Bottom line is Americans, including so-called progressives, still believe they benefit materially from imperialism. That is why progressives are microscopically choosing which of the three front running Democratic contenders will keep in 1 less soldier in Iraq than the other and supporting one of those three despicable war mongerers. Progressives have 3, and only 3, anti-war Democrats to choose from -- Kucinich, Gravel and Richardson. Instead they try to cling to the fiction the Iraqis need us to keep things as stable as they are and that a calamity of biblical proportions will happen when we leave. (What f--kin' arrogance!!!!!!!!) We ARE the calamity of biblical proportions. The insurgents don't have, and never had, even body armor, let alone bunker busters, etc.

Progressive are kind of like the missionaries that set up the Native American populations for the slaughter.

jstevens, I think what people are saying is that if Kucinich doesn't get the nomination (a no-brainer in this media environment), that he then run as an independent. Better than supporting a right-wing Democratic corporate war-monger. Besides, if everyone who said I'd vote for Kucinich but he can't win DID vote for him they might be surprised and we might have a chance to save our democracy. Otherwise, no chance.

Adamslp, it's illogical to claim in one post that only a small fringe minority wants Kucinich and then turn around in another post and blame that same fringe for costing the Democrats the election. You can't have it both ways. Also your personal attacks on Kucinich's appearance are intemperate and self-demeaning. Our greatest president of all, Lincoln, was not elected for his physical attributes. You want physical attributes? Go vote for Harding. It's utterly stupid to choose presidents based on looks instead of substance. Or charm. Bush picked up a lot of votes from people who would prefer a drink or date with him over Gore. And look what we got. A dry drunk megalomaniac who considers the Constitution just a G-damned piece of paper. And his buddy torturer-in-chief Gonzales. And the real dictator behind the scenes shoot-them-in-the-face Cheney. And you're blaming the minority fringe for this? Besides the theft of votes in 2000, while 2% of Democrats voted for Nader in Florida, 13% of Democrats voted for Bush! Put the blame where it belongs. The majority of Nader voters would never vote for a corporate Democrat anyway. Those votes don't belong to the Democrats. They haven't earned them, they won't get them.

I agree, with dux--there seem to be a lot of ideas promoted that will clearly help the extreme right wing. Those encouraging the best Democrats to run on an independent ticket are at best weak on strategy, and actually quite suspicious.

They are often the people who take the angriest and most vulgar tone. The purpose seems to be to smash reasonable discussion and denigrate this website.

walt: I think the President is uniquely unintelligent. Look at his deplorable college grades. He always resorts to rhetoric because he can't formulate a logical thought. If his father hadn't been a politician he would be nothing.

Things aren't going well for him either. He seemed truly upset by Carl Rove leaving. As with Hitler, surrounding himself with enough people to keep up the delusions is critical to his functioning.

The President is probably quite readily manipulated by the likes of oil and coal CEO's. All they have to do is make him think whatever they want was actually HIS idea.

A convergence of many unfortunate circumstances have brought us to our current low level--America is at the peak of consumerism, the media have swerved sharply to the right, and the public is clammoring for celebrity news only. The father of this President waged a very successful (in the eyes of much of the world) Gulf War. Congress should have known better, but they thought this war would be exactly the same--quick and stunning.

Now they're down to the very destructive and short-sighted business of protecting their ego's. For politicians, protecting ego's is an incredibly powerful force. They are willing to sacrifice everything in pursuit of this hopeless goal. Times are dark for ALL of America.

Iraq will not begin to heal until we leave. It is chaos now, and every shred of evidence shows that the longer we stay, the worse it becomes.

WTF! NOT ONE STINKING WORD ABOUT A MAN WHO HAS BEEN TOTALLY CONSISTANT FROM DAY 1! KUCINICH. DO YOU HAVE TO BE A SERIAL KILLER TO BE MENTIONED AS A CANDIDATE IN THE NYT? Oh yeah. Where is OSAMA,THE SEED OF OUR ADVENTURISM IN THE EAST,DUMBYA? HINT:HE AIN'T IN IRAQ.

We need to get the hell out of Iraq ASAP. Don't cut and run---just apologize and leave.

Don't vote for Democrats?
Vote for Kucinich as an independent?
Vote for Nader?

hmmm...there seem to be a lot of undercover Republicans contributing here.

QUOTE:

This war is not the Democrats fault. They can't end it and neither can Nader or Kucinich.

END QUOTE

Having another sip of your intoxicating Dems' koolaid?

The bush-Enabling Dems are equally complicit and accomplices in this Iraq occupation. They voted "YES" for bush to attack Iraq and "YES" for its subsequent funding. And they could end it if they wanted to buy immediately cutting off the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for it. Period.

The bush-Enabling Dems have already given bush the green-light to attack Iran and I suspect after that takes place you will be here saying that "Iran is not the Dems' fault."

I swear, denial is a most comfortable place for many people...especially these looney Dem koolaid drinkers who make themselves look like godddamn fools when they grasp at anything to try to defend these indefensible useless bush-Enabling Dems.

I don't think they mention Kucinich simply because he isn't on their radar screen. The Media doesn't see it as their job to put forth all opinions, just those with the greatest numbers behind them and / or the most controversy around them. Kucinich may be right, but the numbers just aren't there yet. Probably they will never be.

I kind of disagree with some of these positions. The media is not the whore of Corporate America, it's just an old fashioned garden variety whore. If there's a story there, they run it (to sell newspapers or air time or whatever it takes to get the boss to pay their salaries) I don't think they se it as their job to arbitrate the truth. They are far too weak. I can't see conspiracy among dunces.

We have to make the truth the story like we did during the Vietnam War. People can say all they want about how this conflict is or isn't like Nam, but in one way it most certainly isn't. Iraq is not the central story on the news, nor is central preoccupation of a large and vocal segment of the population. People made the Vietnam War the news. Maybe we were a different people. Maybe they were different times. Maybe there was a draft. But an anti-war candidate is making ripples not waves and waves is what changed it all even though the anti-war candidates didn't win … they made the difference.

As for the cries to replace the Democrats because in this article in the NYT we read the sad truth that no one has a plan to leave Iraq immediately, maybe we have to come to terms with the fact that quite simply we can't. No one I have read has a plan for immediate withdrawal. Everyone knows the bitter realities cited on this page, like the fact that collapse will inevitably follow withdrawal no matter when we leave. But no one wants to be the one to say "F**k It! We're outta here. Now" And no one wants to face the ugliest question of all: What makes anyone think we're ever leaving?

I have a fearsome feeling about all this. Everyone says Bush is so dumb but look at what he was sent here to do and look at what he has done. He has damaged our constitutional rights. He's gone inside the Constitution and broken things. Some of these things at a "time of war" may never be fixed no matter WHO is President. He has gone inside our EPA and broken things and in a "time of war" and energy duress no one is going to be able to fix any of it. He has broken the scared separation of church and state, broken public education, broken the chances of health care for all and so much more. And in a "time of war" it will be impossible to fix any of it. Do you really think he no plan at all? The plan was this: Put the US on an irretrievable collision course with the New Deal, Environmental Reform, The War on Poverty, Health Care Reform, Diplomacy and on and on. Break it all! And in a "time of war" none of it will be reparable.

And then it's - in this words - the next President's job to fix it." But don't you realize now that none of it can be fixed? And how did he make sure? By creating a permanent "time of war". Invading Iraq was reckless? How about deliberate? How about they never intended to stabilize Iraq and this is exactly the outcome they desired – War for the Middle East. War for Oil. War Forever.

This war is not the Democrats fault. They can't end it and neither can Nader or Kucinich. We've been massively, ingeniously out maneuvered … and instead of fighting back at them (The Neo-Con Revolutionaries) we're fighting amongst ourselves – slaughtering our own candidates.

Pretty hard to be a revolutionary when you wake up one morning to realize the revolution already happened … and you're on the losing side.

They don't mention Dennis because the corporte media doesn't want Dennis to be mentioned. As to why they started this campaign 18 months early, was to run people like Dennis who don't take money from corporations out of money. The best comment I seen yet is the one saying that we have only one party. Because that's exactly what we have. They all sleep in the same corporate bed of money. Did anyone really think all troops will come home while corporate america is still there working on the upgrade of the oil fields there?

This reads like another attempt by an established major news publication to create a perception that lingering in Iraq is an inetivability, and that there is little resistance to the idea.

More and more, it appears the purpose of the media establishment is to try to tell us how we should think about the situation, if we are "with it."

It's sort of like the class popular guy trying to get you to smoke a cigarette in the school restroom. I believe it belongs on that level.

