Bush, Cheney, Rice and Kucinich on Iran
Those echoes that Americans are hearing in the noisy-and-getting-noisier debate about Iran are from 2002 and 2003, when members of the current administration were busy spinning the fantasy that the United States needed to attack Iraq.
George “Uranium From Africa” Bush sure sounds like he wants to attack Iran. Just last week, the president said, “I’ve told people that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them (Iran) from (obtaining) the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon.”
Dick “Greeted As Liberators” Cheney sure sounds like he wants to attack Iran. This week, the vice president declared: “Our country, and the entire international community, cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions.”
Secretary of State Condoleezza “Mushroom Clouds” Rice sure sounds like she wants to attack Iran. “Unfortunately the Iranian government continues to spurn our offer of open negotiations, instead threatening peace and security by pursuing nuclear technologies that can lead to a nuclear weapon…” Rice said on Thursday, as she announced drastic new sanctions against the country that serious analysts say poses little threat to its neighbors and no real threat to the U.S.
And, as in 2002 and early 2003, the most rational response is coming from Congressman Dennis Kucinich, the Ohio Democrat who says, “After the lies and deception used to lead us to war in Iraq, the belligerent Bush Administration cannot be given leeway with statements that suggest a preemptive attack on Iran is necessary,” says Kucinich, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nod who deserves a much better hearing that he has been afforded so far by the media and Democratic power brokers. “We are systematically destroying every available route to restoring peace and security in the Middle East,” he adds.
Kucinich may be running for the White House, but his message is most relevant to Capitol Hill. “Congress,” he says, “must take back its exclusive authority to declare war from the Bush Administration.”
He’s right.
But being right is not always enough in tenuous times.
Being heard is what matters.
It could well be that the American experiment’s best hope lies in the remote prospect that, having been proven right in 2002 and 2003, it will be Kucinich’s counsel — as opposed to that of Bush, Cheney and Rice — that is heeded in this new moment of peril.
The point here is not a political one. This is not about whether Kucinich becomes president, or the Democratic nominee, or even a strong contender in his race with cautious Democrats such as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. This is about the most fundamental question in a democracy: At a time when talk of war is growing louder, will we hear a real debate or merely the exaggerated echoes of those who have never gotten anything right?
The answer could well be measured by the extent to which Dennis Kucinich and those who stood with him in 2002 and 2003 are afforded the forums that their record of having been able to cut through the spin of the past should afford them in the present.
John Nichols’ new book is The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders’ Cure for Royalism. Rolling Stone’s Tim Dickinson hails it as a “nervy, acerbic, passionately argued history-cum-polemic [that] combines a rich examination of the parliamentary roots and past use of the ‘heroic medicine’ that is impeachment with a call for Democratic leaders to ‘reclaim and reuse the most vital tool handed to us by the founders for the defense of our most basic liberties.’”
Copyright © 2007 The Nation
John Nichols–I dare you to spearhead the move to get Dennis Kucinich a fair hearing in the USofA. I fear the truth is that a small portion of us want Kucinich; the majority want continued war and the Walmart way of life.
Wouldn’t it be great if you proved me wrong?
I like Kucinich. However, to be complete, he was wrong in 2001. Only one member of Congress voted against the unconstitutional H. J. Res. 64. That was Lee. And she got raked over the coals.
Congratulations on the article, Mr. Nichols.
If you read HR 64, he was RIGHT on the money, in 2001, and 2002, and 2003, and 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. We have so many people running for president — couldn’t we get this straight??
I am voting for Kucinich. I have known about him, since the 2004 election. You won’t get a better president.
All of them — Obama, Hillary, Richardson — would do well to learn something from him: Honesty is the best, if the only, policy.
I like Dennis, too. However, I have a hard time trusting him because he stays with the Dems, and because he caved in with his electoral votes in the last election. Still he is consistent with the peace talk. Honestly, I think Beekeeper is right — most US citizens are OK with endless war, and they are not interested in the world, or foreign policy. Not sure at this point what it would take to turn that around.
Kucinich will get my vote, too. How can he get more airtime from Big Media? How about Amy Goodman? Can’t she have him weekly on Democracy Now! so at least those of us listening to her will get on board with Dennis?
No, he’s not perfect. Yes, he has and will continue to vote for things that we might not agree with. But he WON’T invade Iran. He WILL at least try to roll back the tax breaks for the wealthy. And he’ll try to get a moderate appointed to the Supreme Court. He’s the best on offer right now.
Amy and Michael Moore, can you help get out the word about him?
Some say Dennis Kucinich should be an independent. I, for one, am glad he has so far remained a Democrat. We must remember that in the Democratic candidate field, his presence has already allowed him many opportunities to speak to national audiences in the debates, a forum he otherwise wouldn’t have had so far.
Meg:
It will take death and destruction to hit home!
It will take $5.00+ Gas prices.
It will take very public displays of the Government crushing descent.
It will take double the amount of people to loose their homes.
It will take another 25 Million people on top of the 45 Million or so to be with out
Health care.
It will take Salaries to be reduced, and unemployment reaches all time highs.
It will take shortages on the things we purchase everyday.
It will take the cost of things we purchase to become too expensive for six figure income house holds to afford.
It will take $10 a gallon for milk
It will take an outbreak of a disease that only the rich can afford cures for.
It will take riots and visuals of wide spread police brutality.
It will take seeing the military on your street everyday.
It will take curfews.
It will take Government permission to leave the country or maybe even your state.
It will take many more to be U.S citizens to be “extraordinarily renditioned” off somewhere.
It will take all this to happen, and when you turn on the news, you will here them say to your face, with cold disregard for life, utter distain for the people who are watching, they will look you in the eye and say everything is fine.
They will tell us that the U.S is safer and better than ever before.
It will take 1984 for people to wake up.
And then………It will indeed be too late.
~Future~
Good god! What does it take to get progressives fired up and pulling hard for a candidate who so CLEARLY represents their interests, and who has a 30-year history of selfless service and integrity? Did he, or didn’t he get HR 64 right? Who the fuck cares? Really? The list of legislation he’s written that is in the common interest of common people (and common dreamers) is a mile long. He’s been so consistently right on a host of domestic and foreign policy issues for so long. Am i supposed to think he’s secretly just another patriarchal male pig because he married a beautiful young woman? Or that he may have “gotten it wrong” when he pulled a little girl’s pigtails once in grammar school?
Christ, it’s like trying to herd kittens. What more could anyone ask for on this site? Do I care if he endorsed Kerry in 04? No. What was he supposed to do, endorse Bush instead? Leave the party, take his ball, and go home? Look, I didn’t even vote in 96 I was so disheartened. The first and only presendential election I ever missed since I began voting in 84. Nader brought me back into active political participation in 2000, so spare any horseshit about how I might’ve helped Bush. Kucinich allowed me to cast a ballot for a democrat for the first time WITHOUT having to hold my nose.
Even if you don’t think he’s “electable” (whatever that’s supposed to mean) in the general election, then you STILL want to vote for him in the primaries. If he goes into the convention with 10 to 15 %, instead of 2 to 3, then the party HAS to take him, and us, seriously. It could very well mean the creation of a Cabinet level post for a new Department of Peace, which Kucinich could then be tapped to head. That’s REAL, incremental progress for progressive ideas and policies.
