Don't know if the Republicans are laughing, but they are relieved that no one is actually challenging them. The Democrats basically claim that they can do a better job of being Republicnas than Republicans.

One (among many) thing this current crop of Demoplicans (or is it Republicrats) needs to remember:
Democrat Harry Truman said, "When voters are given a choice between voting for a Republican, or a Democrat who acts like a Republican, they'll vote for the Republican every time." (They don't show much interest in Republicans acting like Democrats either. Somehow BIll Clinton escaped this prognosis.)
The need for hundreds of millions of campaign dollars has left most of these folks subsumed by the corporatist agenda. They are so scared the MSM will say something negative about them they twist themselves into rhetorical contortions.
The only one of the bunch I would consider voting for is Dennis Kucinich (Gravel IS interesting) but since I am not registered in their party I won't get a chance (he WON'T win the nomination.) He is the least worst choice.
How sad.
Good luck USA, I really miss the dream image of Truth, Justice, and the American Way. (Not that this image was ever based in reality, but it is a great image to strive towards.)

Why is it that Dennis Kucinich always comes up with the right answers, yet everyone, media especially, ignores and belittles him. He's too short to win, they say. Yet he is at least as tall as was Gandhi. His ears are too big, they say, noone will vote for him. Is it only cartoonists who have noticed the ears on The Shrub? Hello, America. Hello people who care. Hello you 60%-plus who say you want out of the Iraq occupation. Hello those of you shouting for Impeachment of the criminals in control of our country. Hello those of you who say you want peace in this world. You, we, have our candidate. His name is Dennis Kucinich. And of course the power elite does its best to bury his candidacy. So why are we, the public, every one of us, not filling the Kucinich campaign coffers? Why aren't we all bombarding those cowards masquerading as Democrats in Congress with support for the Kucinich move to Impeach, starting with Cheney, with support for the Kucinich campaign for a cabinet-level Dept. of Peace. Why aren't We The People letting the power brokers know that Dennis is our man? Our MAN. A REAL man, the only guy out there with the balls to, not only, say it like it is, but to ACT on it. I supported Dennis to the hilt, with the largest contributions possible, in 2004. I will do so again. People tell me that I am throwing my money away. But my integrity is worth more than money. I do not waste money by supporting my own integrity. I will again support Dennis to the hilt, putting my money in the place where integrity, not politics, tells me to put it.
If all of those out there who say they want peace and integrity would do the same, come election-time 2008, the United States would finally have the leader that we all say that we want.
.

I was wondering why you did not also add the carnage and death toll in Afghanistan.
An "operation" based on lies again...with the same objective: oil and mega profits for those who invest in weapons manufacturing ( the production cycle is unceasing and it is not unknown that war serves the elite agenda of population control)
it is almost, almost, unfathomable how many people have been killed and maimed in the most undignified way humanely possible.
And we are civilized?
Are our "leaders" held accountable?
When we turn away, we are also responsible. complicit in our silence.
the fact is that there is only one party in American politics. And this has been so for a long time.
History suggests that this is called Fascism.
What to do?
...Be aware that we are on the way to a militarized, global agenda whereby we, the people-the pawns, are expected to play by the rules created by the "big" players on the world stage.
I do not feel we can expect change to happen within political spheres.

Kucinich is Yoda. Capitalize on that.

Is "between 64,000 and 600,000" Iraqi civilians dead the best and most accurate statistic we can come up with? How many have been killed by Americans, "contractors", and our allies, v.s. the number killed by Iraqi's themselves and other insurgents. With statistics and information as vague as this, no wonder there is so much controversy and conflicted opinions about the war.

I understand that getting the truth about anything in Iraq is difficult, and that our own government is the reason for much of the lack of information. But it seems terribly important that we know the truth, so that we can make informed decisions. And we must acknowledge that if there were no insurgency, if Iraqi's would stop killing each other and work together to form a new country that would live in peace, very few if any Iraqi's would be dying at the hands of Americans and their allies. On the other hand, our leaving Iraq will most likely not stop the killing between the factions in Iraq - in fact, the country may dissolve into all-out civil war, with many thousands or even millions of dead and maimed civilians.