What the article does not point out is the real reason why the major Democratic candidates want to keep forces in Iraq, as stated in prior debates, "to protect our strategic interests in the region" -- ie -- make sure the oil plan goes through and continues uninterrupted.

Edwards is concerned about genocide. Maybe he's unconcerned with the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed by US bombs in the 90s and in the current operation. There's probably many Iraqis who consider the US occupation of Iraq as part of an ongoing attempt to rid the world of Muslims.

As for Hillary, I have a real problem imagining she is concerned about Kurdish goat herders. I think she is probably much more interested in the strategic value of the stuff in the ground to the South.

At least Obama's stated reason is closer to honesty, "to protect Americans."

But, I think the most important thing to notice about this article is that it presents the continued occupation of Iraq as an inevitability, and not even controversial among anti-war activists. Nonsense.

The whole economic model based on oil is in question right now. Top to bottom.

I voted for Kucinich in the last primary and when he didn't get the party nomination, I voted for Nader with No regrets.

Vote for Nader!!!!!!!

Democracy is constipated
Only Ralph Nader can flush the democraps out of the system.

This political advertisement was paid for by Bush/Cheney

The authors of this piece certainly failed to tell the whole truth. Kucinich has wanted out of Iraq for years and has demonstrated that by not voting for further funding. Getting people to vote in the primary election is the current goal. Last time there was a large increase in turn out and I think even more people will vote this next time. I voted for Kucinich in the last primary and when he didn't get the party nomination, I voted for Nader with No regrets. What I found disgusting at the last primary was known Republicans in my local area voting in the democrat primary. I guess I will not be surprized when those people use their voting trick again to put Clinton in, as they know so many will vote against her in the pres, election. Presently, Kucinich appears to be the parties decoy. If he fails in the primary, he should run independent or green.

KEY:

"Antiwar advocates have raised little challenge to such positions by Democrats."

kool aid drinking dems HATE to be called kool aid drinking dems.

QUOTE:

jstevens August 13th, 2007 4:49 am

I am very tired of the "kool aid drinking dems" reference. There aren't many choices in the political arena, so voting, or considering voting as a Democrat is not commensurate with belonging to the doomsday cult.

I agree with Brown that it is unwise to keep saying that Bush won't leave office in 2009. The country is going, going, but we're not that far gone.

END QUOTE

If one wants to stay in the deep rut of voting for a bush-Enabling Dem nominee, nothing is going to change. All you would be doing is voting for the "lesser of two evils" as many people like to justify it. That's, in part, how we got in this disaster in the first damn place with this "lesser of two evils" nonsense.

It's a given that Dem koolaid drinkers don't like the reference. They resent it. And to that I say, too bad. I'm not about to stop using it because it most applicable.

Since 2000 I've been heard Dem koolaid drinkers talk constantly about the Repugs and bush supporters who were/are drinking THEIR koolaid. Blindly following bush and the repugs. And then it occurred to me that these gullible Dems have their own koolaid too with their blind allegiance to these useless bush-Enabling Dems.

I'm very tired of the Dem koolaid drinkers making excuse after excuse for these useless "YES Bush" Dems. These Dem koolaid drinkers come out with all types of apologies and excuses for why the Dems haven't done this and haven't done that and why they have "YES'd" Bush once again. And let's not leave out the "you have to give the Dems tiiiiiiiiiiiime. They've only been in the majority since January." That type of nonsense. Then when I asked these goddamn fools how much time they are talking about they never answer the question. They respond with silence. No, I can't stand these gullible, foolish Dem koolaid drinkers. Period. And I'm not about to stop talking about them. You just don't like hearing the truth, that's your problem.

And if you want to live in denial (like the typical Dem koolaid drinker does) that bush/cheney won't leave in 2009, so be it. I don't know if bush/cheney will leave or not. But based on what I've seen, I would say most assuredly at this point in time that they have no intention whatsoever of leaving and there's no one to make them leave. I may be wrong in the end but we won't know until 2009. But I'm certainly not going to be like you and Brown and deny the possibility that they won't leave. Granted, denial is a very comfortable place for many people, for what good it serves?

I am very tired of the "kool aid drinking dems" reference. There aren't many choices in the political arena, so voting, or considering voting as a Democrat is not commensurate with belonging to the doomsday cult.

I agree with Brown that it is unwise to keep saying that Bush won't leave office in 2009. The country is going, going, but we're not that far gone.

COMarc at 1131p sums it up nicely about the Dems: "There's the pretense of Democracy..."
The Pros have certainly got the fix in and Dennis Kucinich would never be PERMITTED to be the nominee.
He serves a purpose for the Dems, wittingly or unwittingly, as the Gatekeeper, preventing people like us from leaving the Dem Party.
To those who say DK can win just keep clicking your Ruby Slippers and saying "there's no place like home" and maybe you can bring it about.
But remember, all the time, money and energy that evaporates in the Kucinich campaign could also be spent building a real alternative party, or as many have said here, A Second Party!

Canuckchuck. We gotta take the good with the bad. the Democrats say it will take years to leave Iraq, but the Republicans say___ we ain't mever gonna leave. Think we'll be high taililg it outta there after we bomb Iran. We'll be in soooo much trouble, Iraq will become a moot issue.

If you are still planning on coming down this way to pick up some Texas land when we have our depression. Let me know and I'll put on some extra beans and rice.___ Bring ome ice and beer.

ADAMSLP____ Boy, you ARE pretty smart to post that red flag late at nite. The comments will be hot and heavy tomorrow. I can hear em now. The sad thing is, we may be far left of middle, but the ones who are mostly right. We're a most intelligent minority and a very few know it all.__Naturally.

Democrats may say leaving Iraq will take years, but voters say leaving the Democrat Party will take only a second.

Its obvious that the Dems are going to drag the war out until Exxonmoble can drain the last drop of oil out of the ground.

Its time for a 3rd party people. Its not unheard of, the USA used to have LOTS of political parties, and most civilized countries today do as well.

Bobbi Dykema Katsanis writes "What I do know is that all of these calls to vote against the Democrats and start third parties are NOT GOING TO WORK and will probably result in more Republicans getting elected if enough people do that."

It's moronic positions like yours that keep getting us deeper in the mess we're in, more Republicans or more Democrats getting elected will result in the same. But you're right about one thing, we don't need a third party, we need a SECOND party, since Repubs and Dems are two factions of the same criminal enterprise. Go get informed.

Doc Zimmerman, I don't believe they will fire off any nukes 500 or more feet below ground level in Iran and besides, the best and most oil is in Iraq. What is gonna kill you, your family and me and all, is the depleted uranium they are firing off above ground level,___ everyplace on the planet.

Perhaps you are one of the many who has not heard of the problem. This is one of over one million websites that explains the sad story. If you are in your sixties, don't sweat it, most of us will be here for another twenty years. Those who have spent any tme in Iraq? Well,__ maybe three years before they sicken with radiation poisoning and another ten before it kills them.

www.protecthawaii.ws/page2.html

When nuclear weapons are used as the DOD has plans to use them in the Middle East, will the oil that is irradiated be distinguishable from the oil that is not?

How will we know that the oil refineries in the USA will not be creating a radioactive bath of aerosol fallout?

I have to laugh at the kooky theories you far lefties have to concoct to explain why you can't elect your candidates. But did it ever just occur to you that maybe, you are a small fringe minority in the party????????????????????????????????????

Later yo

The problem is that people think the Democratic Party is a democracy. Its not. There's the pretense of democracy, but ever since George McGovern the Democrats have been honing and fine tuning a set of presidential nomination rules that absolutely, ironclad-lock, ensure that a grassroots candidate like Kucinich can not become the Democratic nominee.

Look at the primary calendar. Its many big states fast, fast, fast. They combine this with campaign finance rules that are as wide open as they can make them. That means the corporate candidates are going to be hopping from big state to big state with an advertising budget of something like $50 to $75 million dollars. In those big states, there will be saturation advertising from the corporate candidate with the corporate media echoing the message.

You saw this last time with the sudden blitz of the message that "John Kerry is electable" that bombarded the nation right at the time of all the key primaries. Dean never knew what hit him and didn't have a chance.

This things going to be over so fast your head is going to spin. There's going to be a flurry of events and before you know it, wham-bam-thank-you-maam, the Democratic nominee will be selected. Dennis Kucinich with no ad budget and trying to drive around to actually talk to voters can't compete in that system. It ain't gonna happen.

And I'll add to my previous posts. If the voters were to go vote for Kucinich anyways, I suspect the VOTE COUNTING COMPUTERS would report that Hillary won. Don't overly focus on the voting machines. The really key computer in the system is the the one that spits out the 'official results'.

