Kucinich would be ashamed of you.

by Kevin Gosztola (302 articles, 146 quicklinks, 81 diaries, 1082 comments [77 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Jan 25, 2008 at 3:59:13 PM

  (0+)

Kucinich wanted to have Ron Paul as his running mate, so I think he deserves a careful look by his supporters. Please don't believe the misinformation about Dr. Paul that he is some sort of fringe element...Dennis Kucinich did not buy that, and nor should you.

Ron Paul will respect the constitution, and will end the war in Iraq; furthermore, he will not start any new wars. He will protect our civil rights, and end the financial hi-jinks that have been going on since 1980, at least. He will not bring back the gold standard, but will allow people to buy and sell gold and silver without paying sales tax, so that people can choose not to keep all their money in a US dollar that is in free-fall. He will not ban abortion - he has said that he is personally opposed, but that it should be decided by the states (because the Constitution does not give the Federal Government the authority to do anything either way). He is opposed to capital punishment - something none of the Dems can claim, now that Kucinich is out. He will end the futile War on Drugs, which has done more to hurt minority communities than anything else. He is opposed to laws banning flag-burning , whereas Hillary introduced a bill making the penalty 1 year in prison and a $100K fine. He wants to end all military aid to Israel, as well as to all Arab states (and everyone else). He is the only candidate who wants freedom for all Americans, and has a record of protecting our rights and the Constitution, having voted against the Patriot Act not once but TWICE, unlike Hillary, who voted for it. And he is the only candidate with integrity- he refuses all pension money from the Congress, and always votes his conscience. When he disagrees with someone, he is respectful and presents his well-thought-out reasoning calmly, and does not attack his opponents as 'un-American' or anything like that. It is impossible to find a candidate with whom anyone can agree 100%, but what we need is a president who has integrity, intelligence, and experience. Ron Paul is the only one with all of these. Please keep an open mind.

by Someone Somewhere (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Friday, Jan 25, 2008 at 4:36:34 PM

  (0+)

Ron seems to have his heart in the right place, pulling the plug on the mess in the middle east, withdrawing troops from a lot of places, cutting off monies to more than one foreign country, basically cleaning house in a lot of areas of policy, I was listening to the television today and Bill Clinton was on, extolling the virtues of some sort of foreign war thing, which implies that a Billary vote would be more of the same as far as I can tell, but a Paul vote, by all indications, would be a serious reform vote. Paul's a libertarian, and opposed to foreign entanglements.

But, before we even get to November, if you support the Kucinich/Paul principles, then consider signing on at the impeachment petition websites,

www.impeachbush.org, and www.wexlerwantshearings.com . Or, if you don't like those, write your own letters to your representatives. Maybe they'll go in the shredder with the others, and maybe they'll read em, only way to find out is to try.

Business-as-usual has fleshed out into this neverending Big Ugly. A highly LUCRATIVE Big Ugly, by all accounts, which would tend to explain why it's still going on. No, a LOT of money, like, more money than you could fit in your car, even. If we're ever really going to innovate, if we're ever really going to change, then they have to stop what they're doing now, which is shoveling hundreds of billions annually into the maw of the war machine. I think a Paul vote would be a good first step in stopping all of that. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm stupid, maybe I'm stoned, but that's what I think.

by truthtruffle (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 111 comments) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 4:40:52 AM

  (0+)

It is a recent urban legend that Kucinich "wanted Ron Paul" as a VP candidate. For various reasons, (such as supporting Paul with a phony report of support from a progressive like Kucinich or in order to tar Kucinich by association with Pau) it just never happened.  Kucinich's response to a specific question was taken out of context. That's all there is to it.

by Gregory Wonderwheel (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 4:08:08 PM

  (0+)

Your message is very clear and concise.

Mr. Kucinich is going to need his supporters and is in the process of creating integritynow.org.

