM.

Kucinich will never get anywhere spreading horse manure like this:

“The third imperative I’ll discuss in this campaign is the imperative of peace. There are those who believe that war is inevitable. A belief in the inevitability of war makes war a self-fulfilling prophecy. We need to be convinced in our innate capability to create structures for peace in our society. We need to be convinced of our potential as a nation to make nonviolence an operating principle in our society. This is the motivating reason behind a Cabinet-level Department of Peace, which addresses directly, in a practical way, the challenge of domestic violence, spousal abuse, child abuse, violence in the school, racial violence, violence against gays, community relations disputes.”

He’ll be lucky just to get elected. If he’s able to go forward from that point “to create a universal, single-payer . . . healthcare system, [develop] . . . policies of environmental sustainability, [and] develop advanced technologies for [clean] alternative energy,” he will have accomplished more than any U.S. president since Franklin D. Roosevelt. Those are the points he should be pushing, and pushing hard.

To go on from there and start spouting all that namby-pamby, pie-in-the-sky, utopian bullshit—he’s just handing guys like Rush Limbaugh clubs to beat him with. At this point in the race, I’d say Kucinich needs to shut the hell up until he finds someone competent to manage his mouth for him. And (because what he’s already said will surely come back to haunt him) it may already be too late for shut the hell up.

I don’t doubt his principles. I’m convinced he’s a good person. But I used to think he also had some brains. . . .

Kucinich for President. Ross Perot as his running mate. What a daily double that would be!

December 22, 2006

Where Was He When It Mattered?
Kucinich: Maverick or Stalking Horse?
By RAHUL MAHAJAN

Winter approaches and a young politician’s fancy turns to thoughts of the 2008 presidential campaign. Among the announced candidates is antiwar favorite Dennis Kucinich.

I have nothing against Kucinich. He’s one of the most progressive Congresspeople and a genuinely decent, honest person who seems to have no trace of the personal corruption so endemic to politicians. Overall, his values and political stances seem highly compatible with the transformative left agenda that so many believe in quietly.

I disagree with him on some issues. On trade, I want a fair international order with binding rules that apply to everybody ­ rules that embody values very different from those in the WTO ­ while Kucinich wants an essentially anarchic world order where the United States strong-arms other countries through bilateral trade pacts. A position he shares with George W. Bush—back when Bush had positions on issues other than “freedom.”

To be fair, Bush wants to impose better conditions for U.S. corporations and for militaristic U.S. imperialism on weaker countries, whereas Kucinich merely wants to impose “social clauses” that are protectionist in effect ­ which is, of course, the kind of “humanitarian imperialism” that Kucinich resolutely opposes in the military sphere. He also doesn’t seem to understand that this is impossible ­ the United States, beholden as it is to corporate interests and to its privileged position in the world order, cannot possibly be in the vanguard on this issue. Look to Venezuela, the G21, Mercosur, anywhere except the United States.

I also task him for not voting against the absurd congressional resolution blindly supporting Israel’s Lebanon war, whose avowed target was the civilian political supporters of Hizbullah ­ he voted “present,” a cowardly act for someone who wants to be a leader of the left.

Though these are important defects, Kucinich is in general very good, and, based solely on the issues, worthy of support.

Even so, if you are considering supporting him, I want to caution you.

Given the conservative-nationalistic populist refoundation of the Democratic Party, most likely Kucinich will stand out as the only even slightly anti-militarist and anti-imperialist Democratic candidate. Short of a run by Nader, Bill Moyers, or someone like that, he’ll probably also be the only worthy candidate with any public recognition.

Still, despite numerous fatuous proclamations of his, there’s absolutely no way he will win or even make a respectable showing, and so one must consider what is to be gained from supporting him.

Last time, his campaign spent $11 million—$11 million of activist money poured down a rat-hole, in my opinion, along with a great deal of time, effort, and enthusiasm.

His campaign was intellectually deficient on foreign policy, a crippling fault. His talks were long on platitudes about peace, but short on the specifics about real issues that might have spread the left message beyond the choir. So ignorant was he regarding the U.S.-backed coup against Aristide that, in a televised debate, he said what the U.S. was doing was good, but it needed to do more ­ it was left to John Kerry, oddly, to expose the extent of the Bush administration’s animus toward Aristide.