So, again, WHAT’S not to like?
Sign up now to be an active supporter: http://www.kucinich.us
GO DENNIS!
Real progressives must choose Dennis Kucinich in 2008!
Please vote for him, for the sake of this planet and all future generations hereafter…
Thank you so much for your recognition of Dennis Kucinich. I supported him last time around and was nearly laughed out of the caucus I chaired. They all went for “count every last vote” Kerry, who, like a good member of Skull & Bones, cut and ran like hell when attention to all the irregularities in Ohio might have saved us from more Bush & Cheney. This time around, I will have the privilege of reminding them.
Kucinich is consistent, un-attached - the “no strings” portion of his campaign speech is right on! Remember, it is definitely a fact that Kucinich can’t win, if we don’t take a stand and vote for him.
Forget the “winner” business and vote and support your conscience.
Meg: “I have a hard time trusting him because he stays with the Dems, and because he caved in with his electoral votes in the last election.”
I am SO tired of hearing this bullshit comment, Meg! WTF was he supposed to do when he had NO CHANCE of being elected in an election year where the theme was: “ANYONE BUT BUSH!” Should he have given the to Al Sharpton?
Many “alleged” Progressives are constantly digging for yet another excuse to put down the ONLY candidate who CAN make a difference. His constant Progressive record doesn’t mean shit to you?!
YES! I am angry and emotional right now, but DAMNIT more of you should be as well. Anger and emotional is what led to our freedom from the FIRST King George. NICE and intellectualing ain’t gonna cut it. WAKE THE FUCK UP AND GET ANGRY TOO!!!
I hope everyone read Daniel David’s post as well!
You think we are not angry celebrity? Think again. I am tired of the whold phucking system. I am tired of people saying they have done all the right things when they haven’t. Ron Paul supporters keep saying his record is impecable, its not! H. J. Res 64 was a load of crap and I want these jokers to say so. Say they were wrong. But, they won’t. They try to justify their vote instead. I trust nobody at this point. Copy?!
BTW, I voted for Kucinich in the last primary.
Lord have mercy. I’m with you guys. But, I’m still very concerned about anyone who maintains ties with the Dems. I will absolutely be voting for Dennis. There is no one else to even consider.
Kuchinich will never be President, period. Stop wasting your time, and my time and everyone else’s time with your unrealistic fantasies.
If you really want to pursue Kuchinich’s agenda, you have to build a movement within the Democratic party that has real power and influence. You’ll have to develop the capacity to conduct a coordinated national campaign that targets voting districts where you can tip the vote to a progressive candidate. Once you have a strong, united progressive caucus in congress, you’ll have to work TOGETHER to influence policy and develop a strangehold on the agenda.
Of course, progressives will never be successful at this. Too busy worrying about honeybees, complaining that one of Obamas supporters said something bad about gays once, demanding that everyone stop eating meat, and clinging to wild eyed fantasies that Kuchinich, or Nader or Ron Paul(!) will become President. (BTW, I’m gay, vegetarian and have a tiny carbon footprint).
It’s called pragmatism. Republicans have it, progressives don’t.
Here is my unrealistic fantasy. And I am sticking with it to the bitter end.
anarchism : a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups.
BTW, I have vigorously campaigned for Dennis in Illinois and worked as a poll watcher. I like him. Nothing wrong with keeping an eye on him or anyone else.
Kucinich does NOT have the credentials and proven experience that Bill Richardson does. Just compare their bios. I think the press would like to get Kucinich in their sights which explains all the misleading support for him.
Again, just compare the bios for experience and knowledge with an open mind. I could be wrong, but you’ll be hard-pressed to pick Dennis over Bill after a fair and unbiased comparison.
“I like Kucinich. However, to be complete, he was wrong in 2001. Only one member of Congress voted against the unconstitutional H. J. Res. 64. That was Lee. And she got raked over the coals.”
Thanks V for getting that out. Barbara Lee needs to run for President.
Kucinich (and Gravel) keep the rest of them honest. Let’s see what fighting words Dennis has on Tuesday’s debate. He’ll have to do it without Gravel, who is currently being excluded. Was his direct condemnation of Hillary last debate to much? If you want to support Gravel’s voice being heard (even if he’s not your candidate), check these links:
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/letgravelspeakoct30
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sen-mike-gravel/why-nbc-and-the-dnc-want-_b_69397.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bryan-bissell/gravel-supporter-puts-his_b_69789.html
Thank you KUCINICH for never relenting in your fight for the people, and thank you THE NATION for Italicizing his name. His name should be shouted, not spoken, and it should italicized in bold, when printed.
Progress!
I like Bill Richardson. He’s a nice guy. He is somewhat progressive. He is certainly well to the left of Hillarbama.
But he’s not very smart. And he’s about as inspiring as a coat of beige paint drying on the wall.
I will vote for Kucinich definitely.
I would say he was right to vote to authorize the President to take action against terrorist cells but didn’t expect Bush to be so blunt in airbombing Afghanistan.
Vfor911 wrote anarchism : a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups.
You are absolutely dead-on, but the Govt, elites and self-serving media instead conjures images of black-clad Bakunin terrorists who will bomb civilization back to the stone-age.
I’m registered Green. But I re-registered Dem when Kucinich last ran, just to vote for him in the primary. That’s where I’m coming from. But I’m jaded. Candidates like Kucinich are idealists; they’re the conscience of the polity. But if they got elected, they either would soon be assassinated, or at best wouldn’t be able to get anything done in Congress. The problem is our economic culture; 300 million people living in big houses, driving gas-guzzler cars, depending on supermarkets, working jobs that depend on govmnt pork. You say all progressives must vote for Kucinich. That’s about 5% of the electorate.
Richardson said on Democracy Now that the Clinton sanctions against Iraq that killed 500,000 children were the right policy. How many people to you have to complicit in killing before being considered a war criminal?
gyptian I agree. wouldn’t a Lee-Kucinich tickect be great?
One guy ain’t going to save this sinking ship of an empire. We need wholesale change in our lifestyles in order to confront the problems our country, and world, face today. As bad as Bush and the boys are, they evolved out of a political system that has allowed corporate interests to replace “we the people” in our Constitution. The vast majority of the American people are honest hardworking citizens, but there are a lot of “good Germans” in our government and media today.
Hoa binh
Terran1212,
Kucinich didn’t vote to authorize the President to take action against terrorist cells. This is what he voted for:
That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons HE DETERMINES planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, . . .
Kucinich proposed legislation prior to the invasion of Iraq asking for evidence and costs. Why didn’t he do the same for H. J. Res. 64?
Moreover, the Taliban offered to hand over OBL if we could provide evidence that OBL was responsible for 911. But, OBL wasn’t responsible for 911. Therefore, we couldn’t provide squat and we invaded a defenseless nation.
“It’s called pragmatism. Republicans have it, progressives don’t.”
Or so they tell you. Mostly I’ve learned that’s just another device to keep you in your place and to assert a kind of social dominance. pragmatism might actually be being vegetarian, or living a simple life off the grid.
I’ve found that people who bow down low before authoritarian pragmatism are denying themselves the freedom to make their own discoveries at which they might be surprised, and in that surprise take delight, and in that delight find a joie de vivre, and in that joie de vivre look back on the pragmatism of authoritarians as sort of melancholy and lacking.