"To those who supported this campaign with their energies and their hearts, I want you to know that we are transitioning the presidential campaign to a movement based on integrity, and based on practical ways we can affect policies on a local and national level," he said, announcing the launch of a new group called 'Integrity Now.'

"I'm no longer running for president, but I am intent on saving our nation," he said, directing supporters to a website called integritynow.org."

I hadn't heard of the organizations that you spotlight and am sure they will prove to be valuable assets in the quest to reclaim this Democratic Republic and evolve into our potential as citizens and a nation. 

Wishing you well

Danielle Vyas 

by Danielle Vyas (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Friday, Jan 25, 2008 at 5:13:42 PM

  (0+)

----- Original Message -----
From: Tevin
To: Kevin Gosztola
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 5:22:54 PM

First rule of integrity is never give up...never quit what you start. I want my 25,000 dollors back and my 12 hours a day since June of 2007 to get out the vote for Dennis Kucinich...

by Kevin Gosztola (302 articles, 146 quicklinks, 81 diaries, 1082 comments [77 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Jan 25, 2008 at 5:33:43 PM

  (0+)

There are two ideas that come to mind.

First, since I am a Green, the idea of Dennis coming over to join us would be wonderful. He has had the Democratic party thumb their collective noses in his direction three times now (once on impeachment and twice as a candidate.)

Dennis has one thing in common with the most likely Green Party Presidential Candidate, Cynthia McKinney. They both had the chutzpah to introduce Impeachment in the House.

As for "finishing what he started" I would hold that question open. I am not sure truly what he started. Is he trying to reform American politics or is he trying to reform the Democratic Party? As I watch Clinton - Obama I am increasingly convinced that reforming the Democratic Party from inside is a losing proposition and that my decision to join the Greens was the right one.

by Wes Rolley (5 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 3 comments) on Friday, Jan 25, 2008 at 6:41:27 PM

  (0+)

I think Dennis can finish what he started without running a losing campaign for the presidency.

by Kevin Gosztola (302 articles, 146 quicklinks, 81 diaries, 1082 comments [77 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Jan 25, 2008 at 8:12:32 PM

  (0+)

The only important issue that I have ever disagreed  with Dennis about is his continued participation in the Democratic Party. I understand why he does -- without it he would lose his congressional seat by an attack of the Democratic establishment. Only staying a Democrat keeps them at bay from a frontal attack.

But by staying a committed Democrat Dennis feeds the delusions of progressives that the Democratic Party cares about them or about any of the real progressive issues.

by Gregory Wonderwheel (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 4:15:10 PM

  (0+)

Kevin,

Don't forget that Ron Paul introduced the Legislation into Congress for Naomi's AmericanFreedomCampaign.

by Highstreet (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 26 comments) on Friday, Jan 25, 2008 at 8:58:54 PM

  (0+)

I was aware of that.

Here's the video of Dennis turning his end to his presidential run into a rally

Video

by Kevin Gosztola (302 articles, 146 quicklinks, 81 diaries, 1082 comments [77 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Jan 25, 2008 at 9:03:16 PM

  (0+)

...is what unites us all.  But frredom has been impossible since 1913, when the federal reserve act was passed.  We have no chance, NONE, but any meaningful change while an elite cartel of banks controls our currency. 

The only candidate who has spoken to this issue is Ron Paul

by Bob Tracey (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 46 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Jan 25, 2008 at 9:34:15 PM

  (0+)

The fight against Fascism is vitally important, and it is not at all abstract.

By definition Fascism is characterized by "severe economic and social regimentation." And one crucial way this condition is enforced is through the power of the purse.

Consider how Representative Kucinich's legislation to rebuild America's infrastructure (H.R. 3400) is designed to counter this with projects meant to serve the good of all, financed through the creation of a Federal Bank for Infrastructure Modernization.

This bank, funded by the Congress and run through the U.S. Treasury (just as the U.S. Constitution prescribes), would offer low-cost credit at a rate of 0.5% interest for infrastructure projects that "promote the general Welfare" (just as the U.S. Constitution mandates).