And, even if after all of that Kucinich showed up at the convention with so many elected delegates that he could defeat even the 800 undemocratic, unelected extra superdelegates the Democrats toss into the mix, then you'd see every dirty trick in the book by the Democrats to still beat Kucinich. You'd see credential fights trying to replace Kucinich delegates. You'd see bribery to turn Kucinich delegates away.

The problem is that the Democratic Party is not democratic. They have no intention of letting the members of the party choose a candidate that the leaders and big money don't support. The Democratic Party is a rigged game designed to make sure that some silly grassroots campaign can't possibly change things.

This is where the Democratic party is dangerous to any attempt to progressive change. Because they try to maintain the illusion that you can change things from within the Democratic Party, it takes energy and money and it diverts them into these hopeless can't win races.

And you know at the end of it you'll see Kucinich endorse whatever pro-war, pro-corporate candidate the Democrats choose. Just like last time you'll get the disgusting image of Kucinich telling you all to go vote for Hillary. You know that's the end of the line for this campaign. That's its final destination, and someone probably is already writing the little endorse-Hillary speech Dennis will have to give. Meanwhile, there will still be an election to fight and all that money and time and effort that goes into a Kucinich primary campaign will just be gone, gone, gone.

Let me start by stating a fact: George W. Bush and his gang of misfits got us into this Iraq war through distortions of intelligence and outright lies presented to other world governments, to the other branches of government and to the public.

Cleaning up the mess that President Bush started has no real good alternatives. Our choices are to:
1. Leave completely without leaving any troops in the region to intervene if ethnic cleansing takes place.
2. "Stay the course" to disarm the factions, eliminate the foreign fighters, and secure the borders to stop arms from coming in to replace the ones we took away from the factions.
3. Leave some troops in the region to intervene if/ when civil war erupts so that we can: a. stop any genocide b. prevent war from spilling into any other country.

Lets look at the alternatives as I see it:

If we continue choice #2 we continue to risk american casualties while the Iraqi central government continues to defer their country's security to our soldiers. We will continue to be in the middle of a civil war in which our troops are fighting both ends against the middle. Not a good place to be.
If we choose choice #1 we will leave a war ravaged country where five years after the start of the war things are worse for that country in every imaginable way. Most people are unemployed with no basic services for their people including water and electricity. Before we entered Iraq and removed Saddam, the separate factions, while not in love with each other, were not fighting (if only because of the control over the country which Saddam held). Now, when we leave, there is the real possibility that there will be a civil war in which the Sunnis (paybacks a bitch) will be slaughtered.
Choice 3 is self explanatory.

Many people who call themselves progressives do not seem to want to take into account all the moral issues involved in this decision. They state that this is an immoral war and that we should GET OUT NOW! They state that all americans are responsible for the mistakes that their government makes (I would only hope that they include themselves) I agree on both counts. This is an immoral war started by stupid men, and we are responsible for what our government started, and so must try to right what is wrong. Therefore should we just tell those people whose lives we have totally fucked up: "uh, sorry for the mess, uh thanks for cleaning it up for us." Where is the morality in that.

The democratic leadership is showing courage when they take the moral high road and acknowedge the situation for what it is. They didn't create the situation, but they will be called upon to fix it. The same "progressive" voices who condemn them for not vowing to remove our troops immediately would be the same ones to condemn them if genocide followed from following that advice.

Most of you here who want immediate withdrawl are supporting Dennis Kucinich. It seems to me that Kucinich either doesn't understand the situation on the ground in Iraq or he is a demagogue who will say whatever he believes his political base wants to hear. Kucinich is both the Charles Linburgh and the Neville Chamberlain of our generation. He is using the same isolationist arguments which were prevalent before WW2. These are:

1. The government fights uses the military at the behest of its largest corporations.
2. The government is imperialistic (or today fascist).
3. The government is manipulated by the Jews (or today the Israeli government).
4. The leaders of other countries (or groups)didn't really mean what they said or were misunderstood, and so pose no threat to us or our allies.
5. Apease, Apease, Apease

Does he care about our responsibilty toward those whose lives we have ruined. Has he discussed how we are going to own up to our moral responsibilties for what we've done. Are we going to "eat and run" without helping to clear the dishes off the table. Since he is whitewashing Amadinthehead's comments about wanting to "wipe Israel off the map," Will he and his supporters be pleased when Iran destroys Israel.

I think deep down that that is the ultimate goal. The America first party which publicly defended the Nazi's before WW2, had a lot in common with the radical left of today, which has a lot more in common with the far right then they are willing to admit. One doesn't have to subscribe to their isolationist, anti-semitic ideology to be a liberal. Not all social progressives are isolationists like Kook-sin-itch. Edwards is a way better choice because his plan is the best moral choice, but I've take Hillary, Biden, or Dodd over that big eared schmuck Kook-sin-itch anyday.

QUOTE:

smallaxe August 12th, 2007 10:06 pm,

For me this is the only path. Dennis Kucinich far and away best represents my interests and I will continue to help fund his campaign. But I'll also support Barak or Edwards (sorry, just cannot handle "Whichever Way the Polls Blow Hillary") to hedge my bets. After seeing what followed the installation of shrub in 2000, to do otherwise is simply a fool's errand.

END QUOTE

Granted, Kucinich should get the Dem's nomination but he will not. Period. He is miles away from most of them in his thinking.

You sound like you are in the "lesser of two evils" rut. Saying you will vote for Obama and Edwards, it sounds like you will support any piece of pro-war, pro-corporate, pro-bush D trash they throw up there for you to vote for. That's exactly what they expect you to do.

In part, that's how we got in this disaster in the first damn place by people continually voting for this "lesser of two evils" nonsense, rather than taking a principled stand and refusing to have anything to do with this one-party system with two right wings.

"We" are not going to vote our way out of this disaster, especially considering we have a fraudulent and corrupt voting system and we are now in a dictatorship.

The only path left (and the only two options remaining are):

1. Long national strikes, and
2. MILLIONS AND MILLIONS taking to the streets in every city and town across this nation, especially in the District of Columbia…

And I don't see either happening because the sheep aren't paying attention because they could care less. Most people will live very comfortable under a dictatorship as long as they are left alone.

QUOTE:

smallaxe August 12th, 2007 10:06 pm,

We have to do all within our power to get the message across to our timid slim majority in Congress that we want major change in our nation's predatory foreign policy, oil guzzling energy policy, overstuffed defense budgets, and shoddy price gouging system of denial of healthcare, among other things.

END QUOTE

Two snags with what you wrote:

The bush-Enablers are NOT timid. Since 2000 they have a spine of steel for helping bush.

The congress doesn't give a damn what "we" think as they have demonstrated repeatedly since 2000. Why do people have so much trouble accepting that? (Because they don't want to).

As someone wrote on here yesterday: Someone on here called John Conyers' office and was told by the guy they spoke with that the people ("we") who show up in DC to protest don't represent the average American person or the American public. From what this guy in Conyers' office told the person on here, that's a widely-held view within the congress, according to Conyers' office. So based on that, I would say that the congress don't give a damn about e-mails, faxes, phone calls, petitions or visits to their office by "we." Because "we" are not important to them, which some of us already knew to begin with. They have made it as clear as day for all of us to see. Unfortunately, some people STILL refuse to see it.

"So….what is the difference between a Republican and a Democrat". Not enough, I'm afraid. One of the last true viable progressive, Paul Wellstone, went down in a mysterious plane crash (what else is new John, Bobby, Martin and Malcolm?).

The system plays for keeps. The pollution of money in determining who we are allowed to vote for and how they are portrayed by the "free press" (check out Squealer in "Animal Farm", also worth a revisit for Orwell's portrayal of fear as a tool to keep the populace in line) has become so pervasive that almost anyone who makes their way into office has strings attached.

Jim Hightower has a chapter in "If the Gods had Meant us to Vote They would have Given us Candidates" titled "Some Say We need a Third Party, I Wish we had a Second One" which pretty much says it all.

But, dwelling on this sad state of affairs gets us nowhere. System's can be changed (see "Moral Minority - Our Skeptical Forefathers" by Brooke Allen to read the views of those who kicked King George out on his ass) by activists.

In Massachusetts I found it refreshing to see how an outpouring of lobbying by phone calls, emails and personal meetings by voters with their representatives turned a number of seeming sure negative votes on the civil right to same-sex marriage to positives which carried the day.

Same applies to the election of Deval Patrick, our new progressive governor, who rode to office buoyed by a largely grassroots campaign. We now have a governor who actually believes in healthcare as a right, sustainable energy, properly funded public schools, etc. What a breath of fresh air after living through the ultimate money-bags phoney, Mitt Romney, now busy trying to buy his way into the presidency.