Although Kucinich’s “position” on Iraq was fine, he had very little to say about it and avoided the issue in favor of expansive visions on social programs that couldn’t possibly make any difference in a political campaign defined by Iraq.

MORE:

http://www.counterpunch.org/mahajan12222006.html

We all know that Kucinich doesn’t have a shot running for president in a political system that requires you to be a high priced hooker—-how much money must a politician possess to run a successful presidential campaign, how many CEOS must a politician satisfy, in order for the cabal to feel comfortable—-I guess we have to ask Hilary and BO.

Thanks very much, TAO Walker, for some very solid analysis and honest speaking about what is needed if we really and truly ever expect to have PEACE.

And the question of “prosperity” continues to be the red herring of “economists,” particularly those who are apologists for a system of capitalistic consumerist materialism.  It is quite clear that such a consumerist-materialist economy cannot survive, as it is causing us to deplete the resources of our planet and create gigantic dumps of the end products of consumerist-materialist action: trash, scrap plastic/metal/rubber, nuclear waste, mining tipple, sewage sludge.

Will most Americans be able or willing to give up their 10 mpg SUV, their overlarge faux chateaux that waste energy and building materials and cooling/heating, their overpriced clothing that was made at inhumanly cheap cost through virtual slave labor?

People don’t want to look at what their lives create.  Among all the people I know, I can count only a handful of us who live with a conscious effort to minimize our footprint on this planet.  And we’re not the ones who need convincing.  So how does the message get written, how does it get spread?

more things to consider:

real campaign-finance reform

ending NAFTA

making corporations pay their fair share of taxes: no more registering as a company in the Caymans but really operating in N.J., for example.

0) Restore the Bill of Rights.

1) End the Iraq War. Now. Period.

2) Initiate inquiry into why the war was started, prosecute those responsible for lying to get us into war, and for wartime atrocities.

3) Reinstate recognition of the Geneva conventions.

4) Conduct a genuine investigation of the events of 9/11.

5) End lobbying as we know it.

6) End Corporate welfare.

7) End lobbying by other countries meddling in our domestic and foreign policy (e.g., Britain and Israel).

8) Make reparations for the wounded and dead on all sides of the Iraq war. Rebuild Iraq.

9) Rescind those tax breaks for the wealthy.

10) Do away with income tax altogether—just tax consumption on luxury items. (This believe it or not will be enough, combined with us no longer having to pay the Federal Reserve interest on any new National Debt.)

I am not listing anything in order, necessarily, and I’m sure I left a lot out. In fact, I know almost nothing about how to run a gov’t and I’m really talking out of my ass. But I want a real conversation started about what it would take to turn things around. Not just from the damage done by presidents in the last two or three decades, but going all the way back to Wilson.

I am really pleased to hear that Mr. Kucinich will once again bring his intelligence and vision to the national stage for a run for the Presidency.My wife and I agreed that he was obviously the most informed and positive of ALL the candidates in 2004.His candidacy in 2008 will raise the level of the debate on every topic.We can only hope that the American electorate will carefully listen to the ONLY candidate who is unafraid to challenge BOTH parties to actually do what they were elected to do.Unselfishly SERVE their employers;the American people!

Conclusion to comment in response to Darya Calliha (#43201)