DO NOTE: neither local governments nor private enterprise can compete with these financial terms.

I point this out because it is a strong defense against those who would claim the uniquely American tradition of National Banking, whose history is not very well-known, is some form of "socialism." You are probably well-aware how this term is used to stir up fear, this by people who generally have a vested interest in maintaining the power of the purse.

DO NOTE: National Banking in no way whatsoever threatens to restrict capital available to the private sector.

I point this out because the issue financiers have with National Banking is not capital availability. Rather it is how it subdues their power of the purse.

Consider the manner in which tyranny is most efficiently exercised.

It is through the power of the purse.

This power, which has largely been consolidated in the hands of private financiers for more years than most in government are willing to say, and most private citizens are presently capable of fathoming, is largely responsible for the widening divide between the "haves" and the "have nots."

This widening divide is the very face of Fascism.

And it has been made possible through the power of the purse.

You can look at most every facet of our nation's abysmal financial position -- ever widening budget deficits and trade imbalances approaching $1 trillion per year -- and you can rest the blame for this upon those who have hijacked the power of the purse from the People.

EVERY BIT OF CIRCUMSTANCE BEHIND OUR WORSENING FINANCIAL POSITION HAS SERVED TO CONSOLIDATE THE POWER OF THE PURSE IN THE HANDS OF PRIVATE FINANCIERS.

Have no doubt about this, too. There is a world of difference between what H.R. 3400 proposes and those infrastructure projects being advocated by the likes of California Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. These latter two are front-men for private finance.

The fight against Fascism demands return of the power of the purse to the People.

Thus, supporting Representative Kucinich's legislation for Rebuilding America's Infrastructure (H.R. 3400) is a crucial step we must take if we are to take on the many political patsies who promote the interests of those whose desperation to maintain the power of the purse utterly necessitates our nation's recent years' wreckless spending on war.

Yes, my friends, we need to call out the war-mongers for what they are: Fascists!

By their relentless expanding our nation's indebtedness through financing the war, they are serving those who are hell-bent on maintaining their power of the purse, this at great expense to "the general Welfare" of the People, and for a cause that is easily demonstrated to be in the spirit of Fascism, this by way the divide between the "haves" and the "have nots" persistently widens ($3+ per gallon gasoline being only the most recent example).

It is time to call these Fascists out!

Get to know and understand National Banking. It is, indeed, our capacity to possess power of the purse and which, alone, will allow us to end the war and defeat Fascism.

by Tom Chechatka (6 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 57 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 12:27:20 AM

  (0+)

and get on with life in the meantime.  I encourge everyone to do the same.

If there is some better way for my voice to be heard, I haven't come across it yet. 

by Daniel Geery (26 articles, 95 quicklinks, 126 diaries, 912 comments [27 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 8:38:09 AM

  (0+)

I'm in California and already have my ballot.  Kucinich is on the ballot and there's this little check mark along side his name - that's my check mark and when I get into the voting booth, if his name isn't there, it's write-in time.

by Angelo (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 209 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 11:34:22 AM

  (0+)

I still plan to vote for Kucinich. I just don't see any other candidate who's an acceptable substitute for my vote. I know it may seem to many people like a waste of my vote, but so did voting for him when he was running, and I see voting for someone I don't believe will be the best President possible as a wasted vote.

I will, however, also support all the issues that are so important to me and are the reasons I supported Dennis Kucinich to begin with. I didn't support him because of his personality, his looks, his wife's looks, his party, his race, his gender, or anything else superficial. I supported him because of his positions on the issues and his voting track record. After I decided to support him, I also found him to be an inspirational person. I admire his courage, that he's willing to stand on the House floor and say what no one else will, the truth. He's a perfect fit for my political ideals, or at least the closest I've found in my 33 years of voting.

I know he's doing what he must to retain his House seat, and I hope and pray that he does keep it. We need him in Congress.