So few people contact their representatives that I'm sure many of them figure why even bother protecting our interests. If we as voters don't take our responsibility to be actively involved in our government seriously, why should they care? Much easier to just cater to a few masters who keep them in office with buckets of money.

I feel, like it or not, we have to start from where we are right now. We have to do all within our power to get the message across to our timid slim majority in Congress that we want major change in our nation's predatory foreign policy, oil guzzling energy policy, overstuffed defense budgets, and shoddy price gouging system of denial of healthcare, among other things.

For me this is the only path. Dennis Kucinich far and away best represents my interests and I will continue to help fund his campaign. But I'll also support Barak or Edwards (sorry, just cannot handle "Whichever Way the Polls Blow Hillary") to hedge my bets. After seeing what followed the installation of shrub in 2000, to do otherwise is simply a fool's errand.

Quote: "Now is the time to unite the energy and resources of the people into a new party."

Sometimes healing occurs when a patient is able to somehow shift perception and belief-- it's called quantum healing.

I urge you to visit firethegrid.com to learn about the next global intention: "Project Cause."

It is an opportunity to make that shift-- "to unite the energy and resources of the people into a new party." (Now is the time.)

Perhaps this would be a "party" where politicians are irrelevant.

Peace.

Let's imagine it.
Feel it.
Be it.

That's how we make it.

(A General Strike and the cessation of excess consumption would help too.)

Kathyodat: Please five me a call. Corvallis. Rebel Farms. Thanks!

Abbeywood: Your vidio was also posted at DKos and Alternet today. Lots of buzz.

The following was posted on another thread by newageartist. It is one of the best arguements I've read for not giving up and supporting Kucinich. It seems to fit here for reasons not to give up until AFTER the primaries no matter what party you are in or support:

newageartist August 12th, 2007 9:13 am
Let's talk about Kucinich and progressive agendas for a minute.

I'm going to try to be as objective as I can by using personal history in regards to the Kucinich campaign. I supported him as a Green back in 2004, volunteering in my state during the Dem primary, promoting his progressive platform more than the man as a Democratic Party politician. His platform was a carbon copy of the Green Party platform and was an obvious choice for me during the 2004 Democratic Party primary season to support. I did my homework, read his book, studied his platform positions and came to the conclusion that this guy was the real deal… a progressive in Democratic Party clothing.

Some here suggest that support for Kucinich or any Democrat is a false hope for the progressive cause. In other words, once a Dem, always a Dem; once a corporate sellout, always a corporate sellout. I would agree to a point. I understand that the Democratic Party was hijacked years ago from the social justice, world peace party and morphed into a corporate controlled and big money financed political lie machine. But I also understand that it is pointless to continually butt heads with the entrenched two-party system we currently have since both parties are like siblings from the same corporate world dominating parents.

Wishing and hoping for a savior on a white horse to rise from the ashes and carry the banner of progressive causes outside the two party system is actually more self defeating than support for a progressive working inside the duopoly. We saw what happened to Nader in 2004 when he mounted an Independent run to raise American consciousness and bring progressive ideals to the table for national discussion. He was completely shut out of any national debate and was dismissed by corporate media as a fringe politicaiian who enabled Bush to attain the presidency. We could go into all the arguments about Nader but it would waste space on this thread at the present time. I will say one thing about his 2004 Independent run. Nader waited long into the Democratic Party primary season hoping that his friend Kucinich would somehow catch on with the voting public. When this didn't happen and Kucinich still lingered in the 1 - 5% range among Dem voters, Nader made his move. Meanwhile, the only glimmer of hope outside the duopoly, the Green Party, opted to become Democrat-lite and run a Democrat in Green clothing candidate. The rest is history.

If progressives are truthful with themselves, they will support a politicain who carries their banner regardless of whether they are members of the Sociialist, Green, Democrat or any other party. It is the PLATFORM, not the person or party affiliation that will bring about the change we need in this country. Being bullheaded and stubbornly defending our point of view has been the progressives' Achilles heel for years. It has caused us to be swept aside time and time again with national elections. It is time for progressives to shed their defensive skin and embrase any politician who carries their banner.

Kucinich is honest. He's a politician of integrity. He has a progressive vision.

Should he quit the Democratic Party? Probably. Will he? No. He knows that he now has the ear of his fellow lawmakers and has the inside position to bring forward peace initiatives and social justice agendas that he couldn't do sitting outside as a Green, Socialist or Independent. Until a strong, viable third party arises that actually becomes an electable player with the two corporate parties (I'm always hoping the Greens will step up somehow), Kucinich is our one hope inside to make the changes we want.

Will Kucinich win his party's primary? No. As much as I and others would hope to see him not only win his party primary and even become president, reality says otherwise.

So why support him? Because he is our only hope. By supporting him during the primary season, we give him and our progressive agenda the only chance to be heard by voters in this country. I've seen his support growing among people who never even knew about him before. I've seen people "light up" when they hear his views on issues. Americans are tired of the war. They are tired of the corrupted Washington scene. They are tired and want a real change. They need a man like Kucinich. Help him be heard and you'll be helping your own progressive cause.

Peace

ummmm erma:
i hope you have a very nice helmet,
i did my 20's
'n 30's
'n 40's
with out one
god damn those walls are hard

bought one in my 50'
still usen it in my 60's

maybe can will it
to goodwill
in my 70's

truck well
helmet or no

ken

And to think, Some people still believe the New York Times is a liberal newspaper. LOL

You might find this article of interest. It sort of covers the problem and suggests at least one solution.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_stephen__070811_whatever_happened_to.htm

Democrats are certainly not the answer, nor is the other side of the two backed beast.

Dont back the party. Back the person.

Near election time, if you live in an electorate where the democrat candidate is not progressive, then dont support them. Support a third party instead.

If you live in an electorate that has one of the handful of good democrats or the electorate of the one good republican, then support him/her with both hands.

Hillary, Pelosi and Obama are anti-progressives. Support for them is support in the wrong direction.

The more I look at Kucinich, the more I like him. I could not ask for better. He is well worth supporting.

So, now we've heard it. If the Republicans are elected, the war will go on. If the Democrats are elected, the war will go on. So....what is the difference between a Republican and a Democrat/.////mmmmm, this is a tough one---oh yeah Republican is spelled r-e-p-u-b-l-i-c-a-n and Democrat is spelled d-e-m-o-c-r-a-t. A no brainer. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE!!!!!

Show them all next election. Vote for anything BUT a Democrat or a Republican. (So-called "independents" don't count. They are only trying to get in the back door). They don't even have the guts to declare themselves anything.

I believe it is important to email the morons that wrote this article and let them know that they missed a candidate, Dennis J. Kucinich. I did. I let them know how odd I found it that they from NYC had never heard of him, but me that lives in a town with a pop. of 620 has! Lies by ommission..how Republican of them!
I dont think Kucinich is going to leave the Democratic party. If he had at the beginning of this race, or the one in 2004 I think a heck of a lot of people would never have heard of him..about the only exposure he gets is on the Democratic debates..as an Independent or Green, he wouldn't even get that. A lot of people just think he is a flake..but being a 6th term Democratic congress member does give him some status with those people.
And if I never heard the name Ron Paul again..especially linked with Kucinich it will be too soon. What is the attraction? He is not only not for Universal Healthcare, he wants to end healthcare for anyone but the wealthy...no more Medicare or Medicaid for the elderly or disabled. Are all of you wealthy? And can you be sure that you will be for the rest of your lives, because without healthcare none of us are going to live very long.
And yes, Kucinich can win! The Iraq war can end! Let's stay on task!

erma...
You are sure full of yourself aren't you. Here's a label:
Megalomaniac!

erma, you are so right on. Pay no attention to Brown. An understandably panicked old line Democrat who wants to blame the progressives for the failures of the Democratic party. When a party is unresponsive to it's base it needs to lose that base. If it wants to be a DLC party it can go find a new base that agrees with it's agenda. When people start getting really rude as Brown has, you know they are reduced to reacting with their brainstem instead of cognitive skills.

There aren't enough of us to make a difference -yet - but the tide is turning for the Democrats, as it needs to. And the public is getting uneasy about the path of this system which looks less and less like two parties.

Here is a list of a few of the political parties in the United States:

http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm

Most of them don't have the name recognition of the Democratic and Republican parties.

How often does the M$M mention any of these parties or their candidates?

The Bush-Cheney Crime Syndicate doesn't need to use the excuse of "losing face" if the military leaves Iraq. They've already killed probably a million Iraqi civilians, executed Saddam, and installed their puppet government. Isn't that enough?