“Some say Dennis Kucinich should be an independent. I, for one, am glad he has so far remained a Democrat. We must remember that in the Democratic candidate field, his presence has already allowed him many opportunities to speak to national audiences in the debates, a forum he otherwise wouldn’t have had so far.”
Which is more than Gravel can say, given the debates where his time has been cut, or that he’s been shut out of altogether - but not to worry, the MSM picked up the slack by rigging the results of the Iowa debate that Kucinich won. http://www.intosanity.com/?p=26
Of course you’re glad that Kucinich is in the party - if it wasn’t for people like him, your party would have no credibility at all. If you’re going to insist that the Democratic Party is a valid force for change, at least have the integrity to support those who are following in the legacy of Wellstone, instead of the centrist pro-Empire sham dished out by Hillary.
gavingourley wrote: “Kuchinich will never be President, period. Stop wasting your time, and my time and everyone else’s time with your unrealistic fantasies. If you really want to pursue Kuchinich’s agenda, you have to build a movement within the Democratic party that has real power and influence. You’ll have to develop the capacity to conduct a coordinated national campaign that targets voting districts where you can tip the vote to a progressive candidate.”
Well, that’s exactly what Kucinich is helping to accomplish by running for the Democratic Presidential nomination. He knows that he won’t win. But by running for the nomination, he is helping to build a progressive movement within the Democratic party that has real power and influence, and helping to develop the capacity to conduct a coordinated national campaign that targets voting districts where you can tip the vote to a progressive candidate. In addition he is fighting to open a space in the public debate for a progressive point of view and a progressive agenda to be heard.
Running for the Democratic nomination is an excellent vehicle for furthering all of these things. Kucinich is doing just what you say needs to be done, and he is being very pragmatic about it.
Daniel David,
We know you’re a shameless supporter of the Democratic party, but at least do a better job at it… Lieberman became an independent and did it limit his ability to get elected, get the megaphone, etc?
There’s no reason why they can’t exit stage left, as well as stage right.
Who cares about the Dems? The Republicans? The Greens? Ultimately we need to reach a post-partisan world, leave these mobs/gangs/ruling dynasties behind us and focus on issues. Not controlling cliques.
Here’s an example of how Cheney’s pals over at Halliburton doesn’t give a crap…
“They don’t even know to get tested for it, unless someobody tells them - and I’m sure Halliburton isn’t going to be the company to tell them” - Former Halliburton water purification specialist documents widespread cases of contaminated water being supplied to US troops by Halliburton.
Video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeIxHQ-lkuM
boy howdy–You say that even if all progressives voted for Kucinich, that would be only five per cent of the population. I say that progressives must not only vote for him, but actively support him. The majority of the population doesn’t even vote, they’re so disenchanted with the whole corrupt system. It’s up to us to spread the word that there IS a candidate that represents the majority (who are not living in big houses–they’re lucky if they have a small house these days). This is a daunting task, because the corporate media and even the Democratic Party do not want people to hear the truth. But what is our alternative at this point in time?
Check out Kucinich.us and donate if you can. Remember–he’s not getting those corporate donations.
restive,
I’ve never said a bad word about Kucinich. I AM a Kucinich supporter, and I’m glad he’s a Democrat.
(Otherwise, he would have never been in Congress.)
If Dennis isn’t nominated, I’ll go with Barack, John, Hillary, or whomever they pick. So far, Dennis too has also seen that approach as his own brand of patriotism.
Paul,
Lieberman only switched independent because he had to.
As for the post-partisan world, Good luck! I’m not going to be able to live long enough to see it. As for shamelessly supporting the Democrats, yes, I do. It’s more shameful in my view to support Republicans, or to promote voter apathy, a useless tactic that also works to advantage of Republicans. And so many here at CD pride themselves on doing that very thing.
It’s good to see “Kucinich” in the heading - it doesn’t happen very often, but when it does I feel a tingle of hope arising.
I think Dennis Kucinich is definitely one to watch for the future, perhaps not for 2008, or perhaps so, I hope it IS 2008. Even if not, the seeds are being sown now, by Dennis, Mike Gravel, and by the good people here on Common Dreams. They are taking root. Whether Dennis Kucinich will be the one to harvest the crop in the future remains to be seen, but it is his work now which should be given credit.
Really… endorse any candidate you like… they’re all the same. The system is so corrupted at the core that Dems and Repubs are interchangeable. I’m sure Dennis is a man of good intentions. Does anyone know if Dennis has given a speech to the CFR or is a member of the CFR? If so, then he’s bought and paid for too. Alas, I’m convinced that we’re all doomed to an existence of slavery. It’s just a matter of time before we’re all required to have an RFID chip in order to conduct daily business… and it’s at that point that we lose our souls.
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumID=3735&edition=1&ttl=20071026212624
Hi…from UK; put the url above on here cos there is a blog on bbc right now about sanctions against Iran…listen, guys and girls..bbc debates NEVER get your great input as on common dreams…most US contributors are neocon supporters and the incisive comments YOU make never get across to the British public..Can some of you register at the link above and tell HOW IT REALLY IS. just like you do on here!!! PLEASE. the UK NEEDS to know the truth about Bush and his fascist henchmen! Tx…Roger
elmysterio,
Come on, yes our government is corrupt but there are a few (very few) good people in our government. You’d probably like what Ron Paul has to say although Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel are right there with him in wanting to give our Democracy back to We the People.
Daniel,
“If Dennis isn’t nominated, I’ll go with Barack, John, Hillary, or whomever they pick. So far, Dennis too has also seen that approach as his own brand of patriotism.”
I think Dennis’ support of the Democratic Party is also his greatest weakness, at least at present; I don’t think it’s about patriotism though, thankfully. (I think patriotism is nothing less than a highly pernicious form of brainwashing, but that’s another topic.) It’s strategic on his part - someone needs to rail against these winners (that would be called sarcasm, they’re anything but), and he’s in a good position to do so.
As far as going with the tide - well, it’s your conscience, do what you will. Personally, I’m much more in the thinking of Cindy Sheehan: I’ll break my voting hand before I do such a thing. How many times are we supposed to be conned by this BS before we realize that we’re being suckered into a losing strategy? No thanks.
At the least, we need third parties; but what we really need is a movement that is committed to lasting change, that is both non-hierarchical and grass-roots. I look forward to the day when you finally at long last realize that your beloved party is stabbing you in the back as much as the rest of us, Daniel, and join us.
el mysterio,
“Alas, I’m convinced that we’re all doomed to an existence of slavery. It’s just a matter of time before we’re all required to have an RFID chip in order to conduct daily business… and it’s at that point that we lose our souls.”
If there’s one thing that slaves do consistently, it’s escape. The moment they force RFID chips on us is when we use whatever is at our disposal to find a way around them. There is hope - gather with your friends, and find comfort and knowledge in each other.
At a time when talk of war is growing louder, will we hear a real debate or merely the exaggerated echoes of those who have never gotten anything right?
Maybe progressives should give up the idea that the neonuts have never gotten anything right, because they did get something right - the something that matters most to them: That the American people could be tricked into enslaving themselves to the catastrophic neonut ideology/agenda.