But vote for one of the others? Especially Clinton or Obama, who've taken so much support from corporate interests and appear to be the media's darlings, while they bicker like children? No thank you. And no, Ron Paul is not an acceptable substitute, for me. He and Kucinich are only alike in wanting out of the Iraq War. They come from different philosophies. Yes, Kucinich said he'd consider him as a running mate, but that doesn't make him a substitute. Kucinich also said he wanted an administration of people from different parts of the political spectrum -- which Ron Paul is. But there's too much about Paul's history that's still a question in my mind.

Still voting for Kucinich. 

by SpiritBlooms (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 55 comments) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 2:45:09 PM

  (0+)

Great ideas, Kevin. And others here also have some great ideas. I am a Ron Paul supporter and my wife was/is supporting Kucinich. And we are very supportive of each other. Progressive and peaceful co-existence is possible when the welfare and benefit of all citizens via strict adherence to the Constitution is the guiding principle. This is what has held the country together so far and it won't last without it.

It would be disastrous to lose Dennis's voice in Congress. Anyone and everyone who can should get involved in his campaign to retain his seat. We need his leadership!

by sunnyjim (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 9:00:30 AM

  (0+)

If Dennis was really for PEACE, wouldn't he put peace over party?  Wouldn't he drop out before the GOP closed their primary ballot registration and advise peace voters to register GOP just to give Ron Paul, a PEACE candiate, an opportunity to win the GOP nomination since the Democrats are offering NOTHING for PEACE voters?

Dennis pulled simular crap in 2004 when he strung liberal peace voters until he could deliver them to Kerry (who won and conceeded to Bush without counting ONE precinct in Ohio).

I believe Kucinich supporters are PEACE voters who are being mislead to support war. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C52-VUZz_3Y&feature=related

by Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 307 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 9:53:29 AM

  (0+)

Paul has one important good point, as well as scores of lousy points (that his cultish following is completely incapable of perceiving).

Here we see you -- a Ron Paul cultist, who never posts anything besides "Vote for Ron Paul" commercials -- basing a plug for Paul on an attack against Kucinich. How incredibly silly! I'm not even a Kucinich supporter, but your idea that you can conclude DK is "not for PEACE" just because he didn't throw his miniscule amount of support to Paul -- that is just so breathtakingly lame, it's hard to find words for it.

You're basically saying that anyone who's for peace must also be for Ron Paul. In other words, to a Paul fanatic like you, Ron Paul equals Peace, and Peace equals Ron Paul.

I'm sure you don't grasp the absurdity of this, but I assure you, it's there.

by Richard Mynick (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1552 comments [255 recommended, 5 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 10:47:06 AM

  (0+)

My post is not an ad for Ron Paul.  No where did I pitch: Vote Ron Paul.  I would have suggested to VOTE RON PAUL before the GOP closed their registration, had Kucinich abandoned his bid BEFORE the GOP registration closed, but because Dennis waited until the day AFTER the GOP closed their registration, I was not in a respectable position to ask Kucinich voters to help Ron Paul kick the neocons OUT of the GOP.  And let me go one further...Ron paul supporters bankrolled Kucinich's NH recount.   Dennis could have been a mench and bowed out then, instead, he played Ron Paul supporters to weaken their Peace Chest. 

For many liberals, Ron Paul will have NO good points, not even PEACE.  Ron Paul and Kucinich may both be opposed to the wars, but they represent different paths to peace.  Dennis sees working with the UN as a path to Peace (Cindy Sheehan others agree and they are "UN Agenda 21") .  Ron Paul sees the UN as the hub for the UN= United Nazis to create a NWO destroying national sovreignity with WMD employing coalations of the willing and contractors building massive prisons while protecting the multinational corporate elite who finds "it's a small world after all" and you're either "with them (the UN NWO) or you're going to support Ron Paul, and USA Freedom 21.  You can blame Bush for the war, but he went to the UN and got a Resolution to attack with pre-empt WMD.  The UN has done NOTHING to stop Bush.