Just as the Chimp said on the carrier when he dressed up in a military uniform and pretended to be part of the bombing, when he stuffed his crotch with the codpiece, "Mission Accomplished!"

QUOTE:

SkySonja August 12th, 2007 7:13 pm

And if I never heard the name Ron Paul again..especially linked with Kucinich it will be too soon. What is the attraction?

END QUOTE

What's the attraction? Who the hell knows!

Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul. Sick of hearing about him.

I don't know how any true progressive could even think of voting for a Repug/Libertarian and what I know about RP I could never vote for him. Some people just grab onto any candidate, chant their name and other people follow like a bunch of sheep.

I wish Kucinich would leave the bush-Enabling Dem Party. Why would he want to have anything to do with that useless party after all he's seen them do FOR bush since 2000.

Some say he stays for "influence," just because he has a D behind his name. What "influence?" What "influence" has he had to cause a change in ANYTHING to date? NONE. NOTHING. Kucinich is just one person, which most of them with a D behind their name completely ignore. So he has no "influence" with the Ds, so why stay? And the only time the bush State Media talk about him is to make light or make fun of him.

Oh I know all about his Cheney impeachment resolution. That ain't going to happen. The bush-Enablers are not going to impeach the very people they have been enabling since 2000.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/07/14/ap3914332.html

We've won in Iraq. We can leave whenver we want! Lol

abbybwood,

Thanks for the Cheney clip. The M$M ought to be playing that all day long (I know it is wishful thinking and never will happen)!

The concept that it takes years or even months to get out of Iraq is bull.

The General says tell the guys they are going home and they can be out damn fast. It is called retreat. The army used to blow a bugle and out they went stopping only to cover their butt on the retreat.

Most of the equipment is worn out so just leave anything that don't go behind. The cost of staying there is too high to screw around getting out.

QUOTE:

karlof1 August 12th, 2007 5:56 pm

Erma,

It sounds like the only choice you're leaving yourself is armed resistence/revolt/revolution.

END QUOTE

If you had read and comprehended what I wrote you would noticed that I listed not one, but the only TWO options remaining:

1. Long national strikes, and
2. MILLIONS AND MILLIONS taking to the streets in every city and town across this nation, especially in the District of Columbia…

You're in denial as to where we are. We are in a dictatorship and one is not going to be able to "become the system" in a dictatorship. Period. I didn't say this before, but people have been chanting this "become the system" nonsense ever since 2000 and you see where things are today, don't you? It AIN'T happened and it's not about to. It's nothing but wishful-thinking which is what many so-called "progressives" thrive in.

But if you want to hit wall after wall by trying to "become the system" to try to somehow change this pro-war, pro-imperalistic, pro-bush corporate system then go right ahead. Go for it. No one here is stopping you from pursuing this nonsense.

But do come back at some point in time, and let us all know how things are going with it... (as the dictatorship becomes stronger and fascism becomes thicker).

I campaigned and voted for Kerry and Salazar in 2004 and what did I get for my efforts? More 'Patriot Acts', more Military Commissions, more kidnappings, torture, and war funding. I will vote for Kucinich in the primaries and if he isn't the nominee, I will vote for him again even if I have to write his name in. I will vote for the person I want to be president, not who I think might win.

Brown August 12th, 2007 5:41 pm,

You must be pretty thick. I say that because what I have said repeatedly about Kucinich is that he is the best candidate out there for a true progressive.

I also said I hope he doesn't cave on his principles and endorse Hillary. He did cave in 2004 and endorsed bush-Enabler john kerry.

I have also said he's not about to get the nomination because the bush-Enablers are not about to put him up there as the nominee when they have run as far from him as they possibly can.

I have NEVER referred to Kucinich as a bush-Enabler. I don't know where you got that from.

And if you believe in that "we must become the system" nonsense then go for it. Go ahead and waste your time trying to do that and hit one wall after the other. Frankly, I don't know why one would want to become part of the corporate one-party system with two right-wings.

As I said earlier, we are way beyond that at this point in time. That thinking is "politics as usual" thinking. "Politics as usual" ended in 2000 with the stolen election.

Then you asked me didn't I learn in elementary school not to label people?

LOL.

You use labels yourself. Republican,
Democrat, Green, independent (with a small "i" meaning no party affiliation) and so forth are all labels which define people. You used those labels yourself.

You just don't like the fact that I tell it like it is. Tough.

Dichterfreund August 12th, 2007 2:41 pm

"He (DENNIS KUCINICH) would immediately be attacked by the DLC & the NYT/Post etc. as a "spoiler" whose candidacy would only "give the Republicans the White House", just as the same bunch endlessly repeats the same about Nader."

I think a lot of people are waking up to the fact that you can't be a "spoiler" if there's nothing to spoil.

If we all vote for Kucinich in the primaries, he will either make it on the ballot for the first Tuesday in November or he won't. Frankly, if Democratic candidate Kucinich doesn't get on the ballot to run against the chosen Republican, it doesn't really matter to me which other Democrat makes it, since there's not enough difference among them for me to be concerned that I threw away my vote.

Kucinich is running as a Democrat, not as an Independent, and he will get my vote!

~Democrats Say Leaving Iraq May Take Years~
.
Maybe so, but how long will it take humanity to leave these Democrats? I'm gone already.

Erma,

It sounds like the only choice you're leaving yourself is armed resistence/revolt/revolution. It's almost as bad as the Death Party's refusal to talk with "enemies." It would seem your level of alienation has reached anomie, a condition that, like alcoholism, must be admitted by the patient before any cure can be affected.

oh I forgot to mention that we won't even get to strike on 9-11-07 since the next false flag operation, gulf of tonkin incident and war with Iran is going to occur before that date. So brace yourselves for martial law

If you want proof that yes we live in a fascist system, with a corperate controlled media and government.... just look at how the 09-10-2007 and 09-11-2007 general strikes recieve ZERO coverage from the media.

The corperate media and government is right in front of all of us, I don't know why so many people have difficulty seeing it. Braindead and brainwashed I suppose.

So they would leave troops in Iraq to "fight terrorism." Someone should inform them that there wasn't any "terrorism" in Iraq before the U.S. attacked and occupied the country, and that if they'd just leave, the "terrorism" would die a natural death.

How much more proof do we need that the Democrats are aligned with the Republicans, the rest of the war profiteers, and big oil? The reason for keeping the troops in oil-rich Iraq is to guard the oil/financial interests of the wealthy. That's the job of the U.S. military in this day and age.

erma...
"Still drinking the dems' koolaid are you?"

No,erma, because I don't believe in PARTY! I believe in issues and individuals. You alleged progressives that keep throwing the baby out with the bath water are just as guilty of keeping us locked in "politics -as-usual as are the corporations!

As karlof1 WISELY said above: "You can't change the system from outside, which is why we must become the system."
You are labelling D.K. "Democrat" in a very ugly, 'same as"
kind of way. It MUST be obvious to you that he is NOT Dem-as-usual unless you are sleep walking.

If he were to go Green or Independent, as many have suggested (and I even thought it a great idea at one time--no more) then "We The People" would have NO, ZERO, ZIP, ZELCH, NADA voice out there speaking for us! Hell they are ignoring him now, what the hell do you think would happen if he went even FURTHER outside the accepted lines???

Didn't you learn in elementary school not to "label" anyone?
I wouldn't care if this man was a registered Republican--I'd support him and spread his name like wildfire because of his stances, heart, courage, and sincerity in caring for "US/U.S." Think about it....

Kucinich runs as an independent, democrats lose the election, people will blame it all on
Dennis like they blame it all on Nader.

Jeff Zeleny and Marc Santora in this article conveniently left out the one Democratic Presidential candidate who is ALL about getting out of Iraq now, Dennis Kucinnich. Nice job, Jeff and Marc!

QUOTE:

karlof1 August 12th, 2007 5:18 pm

Erma, You can't change the system from outside, which is why we must become the system. In Oregon, my state, we have no machines to corrupt the vote. To wait until "our election system is restored to one that is fair, honest and legitimate," means to wait forever, as the US election system has never been "fair, honest, and legitimate."

END QUOTE

"We" don't have time to "become the system." Period. That would take years and years to do. "We" don't have years. "We" have very little time remaining. Your comment reminds me of some people saying, "clean out the congress...throw them all out." Oh it's nice to say and it sounds easy that but it would take literally years to do that. For example, war-profiteer Feinstein just got back in (in 2006) for ANOTHER 6 term (until 2012). And she's only one example. So much for the "throwing them all out" nonsense.