It’s a sad state of affairs when one has to depend on one man, whether Dennis Kucinich or Paul Wellstone, for democratic ideals to even get a hearing in the Democratic party.
Kucinich can only win if he gets the most money. Period.
I have donated to and am voting for Kucinich because his views reflect mine far more than any of the other candidates. End of story.
Kucinch needs money go to the website and donate. All of you who do support him, check out the phone banking for Nevada on the website we need your voice.
I can’t support Kucinich because he remains a Democrat. Sorry, but that’s the law in Colorado. In order to support Kucinich in the caucuses, I’d have to be a registered member of the Democratic Party. And since the overall policy of the Democratic Party is one of supporting every war since Vietnam and a continual expansion of pro-corporate government, I couldn’t possibly register as a Democrat.
His endorsement of Kerry in 2004 was telling. The same as his coming endorsement of Hillary is equally telling. When push comes to shove, Kucinich will choose to support candidates and a party that I find abhorent. When push comes to shove, we know Kucinich will not stand by his values. He’ll place his membership and acceptance in a pro-war, pro-corporate party as being more important that what he tries everyday to convince us to believe in.
I supported Kucinich and went to the caucuses for him in 2004. But now that he’s made if very, very clear that he doesn’t really believe in what he’s saying, I don’t see the point in doing it this time around. In fact I view the Kucinich campaign as a complete waste of time, energy and resources.
Come August, Kucinich will have lost in the phony rigged game that’s the Democratic party. And he’ll be here on the stage in the Pepsi Center endorsing a candidate who’s policies I find abhorent. And we’ll look around and all the time and energy and resources that have gone into the Kucinich campaign will have accomplished nothing and built nothing that lasts beyond the last primary.
Put this time and energy into building a party that can represent us. And if Kucinich really believes in what he’s saying, he should leave the Democratic Party and help with that effort.
I like Dennis and his positions. However it was clearly demonstrated in 2004 that most Democrats don’t like him personally (perhaps too short or ugly - sorry dude). Is Dennis the *only* congressman or politician to make sense? I believe there has to be a willing and electable progressive public figure in the USofA. Am I the only one who feels this way?
Progressives need to find a well known public figure that is willing and electable and stand behind him. Democrats.com has been running a fantasy presidential poll for years now, however it does not restrict to willing and electable progressive democrats only. The Draft Gore campaign is a little wishful thinking since I suspect he’s probably cut a deal with the DLC/DNC/PNAC/HeritageFund etc. to stay out of the race.
Who is willing and electable?
Quick question on Kucinich. Next August, where will he be?
Next August, there will be major protests here in Denver against the policies of the Democratic Party. If he really believes in what he says, he’ll be out in the streets with us. That’s where the people who support his policies will be.
But instead, you’ll find him inside the Pepsi Center endorsing the very policies he says he opposes by endorsing the nominee that supports them.
If I find Kucinich out on the streets with me next August, then I’ll change my opinion of him. If I find him leaving the Democratic Party to lead an independent campaign for the Presidency, then I’ll change my opinion of him.
With any Democrat, watch actions, don’t listen to their words. And I’d be very, very surprised if Kucinich’s actions next August won’t be to be inside the Pepsi Center supporting a candidate and policies that his words say he opposes.
“The Draft Gore campaign is a little wishful thinking since I suspect he’s probably cut a deal with the DLC/DNC/PNAC/HeritageFund”
Gore cut his deal with these people around about 1986, give or take a year or two. He’s a founder and one of the original leaders of the DLC. The 1988 Super Tuesday primaries were organized by the DLC wing of the Democratic party expressly to benefit Gore’s 1988 campaign.
I know because I was with the progressives then too. Which meant I was working hard to beat Gore and support Jesse Jackson’s campaign which was a rainbow coalition of the progressive groups within the Democratic Party.
BTW, that’s how long people have been trying to change the Democrats from within. Given that the 1988 Jackson campaign was much, much stronger than Kucinich’s 2004 or 2008 campaigns (we beat Al Gore and the DLC across the south that first Super Tuesday!), that’s the best proof I can offer that working from within the Democratic Party has been a complete waste of time and effort and that the only thing that’s happened from all that energy and effort is that progressives are much weaker within the Democratic Party today than they were 20 years ago.
To celebrate past (and long gone) progressive strength within the Democratic party, here’s the 1988 numbers from Georgia (where I was living and politicing then)
3/8/1988: Jackson 39.8%, Gore 32.4%, Dukakis 15.6%, Gephardt 6.7%, Hart 2.5%, Simon 1.3%, Babbitt 0.5%
To see how far progressives have fallen, here’s the 2004 numbers.
Kerry 46.8%, Edwards 41.4%, Sharpton 6.2%, Dean 1.8%, Kucinich 1.2%.
20 years of trying to work from within the Democrats have taken us from a progressive campaign getting nearly 40% of the vote to getting 1.2% of the vote. So how’s this bit about working from within the Democrats working out for ya?
It seems the United States is intent upon destroying itself. The nation is largely uninformed, undereducated, “heedless and half-assed”, as the novelist Robert Stone once wrote. The hard work of being a citizen in a democracy is beyond most of the population. There is currently no political or moral force strong enough to counter our decline. We are now a trans-fat nation incapable of getting our obese selves off the couch. When the roof falls in there will no place to shelter. More Cheetos, please. This is my return on success.
To me there’s only one person right for the job and worthy of being President right now—the one who physically puts their body in the doorway of Congress and refuses to allow another shred of business without a binding resolution to return to The U.S. Constitution; to officially re-frame 9/11 as an international crime so that law, rather than war, becomes the answer to which the world can subscribe; to impeach the leading members of the Bush Administration for high crimes and more than misdemeanors; and to redirect the wealth we people produce toward the well-being of our hemisphere (and more). Want the documented best-ever investment, Greed-Heads? EDUCATION: Decades of studies showing a return of at least $14 of return per $1 invested. Kucinich is arguing for all that either implicitly or openly and I applaud—but nothing is going to happen or bring him what he needs (to be heard) until something too outrageous for the media to ignore happens. DO IT, DENNIS—I’m sick of the coyness of Gore. (”Will he save us? Won’t he save us?”)
the thing is we only have Dennis. so we got to stop the carping and pettiness and just give this campaign everything we’ve got. don’t even think about defeat or what the odds are. just remember this is our guy, and he’s our only guy, and fight as hard as we can to win.
Daniel David -
‘Lieberman only switched independent because he had to.’
I respectfully disagree. As a Democrat, he could have supported the Democratic candidate that he lost the primary to.
Vfor911 - anarchy
We saw a lot of that around San Diego this last week as people volunteered to help their neighbors and other strangers.
If Progressives put out positive messages (and not only carp) people will come a’running, especially the young.
gavingourley,
In response to your post: www.pdamerica.org
Join, start or join a chapter, build the movement.
And where are the millions of $’s in Kucinichs’ kitty? Put your money where your mouths are (or keyboards). Every f*#king penny, ya hear me?
Call me crazy, but I have maxxxed out my contributions to Paul, Gravel & Kucinich. The INFOWARS cost a bundle and the truth pukers need the moola.
Kucinich lost me when he attacked the 2nd ammendment after the UV incident. He’s recanted since, but still strikes me as a bit of a Hillary/DLC supporter. Possibly a bad investment on my part?