The term "cult" originated from the GOP NWO neocons Hannity and Rush, who lead MSM to "marginalize RP with such terms.  The irony for me, is I went through this same crap supporting Nader in Y2K and 04.

Again, I say Kucinich is NOT for peace because many of us supporting Ron Paul today supported Kucinich in 04 before he dropped out...and it HURT!!!!!  I was so happy Nader ran, I ran around the USA to collect signatures for Nader's ballot access.  Democrats told me I should be shot in the head.  I thanked Nibiru they didn't believe in guns. 

Kucinich drops the ball or he tosses a curve ball...like impeaching Cheney...IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY..Dennis is a mega game player FOR the Democrat party...not for peace.  He can vote for peace, but he's not standing and FIGHTING for peace.  He put party FIRST.  Majority of Ron paul supporters are fighting the GOP and the Democrats (and why Dennis betrayed us)

If you believe the UN is the path to peace.  If you believe the government is your friend and loves you and does good things for the world so you need this BIG government to tell you how to live, Ron Paul is NOT your candidate.

I respectively disagree with Kucinich and his path to peace (which I knew would go no where) and I'm supporting Ron Paul.  But that's me, an individual who is not here to tell you how to vote, but telling you that I think Dennis is a fraud when it comes to peace because he mis led the PEACE vote on the liberal left.

Ron Paul supporters PAID for Kucinich NH recount.   What have Kucinich supporters done for Ron Paul?  I really didn't think we were enemies until recently.  I thought PEACE could unite people.  I was wrong about that.  But I'm not wrong about Dennis. 

by Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 307 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 11:57:44 AM

  (0+)

Amazing how self-centered and myopic Ron Paul supporters can be. One might even say, "If they were really for peace they wouldn't be against government and against impeachment."

by Gregory Wonderwheel (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 4:22:55 PM

  (0+)

www.peacecandidates.com is working toward replacing all members of Congress with Kucitizens who will vote Dennis into the Speaker of the House position. Peacecandidates.com is hoping for a Ron Paul presidency with Kucinich House leadership.  Please join the site, enter your Congressional information and let's work together for a Congressional revolution.

(Kucinich ran a terrible campaign, screwed over his volunteers, has no idea how to utilized the net and hires incompetents to run his site- I think activists should work together outside of the Kucinich site.)

www.peacecandidates.com

by Nadia (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 49 comments) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 10:26:23 AM

  (0+)

If the fight had been fair, and the best candidates were winning, it would simply mean to me that the time was not right for a candidate like Dennis Kuccinich.  But that is not what happened.

I went to hear Dennis Kuccinich live and watched a room erupt in applause.  There was no media.

I saw him get cut out of national debates.

I saw large press conferences on the internet receive absolutely zero coverage in our main stream corporate controlled media.

The one way conversation.  The talking points from the White House.  The manufacturing of consent and the lack of reasoned debate in our country have lead me to the conclusion that no one running for President stands for the ideals this country perpetuates in fantasy.

 The reality is that our front running candidates are selected by powerful interests.

Those with opposing views are minimized and shut out instead of having reasoned debate and honest discourse.

Campaigns are dumbed down to one way 30 second sound bytes with phrases that can be reinterpreted on a dime to represent the opposite of the impact they will create.  "North Atlantic Free Trade", "No child left behind", "Universal Health Care"

Without understanding the details of what these things mean - they can be re-packaged and become completely different than the image they conjure up for those hearing the message.

Dennis opened up the dialog - when they let him in the discourse.  The fact that he could and was so easily silenced by those in power is frightening.

This is not the land of the free.  It's the land of the wealthy.  

The journalists in the mainstream all talk from one point of view - the corporate point of view - and they control the information flow.

The desire to control the internet is mounting - they have been data mining and watching what we write, who we write it too and what we talk about it.  And they are trying to introduce ways to slow it down for the average person.

Maybe someday Americans will spend as much time on debate and political discourse as they do watching football, television and being so busy with work.  We are all so disconnected from one another.