"We" have very little time remaining at the rate things are going. ANYTHING that has a chance in hell of changing this dictatorial course we are on HAS TO HAPPEN AS SOON AS POSSIBLE (such as long national strikes and MILLIONS AND MILLIONS taking to the streets in every city and town across this nation...do I think that's going to happen? Hell no. The sheep can't be bothered.)

Waiting until "we become the system" will be waaaaaaaaaay to late. And it's nonsense. Good luck trying to do that. You'll smack into one brick wall after the other.

One doesn't have to have machines to have a corrupt voting system. That is a given. But these easily-hackable machines only ADD to the corruption. If you don't have them where you are, fine. You completely missed my point about our election system...but that's all right. I realise many people prefer to live in denial about it and they trot out the "it's always been corrupt and fraudulent." So? But that's not what I'm talking about.

Do what Nixon did, say "peace with honor" and just leave.

Worrying about the Democrats versus the Republicans is like worrying about who wins the homecoming queen contest. The permanent, corporate administration has no intention of leaving Iraq. Ever. The only good thing is that through consolidation the boardroom feudal lords become fewer and fewer and much more identifiable targets. No wonder they're developing a permanent mercenary army.

Just in case ya'll missed this one minute video of Cheney, it's well worth the time it takes to view it:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I

EveningLand, The Irish resistence/war for independence has lasted over 350 years and is still ongoing.

Erma, You can't change the system from outside, which is why we must become the system. In Oregon, my state, we have no machines to corrupt the vote. To wait until "our election system is restored to one that is fair, honest and legitimate," means to wait forever, as the US election system has never been "fair, honest, and legitimate."

QUOTE:

Brown August 12th, 2007 5:04 pm

erma…

PLEASE KNOCK OFF THE SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECIES! THAT KIND OF SUBTLE SABOTAGE IS DEADLY TO HOPE!

END QUOTE

I'm a realist and I tell it the way I see it. Period. I could post what I wish and hope would be the case, but what good would that do? Other than to provide false hope.

Still drinking the dems' koolaid are you? Some of the side effects of that intoxicating koolaid are:

1. wishful-thinking
2. delusions
3. causes one to live in illusions
4. false hope (speaking of your "deadly to hope" language)

Hey Erma!

I've been yacking about the damn computerized voting machines for MONTHS on these pages!!

I am forever calling for voting Absentee and Xeroxing your ballots AND we also need to go to our polling place on Election Day at the close of polls and DEMAND to be a part of the counting, which, I believe, is our Constitutional right.

Go to YouTube and search: "Diebold Princeton University".

Erma is 100% correct. They'll try to distract us with their phoney candidates then like total fools we'll march in and vote on a corrupted computers not even owned by the taxpayers. Private corporations run the voting.

Maybe W.C. Fields was right when he said, "Never give a sucker an even break."

If we have a draft, the first people to be drafted should be the sons/daughters of ALL politicians federal state and local, of heads of giant corperations, of families whose household income exceeds 100K, college republicans...

You see where i'm goin with this? And that means no "deferments" not even for medical reasons. There are plenty of non-combat jobs that they can do to help in Iraq.

I'm really not kidding either, this should be the actual draft proposal. The war on terror will be over within weeks if this legislation is passed.

QUOTE:

karlof1 August 12th, 2007 4:54 pm

Erma,

There are very few "liberals" or "progressives" or humanitarians or "real" law and order types wanting ALL the laws enforced in Congress; most are supporters/enablers of the Corporate/Imperialist Death Party, which is fascist in its essense. Clearly, if we want candidates to vote for, we must run for office ourselves.

END QUOTE

Yes, that's true.

As for running for office ourselves, only after our election system is restored to one that is fair, honest and legitimate. Otherwise, one is wasting their time when the public goes to vote on a corrupt system.

erma...

PLEASE KNOCK OFF THE SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECIES! THAT KIND OF SUBTLE SABOTAGE IS DEADLY TO HOPE!

"DEMOCRATS SAY LEAVING IRAQ MAY TAKE YEARS"

Pay no attention to their shabby, ignorant talk. Make hay anyway you can to let the ignorant bastards in government know that you want the US out of Iraq.

Copy the article titled "Fatigue Cripples US Army In Iraq" straight from the webpage so the photo of the sleeping GI is included (do not use the printer-friendly version). Only the first three pages are needed.

Fasten them together and mail them to your senators and representative with a cover letter. Keep it simple, straight to the point, and speak your mind with absolutely no fear. My cover letter follows. Please make your own, in your own words; that will be more effective than borrowing mine.

13 August 2007

Bob Etheridge
1533 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Bob:

What more is there to say or do about the marvelous adventure the US attempted in Iraq?

I sincerely hope that, if you are not able at this time to feel deep regret for your support of this "war", that you will live to be deeply ashamed of every action you took to allow this senseless war to begin, and to go on.

There is simply nothing you can do to atone for the great sin of this war and the spectacular destruction it has brought to the entire world.

All that you can do now is to move quickly and decisively to end the US occupation of Iraq.

Anything less than that is indicative of a heartless ignorance on your part.

Most sincerely,

Russell S. Wollman

An article from the New York Times about the Democrats' views on what to do with the USian occupation of Iraq that manages not to mention Kucinich and his position on the matter -- what a fine instance of "balanced and objective" reporting! Hypocritical scum!

In all seriousness, the Times tells us that three challenges face the next president in Iraq. Let's take a look at these alleged three challenges.

1. "What to do if there is a genocide?"

If the Lancet report is correct about the US's having already massacred one million Iraqis, then we are already well on the way to a genocide, perpetrated by the US and its main flunky, the English military. The longer the US stays, the more thousands upon thousands of Iraqis it will kill.

Also, the longer the US stays, the more Iraqis will join the resistance, and the tougher the resistance will become. The resistance in Ireland lasted four decades, there is no reason wby the resistance in Iraq will not last at least as long. ('Where there is oppression, there is resistance' is a basic axiom of sound political theory.)

2. "What to do if chaos in Iraq threatens to engulf the region in a wider war?"

The chaos in Iraq is already destabilizing the region, as Israel's savaging of Lebanon amply demonstrated last summer. Turkey is stationing troops along its border with Iraq and is ready to invade the Kurdish territories at the slightest act of provocation. The US is constantly taunting and threatening Iran, amassing more and more navy buildings off its territorial waters and conducting stealthy operations from Iraq across the Iranian border, not to mention its arming the Saudis, the Egyptians, and the Israelis to the teeth.

3. "What to do if Iraq descends into further lawlessness and becomes the staging ground for terrorist attacks elsewhere, including in the United States?"

Was Iraq a lawless land before the US invaded it in 2003 and started murdering its population by the hundreds of thousands? Was there any presence of terrorists and suicide bombers there before the US invasion? Anyone not completely brainwashed by BushCo's litany of lies and fabrications knows that the answer to these questions is negative.

Since the lawlessness and the terrorism were caused by the US invasion and occupation, the lawlessness and the terrorist activities will continue as long as the US occupies Iraq and murders its citizens.

So much for the NY Times's and the Democrats' phony concerns.

PJD observes:

But Kucinich? The NYT, the paper of record, neatly drops him down Winston Smith's memory hole.

Oh, how I dearly hate the corporate media. They are, above any politician, even Bush, The Enemy.

********************

Let's just hope that Dennis is not the analog to Goldstein (or was it Goldberg?) in 1984--the non-existant leader of the opposition used by BB to draw out those whose minds were bent towards "thought crime" so that they could be "cleansed".

***************

Anybody going to DC on 09/15/07 for the impeachment rally?

seriousprofessor,

Clearly, the Republican faction of the Death Party will run a candidate whose goal will be to maintain and expand the Empire, which implicitly means consumating the Iraqi Holocaust. Will the Democrat faction do the same? If the Imperial publications--NY Times, WA Post, Wall Street Journal--get their way, Clinton is the "chosen" candidate, and her position on the Empire is no different from her husband who escalated the Holocaust and primed Iraq for Bush.

Erma,

There are very few "liberals" or "progressives" or humanitarians or "real" law and order types wanting ALL the laws enforced in Congress; most are supporters/enablers of the Corporate/Imperialist Death Party, which is fascist in its essense. Clearly, if we want candidates to vote for, we must run for office ourselves.

QUOTE:

VAGreen August 12th, 2007 4:36 pm

"Four years after the last presidential race featured early signs of war protest, particularly in the candidacy of Howard Dean, a new phase of the debate seems to be unfolding, with antiwar groups giving the Democrats latitude to take positions short of a full and immediate withdrawal."

This says it all. When the peace movement reconciles itself to pretending that War Lite is "antiwar", then our troops our going to be there for a long, long time.