The war was and is wrong, but the issues we are facing now are not simple. It may very well be as immoral (and dangerous) to leave as it is to stay in Iraq.

Take US back, Dennis.

Talk to your democratic friends now. Get them all, one by one. We have enough time.

All of those people are such immature, ugly scum except Kucinich; the moderator should have asked Hillary if taking out Osama meant that she would be killed in the bombing as well, and see how she'd answer.

Talking tough is popular to the media influenced part of the electorate. It plays like John Wayne. But like John Wayne, the tough talkers pass up their personal opportunity to kill the bad guys. Wayne got out of WW2 (4 children) so that he could make movies.

Audie Murphy the most decorated soldier in U.S. history and a real tough guy was not so certain of the value of war and personally suffered over his role in the death of so many.

Barack Obama said, "I think Dennis is right. I don't believe in assassinations, but Osama bin Laden has declared war on us, killed 3,000 people, and under existing law, including international law, when you've got a military target like bin Laden, you take him out. And if you have 20 minutes you do it swiftly and surely."

Barrack just passed the "cojones? test again.

It's so sad. There are so few adults in this world. Dennis is one of them. My only consolation (some consolation!) is that if elected, he would probably be assassinated. But the public is so clueless, he appears to be spared from that fate. We need him but we don't get to have him. Not now at least. Maybe in a few years when the country is in a panic about war and global warming they will be ready to listen to him. I can see if we don't turn ourselves around we will doom ourselves. And a turnaround isn't looking too likely. I'm thinking of the next generations. What are we setting them up for?

Everything Dennis says is so right, so straight to the core, and no one recognizes it.

Mike Gravel was also ready to assassinate. Everyone on that platform except Dennis made me feel discouraged. And it wasn't just that question. It was their entire performance.

I've probably watched my last debate. And that was another frustration because it wasn't by any means a debate, it was a managed event by the MSM which did it's best to ignore Dennis. The public gets screwed again. I have to admire Dennis for never giving up, he just keeps coming back. I will continue to work for his campaign, it's the least I can do considering how hard he's working.

I really want to vomit or cry after watching this debate. It seems there is no way out of a vague right wing democratic celebrity candidate; no way from a disgusting fool who sits there and praises the military. There were leftist comments made, but other than Kucinich, they were scattered and not uttered by the candidates the media chose to win. Kucinich and Gravel were literally marginalized; kept to either side of the other candidates, and just never spoken to while Hilary Clinton wouldn't shut the fuck up and stop saying that the army did any favors for Iraq! They trashed the place!

I also can't beleive they let that idiotic smiling 18 year old stand up and sell out his generation; how dare you act as if the draft is a good thing! As if killing people is acceptable; as if the olympics are important at all in the face of genocide; as if anything other than single-payer health care was truly a universal or ethical plan. After I vote for Kucinich in the primary, I will leave their party; I wish I could leave the country.

http://www.dreamingearth.net

Kucinich says what should be the norm but we hear it as exceptional. We need more truth. Have we become so unused to hearing the truth that we are amazed that someone would dare to speak it?
Also... I don't think the size of someone's ears should matter.

One thing that can be generalized from all media coverage on the presidential candidates is that the candidate who takes the public interest at heart will always make adversaries in the corporate sector and will always attract 'negative publicity' or will be ignored.

So how does a progressive person select his or her candidate ?
By paying attention to this pattern.
It is clear that Kucinich is the best candidate, based on the neglect and scorn he receives from the MSM. But Edwards must be doing something right as well, because the media seems to be afraid of him, too.
If you want to vote corporations out of power, you must systematically vote for the person that causes the greatest unease among those corporations.
If the MSM talks about 'the frontrunner' then that is the candidate that you must ignore.