Maybe someday we will begin talking civilly to one another.  Having town hall meetings with open debate.  Joining others across the country and finding ways to work less and live more and be more involved.

For those that listened to Dennis and what he stood for - he offered hope for another way.  A peaceful way, one that put our priorities in order, one that began to bring the "we" back into our society.

None of the democratic front runners offer nearly enough.  Hillary calls herself "progressive" - but has taken so much money from lobbyists and corporate interests it is easy to see where her interests lie.

Obama - same - and neither of their "health care" plans end the insurance rip-off.

Edwards - is not taking corporate money - but also now is being minimized.  His health care plan, at least offers a government choice which might ultimately lead to a single payer system.

It may be time to focus on single issues.  

Media reform.  Single Payer Health Care.  Ending the corporate strangle hold on our democracy.  

They need to get the hell out of the people's government.  Forever.  And be put in their rightful place - public service - the corporate veil has to be ended - the singular focus on profit is destructive to people and the planet.  

The military industrial complex receives over 50% of our federal budget, we spend more on the military then ALL OTHER NATIONS COMBINED.  We, all of us, are responsible for that.

Health Insurance companies have been granted monopolies.  They do not have care in mind, they have profits in mind.  They have grown to the be the largest fortune 100's in our nation - with unbelievable profits from insuring the healthy and cutting out the sick.  It's disgusting.

Sad day in America. 

by August Adams (11 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 585 comments [11 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 12:37:47 PM

  (0+)

A well-written commentary, no doubt.

But should a sense of fatalism prevent anyone from rallying local, state and federal representatives to get behind Kucinich's H.R. 3400 - "Rebuilding America's Infrastructure?"

Indeed, the message sent to the chain of representatives all the way to the top could be rather quick, clear and decisive:

GET BEHIND H.R. 3400, OR GET OUT.

With our nation undeniably stumbling toward utter bankruptcy, those who receive this message would be fools to think we are just spouting off...

by Tom Chechatka (6 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 57 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 3:15:09 PM

  (0+)

Kucinich was the only serious candidate of ideas in the Dem-Repub race.

Now, we need to bolster the Green Party candidates, all of whom share a platform most like Kucinich's.

Don't waste good votes on Obama, Clinton, Edwards, Drooliani, Huckster, Dumbney, or McInsan.

by R. Queisser (15 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 81 comments) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 1:25:22 PM

  (0+)

I remember once telling an Ohioan, not too hip on the Democratic frontrunners, that there was no way Kucinich could make the presidency this time. And besides, he is too valuable in his present job.

This is how I see Kucinich on the House judiciary committee. He is very essential there regardless of how the final tally comes in for Congress. He has the issue, and seniority, which can carry over into the 111th Congress. There is no statute of limitations on impeachment.

About a president, I ask you where to put the most leverage. I see you live in Chicago, which may or may not excite you over Obama. This Youth thing has an appeal. And, as you know, one part of Democrats who call themselves Progressive put Edwards next in line for acceptability after Kucinich? How does that resonate with you? I suppose you treat Hillary like I do--yesterday's news.

How to size up fringe parties and fringe candidates? In the latter, Paul and Gravel seem to fit. Parties are a different matter. Because Democrats fall into a minimum of three brands, somewhere there might be a person worthy of cultivating if not electing this time around.

Your audience does not depend upon MSM for information, obviously. In 2004 I saw all kinds of people yahoogrouping around the big picture four years hence. It's here! Where are those people? Did they get jobs and spouses and consumer ways? Or are they still hungry, including for ideas?

by Margaret Bassett (45 articles, 2909 quicklinks, 42 diaries, 1851 comments [99 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 1:39:31 PM

  (0+)

Get real, people.

Whether Kucinich struggles his way back in to the House or not, really doesn’t amount to anything. None of the legislation he has personally backed, including impeachment, has gone anywhere. Same is true of Ron Paul. Love him or hate him, he isn’t going to hold the keys to the Oval Office on Inauguration Day.