So already the material “prosperity” Mr. Kucinich wishes for must, at the very least, be deferred indefinitely, pending payment of just the moral and ethical component of the country’s colossal obligations.  This doesn’t even begin to touch the tens of trillions of dollars in public and private red ink that there aren’t even sufficient artifactual assets in the nation’s entire inventory to cover, when those IOUs are called in.
For a people as mired in debt as Americans are, even to daydream about prosperity betrays a pretty serious disconnect from the harsh realities of the capitalist system.  A nation of perpetual wage-and-debt slaves, a condition into which Americans have been tricked and sold (by both their homegrown privateering predator class and many of their duly-elected but seduced and suborned ‘public servants’), are not even remotely in-control of their own economic destiny.  How, exactly, does Mr. Kucinich propose to work around that inescapable fact so that he might then show the way to solvency and an equitable sharing among themselves of Americans’ necessarily much-reduced share of the world’s goods.
Simply chanting the “Peace and Prosperity” mantra is not a solution to this Gordian Knot of interlinked “problem sets.” And it wasn’t, if memory serves, the Sword of Damocles, hanging by a thread over everybody’s head, that Alexander used to cut through the prototype.  So if brute force won’t serve here, a candidate offering to address the situation better have, and be able to spell-out in plain language, an alternative approach.  What exactly, it seems both fair and necessary to ask, is Dennis Kucinich’s?
The other notion in Darya Calliha’s comment that gives cause to pause and wonder is the Kucinich potential to actually pose “....a threat to the very sinister powers that be.” (As a ‘southpaw’ myself, and the father of a daughter who is,too, this is not a very reassuring choice of adjective....but let that go for now.) Along with that idea goes the suggestion that candidate Kucinich is only exhibiting a serpentine wisdom in dissembling about his plans, if any, for dealing (gently?) with those “powers.”
Some of us surviving primitive savages have been watching for quite awhile now how the global gangsters run their global wrecking-and-killing machine.  These practiced con-artists probably aren’t going to be that easily fooled.  If Dennis Kucinich was seen as a threat to their material self-interests he’d’ve been neutralized already.  Ironically, if he isn’t that kind of threat to them, he’s really not much good to himself or the rest of you, either.
This is sure a tough one alright.  HokaHey!

Darya Calliha (#43201) offers an obviously sincere and, in some of its particulars, even compelling case for supporting the presidential campaign of Dennis Kucinich.  Lots of others here do that as well, and the strong undertone in many of their comments, of a recognition that playing the political “percentages” is a luxury Americans can no longer afford (Considering where it’s got ‘em today, it is clearly a gamble they never should’ve taken to begin with.), may bode well for what will certainly be portrayed as a “maverick” candidacy, especially if significant numbers of the populace respond positively to the Ohio congressman’s populist ‘progressive’ appeal.
A couple of things in Darya Calliha’s comments, though, strike this ol’ Indian as inconsistent with the actual condition America’s condition is in today, and don’t bode so well, either, for her hopeful (possibly naive) expectation of getting some relief if the Kucinich program were, against all odds, somehow put into effect.  The first of these is the real-world prospects for “.....peace and prosperity.”
“Peace will come,” as Bob Dylan sings in one of his more poignant anthems.  The question is:  How does it get here?  Probably it won’t be realized by making it a plank in a party platform.  After all, it invariably gets that kind of lip-service every four years already.  It cannot come about at all, as so many fine people have observed, apart from justice.  Justice requires righting wrongs done to others.....to the satisfaction of those wronged.  The American nation has a big bill to pay in that regard, both here on Turtle Island and all around the world.  Getting free of this debt will mean significant, tangible reductions in the amount of the world’s goods disposed of by all Americans.  This is going to be extremely difficult and painful, maybe virtually impossible, for many of you.  Will you muster the resolve to pay the price of peace?

(To be concluded in a subsequent comment)

Dear Folks,
After reading all of your comments, I am encouraged to know that there are so many intelligent and thoughtful Americans out there.  It’s easy to forget.  And, though there is considerable disagreement over Kucinich’s candidacy, the most compelling criticisms involve his lack of a solid position on righting the wrongs of the Bush administration (911, war crimes, etc) by holding the guilty accountable. 
I wrote to Dennis during the 2004 campaign about the need for our country to seek truth and atonement before we can move forward.  He placed a personal phone call to me to thank me, and we spoke about the contents of my letter.  Because of this conversation, I truly believe that there is far more to this man than is presented publicly, and that he is very savvy and well aware of the need to bring this country to truth and justice.  I have to believe that his current strategy is to focus first and foremost on a positive message of peace and prosperity.  I don’t necessarily agree, because it’s clear his campaign will lose the interest of some very good people, but I also can’t help but wonder if he is not also wise enough to understand the real danger to his life should he be “perceived” as a threat to the very sinister powers that be. 
Dennis seems to be a man for whom the phrase “wise as serpent and gentle as dove” applies perfectly. 
I hope this true, and hope against hope I will support him again in 2008.

We need Dennis Kucinich in this race, period.  And if a candidate could win based on his or her positions on issues, Mr. Kucinich would be the next POTUS.  But regardless of who wins, Mr. K’s voice belongs on the national stage speaking unabashed, insightful truth to voters.  This is the one arena in which the media has no choice but to listen to and relay what Mr. Kucinich is saying.