END QUOTE

You know, I will probably get slammed for saying this but I don't give a damn.

About a week ago I was saying to a friend, "most so-called progressives/liberals are useless just like the scum in congress they support." He agreed. He said, "they (most progressives) don't belong in politics because they cave and cave and cave."

Uh huh. True.

We have seen it over and over. Cave into this. Cave into that. They will accept this. They will accept that from the bush-Enabling dems.

It makes one feel like SCREAMING!

You don't see the regressive right-wing trash caving and caving and accepting this and accepting that. No, it's just the so-called "liberals/progressives" who back down repeatedly. Can't seem to stand for anything. Except the dem-Enablers who stand strongly FOR bush.

I'm talking about the bush-Enabler Dem supporters/voters (or the Dem koolaid drinkers as I call them).

Those who are STILL supporting the useless bush-Enabler dems seem to accept anything from the Enablers. These so-called "progressives" keep adjusting and accommodating and weaking their positions in order to hold their support for this party of bush-Enablers.

I don't weaken my positions at all, but many people do. It's an outrage. And some of these people are the same ones who will make tired excuse after excuse for the bush-Enablers because these supporters are so tied to that "D" party-line nonsense.

It's enough to make you SCREAM.

HEY Jeff Zeleny & Marc Santora...Are you out there reading this???!!! WHY THE FUCK IS THERE NO MENTION OF DENNIS KUCINICH IN THIS ARTICLE??? Are you pushing for the war to continue? Arew you two in the pockets of your corporate bosses? It's omissions of the ONLY TRUE anti-war candidate that wants me to call on a neo-revolution against you media puppets, corporate lobbyists, and the government in general.

Your bullshit omissions like this is determined to keep us in chains! Your tunnel vision proliferates a feeling of hopelessness through the struggling masses who NEED the hope D.K. offers.

Damn you and all your ilk!!!

"Four years after the last presidential race featured early signs of war protest, particularly in the candidacy of Howard Dean, a new phase of the debate seems to be unfolding, with antiwar groups giving the Democrats latitude to take positions short of a full and immediate withdrawal."

This says it all. When the peace movement reconciles itself to pretending that War Lite is "antiwar", then our troops our going to be there for a long, long time.

Well, missing from this discussion here is...

What makes anyone think that cheney/bush are even leaving in 2009? And there's no one to make them leave should they cook up reasons why they must stay.

bush uses language such as "I'm the decider" and "MY government" in his speeches.

Does that sound like someone who has any intention of leaving to you?...after they have installed a dictatorship with the help of the bush-Enabler Dems.

Also, regardless of this shit candidate and that shit candidate, assuming there is a 2008 election, most people seem to be living under the illusion that we have a legitimate and honest election system, when we don't, as was demonstrated particularly in the last two presidential so-called "elections." What will it matter in the end when those who do vote cast ballots on a corrupt, fraudulent voting system which in the last 2 presidential "elections" "chose" the candidate with an R behind their name? (An official Repug candidate versus an unofficial Repug candidate like Hillary.)

No one is talking about our corrupt, fraudulent voting machines and these easily-hackable electronic voting machines owned by repugs (and pushed by the dems) are all over the nation.

Paying for it will take even longer.

The military industrial complex wins again.

I see no way out with these Democrats at the helm.

I like Kucinich.

When evil leads, evil follows. There is no good way to bomb people,the only leader to vote for is Bill Richardson. Leave Iraq to do what the Iraq people want Mot force them to be in our image,

Dichterfreund,

Point taken, Kucinich would need "party" support to start the long overdue rollback of the US Empire, and any leftovers from the bipartisan Death Party would surely try to stop any such humanitarian/commonsense actions.

So we enter elective politics to challenge Death Party politicos and provide just such a party base. The party's name isn't as important as its primary driving force, and the general public is more radicalized than at any time in a generation.

As I've said before, much can be learned from history; in this case, Lawrence Goodwyn's "The Populist Moment" offers many important lessons regarding organizing and educating the electorate while describing the disaster of "alignment" with the Democrat Party. Similarly, discovering why Henry Wallace's 1948 campaign failed provides insight. Last, understanding the implosion of the Democrat Party prior to the 1860 election provides a lesson in exploiting a polarized country in order to gain power as a third/fourth party as the Republican's did.

Alienation is rampant, which is why voter turnout is so low, and has proven this proverb: "If God had wanted us to vote, She would have given us candidates." Alienation can be turned to motivation. Future wellbeing hangs in the balance now more than ever, and ought to be seen as a critical crisis that will go unsolved by voting for the lesser of two evils, as the crisis will become more critical if any "mainstream" candidate from either faction of the Death Party becomes president.

As several discussants have noted, Kucinich is absent from this article. So is Gravel, whose position against the war seems to be forgotten even by commondreams readers.

Let us assume that genuinely anti-war candidates will continue to be marginalized by the mainstream press and their own party. In that case, I have a question.

Here it is. Ready?

Which mainstream party will nominate for President a candidate who promises to keep the US in Iraq for years?

You have five minutes. Remember to support your answer.

You can't just be a little EVIL, Evil is and EVIL does and EVIL follows. There is no such thing as a good way of shoting and bombing your people and calling your family death, collaterial damage. Not by real christians,Jews an Pagens yes can do.

Also relevant:

-- Clinton, Edwards and Obama have all said they would not rule out attacking Iran.

-- Polls are consistently showing that Edwards is the only Democrat who can win in November, 2008.

-- The presidential race is also about shaping the federal judiciary. Do we want more folks such as Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Thomas on the federal bench?

I would gladly vote for Kucinich if he would, like Cindy Sheehan, leave the Democratic Party! Kucinich, along with his proposals, were rejected by the corporate controlled Democratic Party in 2004. Kucinich and his supporters refuse to learn from this history and are now wanting us to repeat IN 2008 this purely symbolic act.

Kucinich's role is forever to be a spoiler for any real hope to end the corporate dictatorship facilitated by the REPUBLICAN/DEMOCRATIC party coalition.

To end the corporate dictatorship of this country we must have a PARTY THAT REJECTS CORPORATE FUNDING. We need a party that will STOP THE LOOTING AND PLUNDER (PRIVATIZATION) OF THE PUBLIC RESOURCES OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

MOST IMPORTANT: The new party must organize and mobilize the MILLIONS OF PEOPLE who have marched, protested, signed petitions, trying to influence the incumbent politicians. THIS HAS PROVEN TO BE UTTERLY FUTILE. WE NEED A NEW STRATEGY NOW IF WE ARE SERIOUS ABOUT CHANGE.

NO ONE INDIVIDUAL, ESPECIALLY ONE RUNNING IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, CAN POSSIBLY EFFECT THE CHANGES THAT ARE NEEDED!

WE NEED A NEW PARTY THAT RECRUITS AND RUNS CANDIDATES FOR ALL POSITIONS OF ELECTED OFFICE AT THE FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT.

WE ESPECIALLY NEED A NEW PARTY THAT REPRESENTS THE INTERESTS OF WORKING PEOPLE AND THE ORGANIZED LABOR MOVEMENT. THE DESPERATE SURVIVAL NEEDS OF WORKING PEOPLE TODAY ARE NOW VIRTUALLY IGNORED BY THE CORPORATE TWO PARTY DICTATORSHIP.

-----------------------------------------------------

DUMP THE DEMOCRATS!
UNITE INTO A NEW THIRD PARTY NOW!

We the people, opposed to the destruction of the planet and it's peoples, now atomized and powerless in "grass roots" and "special interest" groups, must unite our efforts and resources into a new party to replace the corrupt Democratic Party! A new party that rejects corporate funding in order to end the corporate plunder of the federal government.

A new party explicitly opposed to the Project for the New American Century. Opposed to unending war for profit and power. Cut the military budget by 50%, shut down the 700 military bases around the world. Re-instate taxes cut by Bush gang.

A new party that commits the entire resources of the country to end global warming, end imperialist wars, implements true non-profit universal health care. promotes mass transportation, develops renewaable energy, and produces the essentials for human survival.

A new party that promotes an economy that works towards fulfilling the economic needs of all the people, not just to profit a tiny minority of super wealthy. No more people living on the streets! No more hospitalized people being dumped into the streets when they have no money or health insurance! (See the film SICKO)

A new party to unite all of the oppressed people of this country. A new party that cuts across all the false social and cultural divisions that keep us forever powerless (racial, ethnic, age, language, etc.). A new party to unite us against the unending destruction of peoples and planet.

A SOCIALIST PARTY to promote the end of gangster capitalism, run-amok capitalism, which is supported by both Democratic and Republican parties.