Instead it’s going to be either Hillary or Obama. Unless of course, Bill, who really appears to have lost it, triggers the Mutually Assured Destruction of both. This would leave Edwards a wide open shot at the nomination, but whether he could beat a Romney, or McCain is an open question. The Intrade political prediction markets provide us with an instructive view of some possibilities. Hillary is seen as having a 67% chance of becoming the nominee, with Obama at 30%, Edwards at .7%, with even Gore beating him at 1% Interestingly, McCain leads the pack on the other side with 50.5%, Romney at 35.5%, and Giuliani trailing far behind the others at 8.2%.

For all of you bemoaning Kucinich’s loss of the Gold, the Silver still remains, No matter the nominee, the Democratic party is seen as winning by 64 to 35%. If the margins remain this comfortably far apart, then it would seem that almost any proposed Vice Presidential candidate would seem acceptable. Why not start a campaign with the three potential winners to select him as their running mate?

Failing that, pick a Cabinet post you think he could successfully fill, and campaign for that. Of course, you still need to be convinced that he would get confirmed, but with all your belief that he represents the best there is, give it a shot.

by Sherwin Steffin (16 articles, 26 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 119 comments [11 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 2:52:49 PM

  (0+)

Kucinich's struggle back into the House doesn't amount to anything?

H.R. 3400 -- Rebuilding America's Infrastructure -- probably is one of the most important pieces of legislation before the U.S. Congress.

Why is that?

Because the nation of the verge of utter bankrutcy will need policy solutions coming from an FDR Democrat.

Not to disparage your ideas. I simply want to stress the importance of policy over the brokering of personalities...

by Tom Chechatka (6 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 57 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 5:25:16 PM

  (0+)

Yes, I am a Ron Paul supporter. I ask that supporters of Dennis Kucinich consider voting for Ron Paul in any upcomong primaries if they are able to. Even though you may disagree with Paul's domestic policies, a vote for Paul in the primaries will keep the issue of withdrawing from Iraq in the mix. You can always choose to support another candidate in the general election.

by Jim Rongstad (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 2:59:58 PM

  (0+)

Any Kucinich supporter who would now vote for Ron Paul is someone who doesn't have a political analysis or philosophy, but would only be voting on Iraq as a single issue regardless of the fact that Kucinich and Paul represent entirely different visions for America.

Paul's vision of "the least government is the best government" and that government regulation is inherently evil is a recipe for disaster as it allows ther rich and corporate powers to freely exploit their positions.  Kucinich on the other hand says that government "of the people" and  "by the people" is the only hope that we have of working to together "for the people" to protect our rights.  Paul trashes government every chance he gets. That is such a fundamental difference that I laugh everytime I see Paul supporters thinking that anyony who believes in Kucinich's values and integrity would even think twice supporitng the economic anarchy advocated by Paul that woulld only benefit the plutocratic pirates.

by Gregory Wonderwheel (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 4:41:09 PM

  (0+)

Kevin i liked your article on Dennis. I would have voted for Dennis. he is the only one who i beleave could have given the country back to the people. were it belongs. the trouble is we the people have lost this country. it is bought and payed for by corporate america. we are in deep trouble and i dont see any way out. we the people have neglected our  responsibility of taken care of business and voting all worthless politicans out . that would mean all most all politicans now in washington. Between George Bush and Dick Cheney they have left America in shambles. with almost a Ten Trillion dollar National Debt, and the congress keeps borrowing money like it is going out of style. a war that continues and no end in sight. most of americas finest our military die for a idiot. i dont see how anybody will get america back to were it was before. remember what john Adams said about democracy. true words were never more spoken. Democracy never last long. it soon wastes,exhaust and murders itself. there never was a democracy,yet, that did not commit suicide.  we as a nation we better PRAY TO Jesus Christ that this dont happen.

by vincent passiatore (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 185 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jan 26, 2008 at 11:47:32 PM

  (0+)

I applaud your continued support for him.