Bustin' thru the lie---

A couple of things while glancing through these comments.
The public is NOT clueless. The public is under-represented and what representitives it has are marginalized or dismissed as weirdos or far-Left whackos. Especially pay attention to references to "moving Left" or, the "Left-wing anti-war Democratic base" putting pressure on politicians to move Left. THIS IS A LIE!!!! The majority of Americans oppose the Iraq occupation--Bush approval ratings are in the 20's but it is still framed as a far Left anti-war minority--when, in reality, it is the majority. Kucinich and Gravel speak for the MAJORITY but they are relegated to the sidelines and Clinton is championed as the winner when she makes statements to the effect that the war on terror has made us safer. How, in any way, does this reflect the views of most Americans and doesn't it really back Bush's big lie?

"And we must acknowledge that if there were no insurgency, if Iraqi's would stop killing each other and work together to form a new country that would live in peace, very few if any Iraqi's would be dying at the hands of Americans and their allies. On the other hand, our leaving Iraq will most likely not stop the killing between the factions in Iraq - in fact, the country may dissolve into all-out civil war, with many thousands or even millions of dead and maimed civilians"

Be very careful in accepting the framework that is defined as reality. To divide any opposing force is war strategy to weaken and keep those who would oppose US occupation fighting among themselves. The "insurgency" is Iraqis fighting occupiers of their country and they have the support of the Iraqi people--and that is why they perservere. Our training of police forces is to turn Iraqi against Iraqi and institute a police state of death squads to keep Iraqis from rising up against their occupier who is there to loot their natural resources, destrioy their culture and do the bidding of Israel hardliners.
Do not accept the framework of lies manufactured as commonly agreed upon consensus.
Bust thru the lie!

Reasons not to vote.

Vern: Excellent analysis and points! George Lakoff would be so proud!

What was the exact wording ( not that it makes a lot of difference I suppose) " Would you knock off Osama bin Laden with a missile even if it would kill some innocent civilians."

I would like to ask their question with an additional twist;
"If it was ascertained that Osama bin Laden, or any other high value terrorist target ( whatever that means) was hiding in, or being hidden by, or even holding hostages, in a certain location would you take him out with a missile, or deadly force, if you believed he would escape otherwise...."
if the target was in a area with a limited population...what would be an acceptable number for loss of innocent lives (don't let them get away with the slippery phrase about collateral damage)
if the target was in a slum
if the target was in a city
if the target was in a public or government building in a "civilized" part of the world
if the target was in an Allied country or only a country not among our Allies
If the targeted area was in a country that has nuclear weapons (would it be worth that risk) or only one without ?
if the target was in our own country
if the target was a building in your own families neighborhood

I say we need to pin them down, because it matters...they have to face their own use of Orwellian language before they can be trusted.

"it would depend on how many innocent civilians."

Biden was never on my list, but hearing him say that sent chills down my spine. The rest of them weren't much better.

Kucinich won the debate as far as I'm concerned. (Gravel was not allowed to speak enough to make his points.) It's a pity that party/mainstream media/corporate oligarchy won't let him be the nominee. His moral compass generally seems to be pointing in the right direction (rare in a politician) and his wife would make a heckuva First Lady: http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=156870495

The public may not be clueless, but very few people have ever even heard of Dennis Kucinich. Don't even know he exists.

Chicanery made me think: If nobody would vote for Dennis Kucinich - short, big ears, not physically too attractive - how about Elizabeth Kucinich for president in 2012!!

Sorry Republicrat-Demican, that would take a Constitutional amendment for starters. She's British. Besides. you have to give this to the Republicans. They are getting better and better at stealing elections.

'Yes, we lost 3,000 people during 9/11. But between 64,000 and 600,000 Iraqi civilians are now dead because of our invasion and the resulting civil war.'

Lets not forget the innocent people who died in Afghanistan too.
It saddens me that troops deaths are reported everyday but no one remembers the others that die.

The truth is: people die in the west,it's the slaughter of innocents,people die in the east,it's collateral damage'