Spending $6900 on 3 candidates is my own personal economic malady by which I am “beseeched”! (a really old English term,’scuse me). But the alternatives are?
Remember kids, one man (or women, God forbid) can’t do it alone. We’ve got 535 legislative, rich crooks that need to be erased from our history books.
One thing I should mention… Never drink single malt and post (hic).
“Lieberman only switched independent because he had to”
I thought loyalty to the Party trumped all other considerations.
If Democrats who voted for Lieberman had voted for Lamont, the Dems would not have an asterisk majority*.
What could have been the name of the imperative that forced Joe Lieberman to run as an Independent instead of bowing to the will of Democratic voters? Hmmm . . . perhaps like “Imperative” and “Independent”, it started with “I” as well . . .
abuelito,
“the thing is we only have Dennis. so we got to stop the carping and pettiness and just give this campaign everything we’ve got. don’t even think about defeat or what the odds are. just remember this is our guy, and he’s our only guy, and fight as hard as we can to win.”
Hell no, i’m not going to do this. Look, i support Dennis - but this is all but myopic in a situation where we appear to be losing. As ComARC said, “Put this time and energy into building a party that can represent us.” Things *could* turn around - but to bank several months of all our time on that being all and everything is just bad strategy. Personally, I’m looking past the February primaries, and thinking about best responses.
Dichterfreund,
Indeed, Lieberman could have dropped out of Congress after losing the primary and let Lamont maybe or maybe not actually win his old Senate seat in the general election. I suspect Lieberman’s own ego and hurt feelings were the deciding factor on that.
None of this, though, has anything to do with why Dennis Kucinich needs to drop out of the Democratic Party, as some say he should. I would have never mentioned Lieberman except to answer another of the routine attacks I get - that one coming from “Paul”, demanding I do a better job as a Democratic Party supporter– somehow by considering Lieberman.
Answering the blasts is indeed time-consuming.
What an astonishing, almost soul-destroying thread in response to a topic of this seriousness. Read the title again.
So it would be foolish to devote efforts to supporting a progressive President because it “doesn’t matter” unless there a truly progressive reformed Democratic party. We are just going to keep strategizing on that reform. Or go third party. So instead of backing the only progressive candidate even as he earnestly tries to prevent a unilateral attack on yet another country, you are going to think about how to cope, next year, with having only neo-conservative parties and neo-conservative pro-war presidential candidates as well. I mean come on, who really wants a progressive President anyway?
So Kucinich is showing leadership on Iran. No-one is surprised nor do they care. Lets debate electioneering and inter-party politics instead. He stands alone in assuming this critical position, is that a surprise? Will you back him up, or will you will let him fall? Someone tell me about this 5% of American voters that are progressive. How can you be progressive without any idealism, or any guts?
I couldn’t agree with COMarc more. I feel joined at the hip with COMarc. I too worked for Jackson in ‘88 and have found exactly the same thing about the Dem party. They’ve been taken over by the DLC, the Rahm Emanuel contingent, and they’re not looking back. Hillary is all there is for ‘08, far as they’re concerned, Obama is a good foil, but no one else need apply, least of all Kucinich. I’ve told his phone bank people as much when they’ve called me for donations, and that if he’s serious he will quit them forthwith and make his presence known as a “viable” independent candidate. Then he’d get plenty of support. But he won’t do it so he’s condemned to be a still small Vegan voice, not presidential looking enough, heckling on the sidelines as Hillary triangulates and fundraises her way to the nomination.
If he were independent of the other wing of the Business Party, many would pay attention, maybe even enough to overcome his less-than-riveting physical appearance. But he’ll stick with the Dems even though they have absolutely no use for him. So we progressives have no candidate. Hillary will just continue the roller coaster ride of the Bush/Clinton dynasties and war will never end, until we all do because we can’t end war. Dennis is no Paul (Wellstone), who if he were still alive would have probably broken away from the spineless, useless Democrats.
Comarc: Thanks for the head’s up. Here in Minnesota we don’t have those registering limitations (though we have other problems). That lends good perspective to the problem. So it looks like any genuine progressive running for president should probably run Independent or Green.
Daniel David: 150 years of the Democratic Party and it has steadily slid to the right. Hypothetically now, would you support “the Democrat” if his/her politics in another 25 years were on par with Goebbels? I mean, is it crass branding that retains your loyalty, or principled stance on particular issues?
The prospect of war or military strikes against Iran is horrifying. I created a musical piece that helps place this crisis in the context of the Iraq fiasco.
“Bush the Bringer of Wars” is the title. It incorporates the bogus statements of Bush and company regarding the purported Iraq threat with a chilling musical accompaniment. Click here to listen to the piece.
http://nukular-waste.tripod.com/Bush-The_Bringer_of_Wars.mp3
Party ’till W pukes,
Oscar Lewis
Nichols’s piece should have included Bill Richardson.
All arguments should have included Bill Richardson.
Here’s why, folks –
http://www.richardsonforpresident.com/issues/foreignpolicy
And much, much more why –
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/23/AR2007022301595.html
And don’t miss the opportunity to put your name where your mouth is re Iran, thanks to Richardson —
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/s/Iran
Commonsense pragmatism and informed thought before ideological hysteria, folks.
We must lobby the mainstream media pester them.
Blog their pages with links and statements, supprt him Gravel and Paul put links on sites and email. Get Dennis to use You tube more
and http://current.com/topics
Ask Gore to enter into this fray and join up at
http://peacesource.net
Satire at http://peacesource.net/blog
http://peacesource.net/blog.html
Social networking at http://peacesourcenet.ning.com/
Book office space http://peacesource.net/about_us_and_pand
All very good points. But why does the FACT that there will BE NO Presidential election in 2008 seem to bypass everyone’s self interest?
COmarc, you make a compelling and principled argument backed by evidence, which i respect. I was there in 88 knocking on doors for Jackson myself. So I’m not going to try to convince you supporting Kucinich is what you need to do. But I live in NH, which means I’ll have several opportunities as I did in 04 to meet the candidate up close and personal at house parties, which is a delightful campaign tradition here. I am going to ask him about his intentions come August. I will want to know, in particular, if he would ever support Clinton, whom I detest. I will encourage him not to. I will report back on some future thread when I have done so.
In the meantime, I will continue to support him, and encourage everyone else to do the same. I don’t think the guy’s Jesus Christ, or without his faults, but it’s a great feeling to work FOR and vote FOR someone, as opposed to voting for candidate asshole just because he isn’t candidate psycho-boy.
You are correct. Progressives have lost ground in the last 20 years. And alot of that has to do with how DLC dems took the party over from the inside. And even if his chances are slim, I really do believe Kucinich is doing his damnedest to shake it loose from their money-grubbing clutches. I support him in this.
Thanks for your posts, and good luck in the streets of Denver.
Well well, with so many Kucinich suporters here, it seems as if there is nothing to worry about, Kucinich for President is a slam dunk.
COMarc:
“20 years of trying to work from within the Democrats have taken us from a progressive campaign getting nearly 40% of the vote to getting 1.2% of the vote. So how’s this bit about working from within the Democrats working out for ya?”