If you are serious about running for President I hope you will tell the people the truth about Emperor Bush.  He lied us into the Iraq war without a plan to win or get out so that he could have an ongoing war to give him the clout to get the big tax cuts and other benefits for the super rich and to protect them for as long a possible which meant he had to get reelected.  Why did he do this?  He did it because he has been controlled by the super rich ever since he learned that they would take care of him if he took care of them.  He expects to get really wealthy after leaving office with benefits like the Bin Laden family and others gave him after he drove his oil companies into the ground.  They gave him the interest in the Texas Rangers to be their front man and he has been that every since.
Why does he oppose stem cell research?  Because the super rich that own the drug companies and hospitals and insurance companies would lose Billions if cures for diabetes and other such illnesses were found.
If you look behind every thing Bush pushes you will find it benefits the super rich whom he expects to pay him back when he is out of office.

“When Dennis starts talking about the CIA, FBI and DEA being at the top of the U.S. drug pyramid and creating huge amounts of money for clandestine operations and secret, private armies, I’ll start listening.”

If this is the case and knowing that Afghanistan is the drug capitol of the world--these agencies must have a ton of secret cash.

When Dennis starts talking about 9/11 and prosecuting the actual criminals that perpetrated it, I’ll start listening.  We do know who they are and they don’t live in Saudi Arabia.

When Dennis starts talking about the CIA, FBI and DEA being at the top of the U.S. drug pyramid and creating huge amounts of money for clandestine operations and secret, private armies, I’ll start listening.

When Dennis starts talking about the Insurance industry and how it’s controlling the aftermath of Katrina in conspiracy w/the Bush administration, ruining the lives of thousands of children living in virtual concentration camps, then I’ll start listening.

Otherwise, it’s just more of the same…

Hey, Dennis!  You want Peace?  First work for Justice and an end to Poverty.

Haven’t had time to read through article but have been an avid fan Mr Kucinich from afar, love him very much, I , among many will be praying for his much needed success. Thankyou so much for existing Mr; Kucinich. God bless.

with love

Janie Still

Rep. Kucinich is certainly speaking truth and should be considered by the Dems. as a good choice in the Presidential primary. However, me being an independent voter; the only people that will get my support are the ones that activily, seek impeachment and criminal prosecution for this entire administration. To kiss and make up is not acceptable; in my view. I’ve heard alot of retoric coming from the Democratic leadership, and I have a bad feeling that all these hearing that are supposed to happen after the first of the year, are going to be nothing but a sham, and the status quo will continue. I sincerely hope I am wrong.

First order of business must be to remove the hands of the criminals in this administration from the wheel - and place them in cuffs. They are murdurous corporate whores, and they must be brought to justice NOW!

Then let Dennis have his day.

Of course we will support Dennis again.
And we’ll support him longer and harder if he comes out against the Holocaust Industry and the rogue settler state of Israel!

Dennis’s record speaks for itself. There is no better candidate—which is why the DLC would never nominate him. It will take a real movement to make his candidacy viable. He is up to the task. Are we?

Has any other president ever revealed more determination to make himself Dictator
than George W. Bush? This “Unitary Executive” has usurped the balance of powers, seizing more power unto himself than all other president combined. Bush and his authoritarian idolizing political appointees, along with goose stepping congressional supporters are stomping our Constitution.

Has our “Free Press” failed to notice, or are they enabling this blatant dead-end detour to fascism? Has the Supreme Court failed to notice, or are they ideological mutants for tyranny? Have a majority of Americans failed to notice, or are they simply blowing in the wind, hoping for some great and courageous leader to emerge and save them? Great and courageous leaders don’t reveal themselves until they are absolutely certain which way the wind is blowing.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) IS THE EXCEPTION TO THAT RULE.

We the people can’t wait for timid Democrats to grow a backbone. Every day that George W. Bush retains power, he will commit more crimes against humanity. We must demand the impeachment of the entire Bush/Cheney criminal cabal. We must gather like a hurricane and rip through Washington, cleansing the capitol of hate-mongers, war-profiteers, corrupters, polluters and fascists.