However, I am concerned that you would miss the opportunity to give the only other anti-establishment candidate your primary vote.  Paul and Kucinich agree on 2 of the 3 most important issues of our day, the War and Civil Rights.

Paul is the only other candidate running to vote against the war and the Patriot Act.  Please reconsider voting for Kucinich, when a vote for Paul could help bring down the Elite ruling members of both parties, and give control back to We the People.

by Highstreet (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 26 comments) on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 3:25:37 AM

  (0+)

Here's another fairytale that Kucinich and Paul agree on civil rights.  There are some particular issues where the two political philosophies represented by Paul and Kucinich overlap to cfreate an illusion of agreement, but the fact is that the two views are not the same at all.  For anyone who thinks they are the same let me say "abortion" and "gay marriage." The two philosophies arrive at diametrically opposed results for these issues.

Paul advocates individual liberty free from social (government) regulation, but then he allows government control over abortions and gay marriage. Kucinich advocates individual freedom within the context of social integrity so he allows abortion to be a decision between mother and doctor and gay marriage to be a social contract between 2 adults.  This is a very cursory review but it portrays the important difference that people should never be blind to when imagining that Kucinich supporters could ever support Paul 

by Gregory Wonderwheel (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 4:49:54 PM

  (0+)

From http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Ron_Paul_Civil_Rights.htm#10 

Q: On gay marriage. You've been quoted as saying, "Any association that's voluntary should be permissible in a free society." And you've expressed your opposition to a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

A: If you believe in federalism, it's better that we allow these things to be left to the state. My personal belief is that marriage is a religious ceremony. And it should be dealt with religiously. The [government] really shouldn't be involved. The government got involved mostly for health reasons 100 years or so ago. But this should be a religious matter. All voluntary associations, whether they're economic or social, should be protected by the law. But to amend the Constitution is totally unnecessary to define something that's already in the dictionary. We do know what marriage is about. We don't need a new definition or argue over a definition and have an Amendment. To me, it just seems so unnecessary to do that. There's no need for the federal government to be involved in this.

Yes I know that Paul says he isn't opposed to gay marriage, but my view is that this is a cop out because he won't advocate specific laws protecting gay rights to marriage. He approves of the laws prohibiting gay marriage today by saying gay marriage is not a civil rights issue, but a state's rights issue for states to be able to legislate bigotry against gays. As another example of this fake support of civil rights he voted against gay adoptions.

by Gregory Wonderwheel (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 5:01:36 PM

  (0+)

Where Do All the Devoted Kucinich People Go Now?

After donating to Kucinich's campaign and seeing what the Democrats have done to Dennis, this supporter in California will be voting for Cynthia McKinney in the Green Party primary.

by Gregory Wonderwheel (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 3:44:55 PM

  (0+)

Karl Rove once said something to the effect that Gay marriage was the hood ornament on the family values wagon that carried the president to a second term. If it were not for the Massachusetts Supreme Court making the issue front-page news around the country just prior to the 2004 election, we would be out of Iraq by now, and President Kerry would have shut Gitmo. If gays want equality, they should lobby for getting marriage out of the government's business, so that anyone who wants to can call themselves married, and just have everyone, gay or straight, register as civil partners. Otherwise, its just handing the GOP the South (and much of the West) on a silver platter.

Anyway, as for Ron Paul, he is literally correct in saying that the Federal Government has no jurisdiction in the issue of marriage of any sort, which is why he voted against the 'Marriage Protection Amendment'. I am not sure about the gay adoption vote, but my suspicion is that he voted against it on similar grounds. One thing about Ron...agree with him or not (and it is almost inevitable that any one person will disagree with him on something), the man is consistent, according to his stated principles. Above all else, he belives we must follow the Constitution, which really in the end makes sense to me.

by Someone Somewhere (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Sunday, Jan 27, 2008 at 8:34:30 PM

  (0+)