This reminds me of a joke:
A rich old man goes in to the doctor for a checkup. During the course of the exam, he complains to the doc about the cheating, free-spending ways of his young trophy wife and bemoans the fact that he can’t divorce her without having to give her half his fortune in settlement. The doc mulls this over for a while before writing his patient a prescription. The doc hands the old guy the slip and tells him, “Look, take two of these pills each morning. They’ll give you enough sex drive and stamina to hump that wife of yours to an early grave.” The old man thanks the doc and agrees to come back in one month’s time to give a progress report. The month passes, and the rich old man returns in terrible physical condition, wheeled into the office by his very healthy looking young wife. The doctor looks at the woman with no small amount of bewilderment before thanking her and closing the door. He turns to the old man and begins to examine him. “My god!” he says, “you’re practically at death’s door. We have to get you to a hospital right now!” The old man looks weakly up at the doc, shakes his head, coughs up some blood and replies, “Just write me out another prescription, doc, she can’t take much more of this.”
I too am tired of hearing criticism of DK for not leaving the Democratic party. An independant will never be elected president. We are a two party system, not a parliamentary system. Even if an independant were to win, the Democratic and Republican Congress would not work with her/him.
I agree with Daniel David, who said: “As for shamelessly supporting the Democrats, yes, I do. It’s more shameful in my view to support Republicans, or to promote voter apathy, a useless tactic that also works to advantage of Republicans. And so many here at CD pride themselves on doing that very thing.”
Right on. Contrary to the constant whine on this site that the Democrats and Republicans are one and the same, that just is not true. One party is controlled by Religious nutcases. If they were the same we would have had a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage by now. If they were the same, we never would have had a family leave act passed. If they were the same, we’d have fiscal responisiblity all the time rather than 500 billion deficits that we always see under Republican presidents from Reagan on.
They are not the same. That is a lie. And while there is more than plenty that I do not like about the Democratic party, especially their lack of balls in standing up to Bush, and their funding by corporate lobbyists… the only solution to getting out of this mess is to support those like Kucinich and Feingold from within the party. It must be changed back to the party of FDR instead of the party of Clinton.
Cutting and running is not the answer.
But until that consensus is reached, and THAT is the tune those on this site sing…. all the rest of us can do is vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is because the fact is … whoever it is will be better than ANY Republican that is chosen.
I am proud of Dennis for staying in the Democratic party, and running so that a voice of reason is part of the debate. As his support grows, change within the party will be inevitable. If he cowarded out and ran as an independant, no good would come of it..
“Ski” On Iran……..
Iran is the topic….Why do we hate Iran so much?
In 1953, The CIA ran a Coup d’etat against the Prime Minister of Iran, Mohammed Mossadeq. He was going to “Nationalize” the oil industry of Iran. The Coup was headed by the Grandson of Teddy Roosevelt, Kermit, and he was rewarded with the Vice Presidency of Gulf Oil Corp.
The United States government installed Shah Pahlevi as the leader and dictator and for years armed and supported him, until he was overthrown and the oil industry was then nationalized. Oooooppps, instead of negotiating and working with that government, we had our “Other CIA Man,Saddam Hussein(yes, since 1959 and his handler was James Critchfield), wage a nine year “War” against Iran.
Iran is not a threat to the United States, it has no long range missles and no nuclear weapon (Of course , if you read James Risen´s, “The State of War”, you would find a chapter on a “Top Secret” CIA operation to provide the Iranians with the design of a Russian Atomic Bomb.)…..Israel has between 20 and 100 Nuclear Weapons (Only the CIA knows!)and long range missles to deliver them. They can take care of themselves.
Why do we want to attack Iran? We want control of the “OIL”….Saddam Hussein was negotiating with French and Russian Oil companies…..Mobil Exxon and BP Oil did not like that…..The Taliban were negotiating with an Argentinian Oil Company for the pipeline, Unocal Oil Company did not like that.
Will Iran get control of Iraq Oil Fields? Not if Dick and Halliburton have anything to say.
As for using Iran as a target in the “Global War on Terrorism”……Please, “Operation Cyclone” was a joint CIA and ISI (Pakistani CIA)operation to recruit 100,000 Islamic Militants from 43 different Islamic Nations. The leaders were trained at Camp Peary, Virginia in the use of IED´s (Bommb Making) The financing was by the U.S.A and Saudi Arabia to the tune of over 12 billion dollars. The “Operation ” lasted well into the 90’s and many of its initial participants and trainees were responsible for many terrorist attacks……My belief is that most terrorists are or were either trained by the CIA/ISI or trained by trainers who were trained by the CIA/ISI.
Do you ever hear that the Sunnis have been reponsible for most of the attacks against U.S. soldiers ? Almost never !! Who is supporting the Sunnis ? Our ally and good friend Saudi Arabia ! Yes, go back to 9/11.
‘“It’s called pragmatism. Republicans have it, progressives don’t.”
geoff29
Or so they tell you. Mostly I’ve learned that’s just another device to keep you in your place and to assert a kind of social dominance. pragmatism might actually be being vegetarian, or living a simple life off the grid.
I’ve found that people who bow down low before authoritarian pragmatism are denying themselves the freedom to make their own discoveries at which they might be surprised, and in that surprise take delight, and in that delight find a joie de vivre, and in that joie de vivre look back on the pragmatism of authoritarians as sort of melancholy and lacking.’
It’s a difference between short term and long term pragmatism and micro vs. macro pragmatism, or should I say personal responsibility vs. societal responsibility. Yes, the ideal would be to all work towards getting off the grid.(literally and figuratively) The point is that squabbling over these issues, important issues albeit, can distract from the issue of governance and the sheer weight it has on these issues. Unfortunately we live in a broken society and need to fix it. These are all incredibly necessary to our society but they won’t change the upcoming election or it’s implications.
There is no Utopia and there never will be one. There will always be human nature, greed and self seeking, and short sided self interest only seekers. That’s why we need laws and a system to protect rights. Not everyone wants what you want either and their freedom guarantees yours as well, provided neither is destructive to the whole or to others.
Pragmatically I assume that the best chance to work out of this authoritarian structure is to move with the most viable options. If you find that not reforming the current system, rather ditching it for another is viable with the current populace please fill me in, I’m on board. Let me know how you will get a majority to back this quickly. If you’re implying that we should follow this MO because it will gradually lead to a better result, while in the short run facilitating the worst of the 3 options before us (more Con domination), please let me know how this will happen under a growing in power conservative power system in the near future. (the only thing I concede is that life in America may get so bad that the populace may finally wake up)Not to mention, there are so many crucial factors facing this world in the near future that we don’t have time to hesitate in making changes.
locust
“If Progressives put out positive messages (and not only carp) people will come a’running, especially the young.”
Yes and no. Yes they did come out and help in the 06 elections and are generally the ones that are aware are far more politically aware than those of the 80s and 90s(thank God for the Daily show)But, the unaware are getting reeeeealllly unaware. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2007/10/24/notes102407.DTL&feed=rss.mmorford
It’s risky putting too much faith there, but maybe, I hope you’re right.