Dennis Kucinich should be strongly supported by ALL progressive Democrats. I will do everything I possibly can to see that he gets the nomination. Not only do I wholeheartedly agree with his plan to end Bush’s stupid war immediately, but also, as a senior citizen, I warmly applaud his advocacy of a single-payer, non-profit health care system in this country. Indeed, it’s about time we joined the rest of the civilized world in this regard. Go Dennis!

In 2004 Dennis remarked that he intended to win the election.  If not then I believe 2008 will be his year. He can win if you support his candidacy and share his message.  There are still too many people who do not know that we have a statesman, Dennis Kucinich, running for the presidency.  It is certainly possible to fund universal health care, social security, and education K through college.  Dennis knows it and will fight for us.  Perhaps the tragedy of Iraq was needed to wake up Americans.  Without the right people in office we’ll see the draft once more.  Let’s send a message before that happens.

No one says it better.  Full speed ahead!

I supported Dennis Kucinich in 2004 and I will do so again. He is exactly what the Democratic Party (and the country) needs right now.

I’m sure we could all find some flaw or another with him, but seriously, isn’t he so much better than the rest of the crop of self-serving politicians out there.

I am amazed at the hypocricy of “Stephen Hesse of the Brookings Institute on CNN saying that candidacies like yours are just an ego trip. Is this an ego trip for you?”

Somone who earns his living working for a think tank and then going on national television spouting off his opinions saying Dennis Kucinich’s campaign is an ego trip?

I would offer Mr Kucinich one bit of advice while running for president. “Be very careful how you travel during the campaign. Principled positions such as your frequently cause small airplanes with candidates aboard to fall from the sky”.

a politician who will not talk about another politician...? this is refreshing. if he is sincere and his intent matches his words : we just might have something here. still i wonder with skepticism, after all he is still a politician and trusting a politician is not something that comes naturally to me...further even if his intention is sincere, what then? what’s his master plan for withdrawl, for health care, etc...potential exists here, I think he would make a good running mate with someone who has less to say about whats wrong and more to say about how to make things right…

Who would you buy a used car from? The guy that started this war and hasn’t listened to anyone but the neo cons from day one; or the guy who opposed it when most of the pols were for it or were too afraid to vote against it?

Run--just to bring political issues to light--debate and tell the public that we need to get out of Iraq NOW!  Talk about universal healthcare and why the middle-class will soon be an anachronism--but unfortunately this corrupt political system will never let you win or become a real threat.

Someone below posted, “I wrote Obama suggesting he sit this next election out for two reasons,” and then cited two reasons that really aren’t the best reasons why this should happen.

The very best reason is, Barack Obama is a phony, he is a corporate tool, he is no different from the other members of the Democratic Party who believe in appeasement and incrementalism, the two things that Kucinich says are very problematic for the Democrats now sitting in the Congress.

Please do not think Barack Obama would make a worthy President, unless you think Dubya Bush is a worthy President.  The mere fact that Obama is part African-American doesn’t absolve him of his fakeness.  His phony implorings of passion and empathy strongly resemble the last great Democrat phony, Bill Clinton.  Remember that there are plenty of African-Americans who are willing to sell their souls for wealth, political power and/or publicicity… Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Thomas Sowell, Alan Keyes.

Barack Obama = Corporate Oreo

Hurray for Dennis - but he should drop that part of his argument about “having the money to bring the troops home”. Nobody sees that as a “problem”, and to make a point of it sounds silly - even wierd.

Hey, are we nuts?  We’ve got Dennis Kucinich running for president on a platform that features TROOPS OUT NOW*, yet here we are quibbling about this or that, is he or is he not for real and so on and so forth. Why are we holding back? Is it that we’ve been losers for so long now that we’ve given up?  If so, it’s a hell of a time to call it quits, being that Kucinich wins, we win and one victory for us, that’s all it’ll take.

*via a cut-off of all funding for the Iraq war

My first presidential election that I could vote in was 1976.  Dennis Kucinich is the only presidential candidate I’ve ever actively supported because he’s the only one that isn’t pandering to the dogs of war (military-industrial-congressional complex that currently run the U.S.).  Go Dennis!  You’ve got my vote!  If you start getting some serious support, for God’s sake watch your back!

I wish Dennis Kucinich the best because he is currently demanding unambiguos immediate troops withdraw, now!  I wrote this regarding our military leaders wanting another chance to gamble on Iraq.
Why are we still gambling again?  Didn’t we go to the polls