A new party to support the labor movement and all working people. We urge the labor movement to stop supporting the Democratic Party (already besotted by corporate money), and to focus its precious resources to fund a new national radio and television network. By being on the air 24 hours a day the labor movement can provide the latest news, information, education and current affairs analysis desperately needed by all working people. This effort, combined with the formation of the new party, will be a bold step towards reviving the organized labor movement.

For years we have listened to radio programs like DEMOCRACY NOW! that has discussed with numerous "grass roots" groups desperately struggling to make a positive change in society. Anti-war protest groups, civil rights groups, union struggles, affordable housing groups, teachers unions, health care access, seniors about Social Security, have involved millions of people. Now is the time to unite the energy and resources of the people into a new party.

The new party provides a means of uniting the "special interest" agendas of each group into the platform of the new party. The new party candidates, selected from the various individuals and groups, would become the candidates representing their cause and the new party. The new party will contest for office at every level of government in order to take power. The new party will provide the new leadership and new programs this country desperately needs.

There is still time before November 2008 elections to start this process. Even the announcement and preparation for a founding convention of such a new party will shock both Democrats and Republican incumbents. They will know that their days are numbered!

The needs of all previous "minority" and "special interests" people now become the platform of the new party representing the vast majority of people. Can the existing activists of so-called "minority" and "special interest" groups overcome their existing powerlessness, and link up with each other to start this new party?

This all-inclusive struggle will attract millions of atomized working people, often non-voters and uninvolved people, who have been atomized, exploited, brain-washed by corporate media and ultimately destroyed by gangster capitalism.

Democrats are not gutless. They do what they need to and want to do, which is to enable Bush.

The problem is not of the Democrates', it is a problem of the clueless Americans, who don't realize the true nature of the Democratic party.

Don't be fooled by labels (patriot act, no child left behind, secretary of defense, Democratic Party,...) - the label has nothing to do with the content.

Don't be folled - Dems = Bush enabler.

Bobbi Dykema Katsanis wrote:

"What I do know is that all of these calls to vote against the Democrats and start third parties are NOT GOING TO WORK and will probably result in more Republicans getting elected if enough people do that."

You're right. Third parties are never going to work in this country. On the other hand, it's also clear that the Democratic Party is never going to be a real political alternative as long as it's dominated by Republicrats like Hillary, Lieberman, Biden, Reid, etc.

Obviously the only solution to this dilemma - within the context of the two-party system - is for progressives to support Republicans - yes, REPUBLICANS! - over Repubicrats and thereby rid the Democratic Party of its ideological impurities. This is just simple logic, and the only question is why progressives - who purportedly are more intelligent than conservatives - keep beating around the bush about it.

"I believe that the 2000 election was stolen; but it is also the case that had the 90,000 Florida votes for Nader gone to Gore, he would be in the White House right now, the Iraq war would never have happened, 9/11 would be just another date on the calendar, and we would be light-years down the road toward addressing climate change."

Global warming has been an issue since the 80s, and if Al Gore was going to try and do anything about it, he would've done so while he was VP and Clinton's point-man on the environment. He didn't, and in fact, wouldn't even talk about the environment during his own 2000 campaign.

It's obvious Gore is nothing but a phony, not the hip progressive portrayed by the media, and it's absurd that some people on the left have allowed themselves to get caught up in this cult of personality. Anyone with a memory beyond yesterday (which most Americans unfortunately don't have) ought to know that Al Gore is not some white knight who's going to come in and save the day. The instant he entered the race, his outrage over global warming and Iraq would immediately be replaced by the same *Americans are never going to give up their gas guzzlers* and *we can't just pull out* statements we hear from other Democrats - no doubt about it.

QUOTE:

canquest August 12th, 2007 3:09 pm

The Democrats are gutless.

END QUOTE

People keep saying that but it's not true. As I and others have pointed out repeatedly the Bush-Enabling Dems have displayed a spine of steel for "YES Bush" since 2000. They have been his strongest allies. That's not "gutless."

The Dems are not who you still think they are and want them to be.

The don't worry about "their constituents." They don't give a damn what we think and they have demonstrated that repeatedly.

To me, you sound like you are still drinking the Dems' koolaid...after all this time. Isn't it time to give it up?

Crotchety ol' USA has fallen...and it can't get up.

Why can't we face up to what we have done? We have destroyed this country and lost the war. Iraq can't be put back together again. It doesn't exist any more. We must leave now with our tail between our legs.

Forget about getting this collapsing government to sign an agreement to give their oil away. If the politicians weren't hiding in the Green Zone and voted for this they would deservedly be assassinated. Forget about the Green Zone and its electricity and swimming pools in the centre of a destroyed Baghdad. LEAVE. Set up a plan to make this happen within a few months and look to Iraq's neighbours and the UN to manage a plan to minimise the bloodshed and attempt to achieve at best a loose Federal system. America has killed too many people, turned much of the country into rubble and destroyed any hope for a future for too many lives to have any credibility in this process of reconstruction.

Our intervention has created three distinct societies: Shiites who essentially want a conservative Muslim society with the return of ancient Shira laws, a Sunni population who under Saddam practiced a more secular society giving rights to women, and a Kurd population who simply want to separate and set up their own state and eventually join with Kurds in Turkey, Iran and Syria. The Shiites and Sunnis share their hatred for the invading army and want us out now so they can fight out their differences. The Kurds will cooperate with anyone who will help them to set up a separate Kurdistan. Iranians,Syrians,Turks and Saudis will inevitably intervene and we should let them get on with it, hopefully under a UN umbrella. As fellow Muslims I can't believe they will handle this as bady as we have

The Democrats are gutless. They worry that their constituents don't want to hear the bad news so with some hang wringing the war will continue and more people will uselessly die and the military complex will prosper - and fund the politicians.

Kucinich, can win. He is the ONLY AMERICA FIRST candidate. I belive that he truly cares about America AND Americans. Well Ron Paul cares too, but I think all rePUBicans should hang them selves for what they've done. Shame on them. But don't get me wrong, the DemRats aren't far behind. Dennis Kucinich will get my support. I will find a way to spread his name. I too wish he'd run as an independent. I will never vote democrat,ever agian, unless its for Dennis. Don't be fooled by the Holy Trinity, you know, the only DumRats that get media attention.They are full of shit and deep in the pocket of the corporations.The Revoultion Starts NOW! By the way, is Tom Delay in jail yet?

It's a great point so many noticed here: that the Times story left out Dennis Kucinich. That's unsconscionable, revelatory of weakness of character-- no surprise there. As Gore Vidal said long ago, "The Times never yet met a well it didn't want to poison."

The Times, Hillary, Obama, Biden, others--weakness of character in every case. To say that Bush, Cheney, Rove, etc. lack character is to invite criticism from all sides for uttering truisms and being overly mild of manner.

It's true, though. The main characteristic that unites American politicians these days is lack of character. And isn't it a hoot the way they dress it up as something else: The Democrat who bought the Bush-Rove line, "We're fightin em over there so we don't have to fight em here."

Oh sure, they're coming over in paddleboats and are going to explode boy scout troops with roadside bombs.

If they have enough money for plane tickets and have the intelligence of a frog they can beat airport security and BLOW US ALL UP whether we're still fighting in Iraq or not.

So GET BLOWN UP WITH GRACE, like Mrs. Miniver, and learn from French history, too-- their experience of mostly outlasting Algerian terrorism.

Do we ever get over anything? American politicians are hysterical and paranoid.
Very few are therefore qualified to be president.

Those who want to "take care of the mess we created" had their chance. Too many years went by. Time-- past time-- to get out.

If you still want to take care of somebody overseas, POLITICIAN, let it be someone in depressed Africa or an orphan from the Ukraine.

You'd free up so much money that you would actually become a real politician, in position to take care of bridges, public education, the post offices, hurricanes, a centralized health system, renewable energy sources, etc.-- vital American things.

I saw that headline last night and thought:

That's news?

It's a given.

All of the leading Bush-Enabling Dem candidates are pro-war, pro-corporate, pro-imperalistic and pro-Bush despite their occasional charades to the contrary.

Kucinich is the only candidate out there for a true progressive. Granted, the reality is that he doesn't have a chance in hell of getting the "YES Bush" Dems' nomination. They are not going to put that man up there as their nominee when most of them run as far away from him as they can. Hopefully he won't sell out his principles again to give a little speech at the Dems waste-of-time convention when the annointed one, neocon Bush-Enabler Hillary, is crowned the nominee. UGH.

This nation will not leave Iraq until the very last drop of oil is extracted from the ground. The same is true for the rest of the Middle East.

See the Project for the New American Century document to which Cheney is a signatory.