My view is from the point of Joe Q. Public, is that they somehow see Clinton and Guliani as the best candidates. Maybe they want a return to life pre-Bush on left and center, and still want their father figure and tough terror guy accordingly. If this happens and it looks like it will (I pray it won’t) I think and the polls confirm we’re looking at a toss up. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_giuliani_vs_clinton-227.html
4 points isn’t that big when there’s a margin of error involved. Plus when it all gets going Clinton just looks very phony in front of the camera. Her new personality make over makes her look very fake and a bit demented in front of the camera. It will be a blood bath of mud slinging as both have skeletons in their closets.
From my point of view as a progressive, lib, lefty, whatever, I think we should get behind DK at least through the primaries, and if the worst comes to worse, stand behind the most progressive that can win in 08.
As I’ve said many times before but none of the “No Dems, No Reps in 08″ camp never answer is tell me how what you envision will be played out in 08 and what the next 4 years and beyond will look like.
I see further media restriction, at least the same veto block we have now, the Supreme Court going straight to hell, corporations run amok, more false terror scare control, the environment irrevocably sliding into the abyss. It looks to me like Libertarianism to me. It will all fix itself in time after mass chaos and magnitudes of deaths and suffering. I find that not socially responsible.
But please feel free to show my why I’m wrong.
COMarc October 26th, 2007 6:23 pm
“Gore cut his deal with these people around about 1986, give or take a year or two. He’s a founder and one of the original leaders of the DLC. The 1988 Super Tuesday primaries were organized by the DLC wing of the Democratic party expressly to benefit Gore’s 1988 campaign.
I know because I was with the progressives then too. Which meant I was working hard to beat Gore and support Jesse Jackson’s campaign which was a rainbow coalition of the progressive groups within the Democratic Party.”
Ephraim October 26th, 2007 9:47 pm
“I couldn’t agree with COMarc more. I feel joined at the hip with COMarc. I too worked for Jackson in ‘88 and have found exactly the same thing about the Dem party.”
The Greens need people with campaign experience in the 2008 election. Would you be interested in helping out?
Ephraim, I’m not sure which state that you’re in, but we need to petition onto the ballot in many of them.
COMarc, the Greens are already on the ballot in your state, but we still need help in the general election campaign.
There is definitely something seriously wrong with this country and the uninformed electorate.
Every time the name Dennis Kucinich is evoked by the TV pundits it seems to generate a giggling effect like he is some kind of joke and his ideas are fanatical.
This is the only candidate in the race that has the intelligence and compassion to return this country to a more egalitarian approach of governing.
We are being robbed blind by the elitist war mongering corporate shills now running this country.
This is one of the few times in many weeks that I have seen Kucinich’s name in a headline. Even the liberal press like Common Dreams and the HuffPost have ignored this political savvy intellectual.
He has consistently beat the drum for Peace, while all other congressional members have been rushing to the head of the line waving the flag and spouting meaningless nationalistic slogans condemning anyone or any country that tries to interfere with our imperialistic goals.
I am proud that America has produced such an honorable human being like Kucinich but I am sad that America has ignored his message of peace, love and diplomacy.
Liberal progressives have only a few more months before the first votes are cast in a primary, this will be our last opportunity for several years to promote someone who actually thinks like we do.
Lets get behind Kucinich and do whatever we can to get him the attention he deserves.
Please ignore these foolhardy republican light posters who keep telling us to abandon the Democratic Party, remember a vote for a liberal third party candidate is a vote for a republican and war without end.
Nader got over 90,000 votes in FL, Gore lost the presidency by 560 votes in FL, I for one will always believe that Nader helped put Bush in the white house.
We cannot afford another 8 years of these destructive greedy charlatans, we cannot afford to ignore the reality of the situation, which is one of the two mainstream candidates is going to win, if we throw away our vote to protest our displeasure with the system the more liberal mainstream candidate will lose if a strong Green Party candidate is on the ballot.
The formula is relatively simple: List the things you would most like to see happen in government after the next election. Then post your list with the campaign efforts of all of the candidates. Which candidate comes closet to your own ideals? I am willing that Dennis is your answer. I could be wrong but that will not change what I want from the next person in the White House. I want what Dennis is offering. No one else comes close.
“Nader got over 90,000 votes in FL, Gore lost the presidency by 560 votes in FL, I for one will always believe that Nader helped put Bush in the white house.”
*gentle sigh*
OK, let’s go through it again, peoples.
Perhaps it was *one* factor. But *the* factor? Absolutely not. You’re leaving out the discarded ballots (which to my thinking, is an insult to the people whose votes were removed), Gore’s unwillingness to keep fighting the results “for the good (?) of the nation,” and let’s not forget the supreme court, the GOP brownshirts that attacked the people doing the recount, and last but not least, Kathleen Harris and her connections to the Bush family.
As for Nader’s contribution to this mess, well…OK. 1) A significant number of people voted for Nader who would not have otherwise; assuming that someone is going to change their vote at the last minute is anything but realistic. 2) I seem to recall many voters that weren’t in swing states voting for Nader because it was clear that Gore was going to carry their state, which he did. 3) It was Gore’s campaign, not Nader’s, that was crap - there are a million things that Gore could have done to increase his percentage, and from showing a spine to getting a public speaking coach, he pretty much did none of them. (I fault the DNC here more than him personally - if the DNC’s job is to come up with electable candidates and make them the voice of a nation, they’re doing a heck of a job - a la Michael “Brownie” Brown.) 4) Assuming anything about the outcome of Florida other than “the GOP rigged the election there” is utter speculation.
As for this election: I see two patterns emerging, neither of them good.
1. Neo-cons keep winning, which drives the country further to the right.
2. Neo-liberals keep winning, which takes the wind out of the sails of the left opposition to that right - while passing through part of the Neo-cons’ agenda, which makes their job that much easier.
BOTH of these two scenarios lead to totalitarian control. BOTH of these scenarios lead to dismantling of social services, the gutting of the environment, increased funding for the “war on terror,” and erosion of civil liberties. The proof of this is the voting record of both neo-conservatives and centrists. The centrists just do it slower.
Now, slower would be better than all at once - if it bought the left more time and a chance to regroup. I assure you that this is not the case - what it does do is take the wind out of the left as a movement, as I mentioned above - thus further assuring right-wing control via the DNC alternating with the Project for a New American Century horror show. Anything that further damages the progressive left in this scenario is just handing the country away. We *HAVE* to stop capitulating, even if that means losing ground - we’re already losing ground faster than we can keep up, at least in the electoral sense. (As one poster mentioned, Jesse Jackson got nearly 40% in the 1988 primaries, and now we’re looking at 1-2%. Thanks, Democratic Party.) But given that the only real hope in this country is the same hope that always emerges - namely, to stop trusting politicians and start educating and trusting each other - what this election fear-mongering does more than anything is enervate us. Something needs to change, and voting for the lesser of two evils is unequivocally not going to change that.
Sorry for the filibuster, but one last thing. You mentioned that 3rd party “no dems, no repugs in 2008″ folks don’t come up with suggestions as to what to do. So…here are a few suggestions.
1. Vote for Kucinich or Gravel or your left shoe or anybody or nobody in the primaries, as long as they’re not the front-runners. I think we agree on this, at least in relation to Kucinich.
2. Become involved with movement building on the left. From immigrant rights groups to organizations that combat poverty to people who do things independent of any visible organization, there are thousands of efforts going on that rarely if ever get covered in the MSM. Find them, talk with your friends, organize.
3. Read voraciously and live simply. Learn about left social movements throughout history, and take time to become fluent in social movements in the present. If you can’t describe the connections between WWI, WWII and the ever-present World War III, what the conflicts and alliances were within the left as per the above, and what Marcos meant when he talked about the Fourth World War, it’s time to read up. Also, read People’s History of the United States!
4. Make your presence known at the 2008 conventions, especially if you are local and can take the time off from work.
5. Be bold. Shout your truth from the mountain tops. Tell friends, talk with strangers, live the world you want to see.
6. Be really bold. This last week, a Code Pink activist managed to get right up to Condi Rice and confronted her as a war criminal. We need to step up the heat, not turn it down.
7. Recognize that there is a way to be a warrior for change. Key to this is getting your mind clear, as well as your heart. The key here is becoming both flexible and immovable, depending on the situation.
8. Use the blogosphere and the internet, but don’t get stuck there. Trees are good, and I don’t mean just the virtual kind, either.
9. When it comes time to vote in 2008? Damn. The reason I can’t, in context, support the concept of getting behind whoever is the less evil of the two is not only because of what I’ve outlined at the start here, but also because anybody who thinks that what the scenario will look like in November of 2008 is fooling themselves. My suggestion is to above all, vote your conscience, and don’t check your brain at the door. What is making us sick is people acting as if being all emotions or all pragmatism is going to fix things - and it’s not. What is going to fix things is us standing up as examples of what it means to be human, and that means using both our hearts and our minds. “Fear is the mind-killer” - but love, trust and mutual respect unequivocally aren’t. As our movements said for years, “Another World is Possible” - it’s up to us to pick up that banner again, and to make that world real.
Obviously it’s good to have political wants, but to continue, day after day, year after weary year, to expect the “democrats” to listen to “progressive” politics in the face of massive evidence to the contrary is more an act of faith now than it is based upon any “practical” sense of living politics.
This business about “wasting one’s ballot” voting for a third party is more bankrupt now then it ever has been. It is based upon a concept of politics rooted entirely within the concept of winning elections without the construction of a mass base of dissidents, which is what political empowerment actually requires in order to attain real power. That base of dissidents must be willing to build a faction of fighters that declares openly its willingness to go its own way, and build from a minority position if need be. A minority position in this country at this point will not be made up solely of “left” forces, but a united front with a cross section of greens, lefts, socialists, feminists, gays, labor, libertarians, and one can even speculate that there will be a few genuine constitutional conservatives in the mix. It’s best bet will be to consider itself a Labor party of sorts, based upon the interests of everyone who lives paycheck to paycheck, and right now, we’re talking about better then 3 quarters of the electorate, and it and it must be dead set upon an independent, third party empowerment built as locals and committess of correspondence.
43 years ago, the Republican right, humiliated in the elections of 1964, began its ascent to power with such a strategy, building itself as all neo-fascist currents do upon the resentments of corporate America, white middle class paranoia and the frustrations of middle class elements at a number of levels. They were able to attain power because they were underwritten by organized capital, which worked slowly and steadily to attain a political concensus with all power at their disposal.
It was contingent upon the civil rights and anti-war movement at that time to rally its own base, which it attempted to do for a time, but rapidly lost sight of because of a relative prosperity unlike our own time, and a public sector that was far more powerful than it is now. Clearly a lot has been conceded since the days of the Reagan restoration.
At this point, there is no choice but the development of a new born movement that organizes its own base, and focuses on that over the winning of elections. Electoral victories are useless anyway without a base that’s willing to organize and hit the streets. Such days are coming, but he question is whether the opposition the current bullshit is going to trust its own energies, or pile them all into the laps of the “democratic” party as it did with the last wave of anti-war consciousness, and thereby see its energies and its prospects dissipated once again by the corporate state. The rubber has hit the road, people. If we continue to ignore the organizing opportunities that open to us in favor of putting all eggs in the electoral basket of the “democratic” party, fascism will win, will consolidate its power, and those of us who can get out of the country will be making these internet posts from exile. The rest of us will be in prison or dead. We may well end up that way anyway, but an organized resistance will be attempted, which is better than pulling a lever for donkeys every two years.
“The rubber has hit the road, people. If we continue to ignore the organizing opportunities that open to us in favor of putting all eggs in the electoral basket of the “democratic” party, fascism will win, will consolidate its power, and those of us who can get out of the country will be making these internet posts from exile. The rest of us will be in prison or dead. We may well end up that way anyway, but an organized resistance will be attempted, which is better than pulling a lever for donkeys every two years.”
That’s what I’m talking about.
Thank you.
kucinich would do himself and the rest of us a great favor if he would set up a maillist. it would give him far wider exposure than he now has, and give people a taste of what open political discussion and debate can be. why he fails to do this is a mystery to me. i have emailed his folks on this repeatedly and get either no response or vacuity.
Sequioabison:
One more time: Your notion that Nader supporters helped Bush into the white house is just plain horseshit. The same can be said about Gore drawing votes away from Nader, and therefore helping Bush.
Most Nader supporters, like myself, had, up until 2000, joined the ranks of the MAJORITY of Americans eligible to vote, but too disheartened to be even registered to do so. You think this is a zero sum game, but when over half of the American people don’t feel that either party represents them, then you’re just plainly, and clearly wrong. I got politically re-involved again BECAUSE of Nader, not Al Bore. And one more thing, in 2000 I lived in Arizona, which was solidly in the repug column, so my vote made no impact on the Gorebot’s electoral votes. Then, as now, I was voting to try to build a movement, not necessarily “win.”
And yes, I obviously support Kucinich now, but not because he’s a democrat. I support him, as I supported Nader, because I support his positions.
eshu and restive
and if DK or Gravel don’t succeed in the primaries?
you’ll sit this one out or write in?
let’s make it simple, if Hilary wins the primary?
I agree with your MO about getting to where we need to be, but we’re not anywhere near that now. You’re going to have to start talking to the common man that doesn’t read this website if we’re going to make a big enough dent, because even the common liberals are seemingly choosing Hilary at the moment. I doubt her polls dropped because a code pink waved their hands at Condi. Get another 2 million to storm the capital and pull that and maybe we’re getting somewhere.
I’m assuming you don’t think Joe Q. Public will be mobilized in to the action you both suggest in the next few months.
I hope all of you stick around this forum until after 08 so we can see what will happen and take responsibility for their words and deeds accordingly, whether somehow DK or Gravel shoot through the charts, a centrist proves to be as bad as you think they will, or if the Cons take the oval office again and what horrors await us then.
We will all know who to gripe to or praise here then.
There’s also some of the same on the right so who knows.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/bloomberg_reaches_23_as_third_party_hopeful_in_nj
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/27_of_republicans_would_vote_for_pro_life_third_party_instead_of_giuliani
Of course the MSM says Mr. Kucinich is “unelectable.” They represent the right-wingers, corporations, military-industrial complex, Zionists, neocons, etc. They want to discourage anyone from voting for him by saying he’s unelectable. Don’t believe it. He’s got my vote and many more from other people who are sick of the fascist warmongering and our tax money going to unnecessary war to kill innocent people so that the ultra wealthy can get richer.
Drift,
You are wrong and right. Your vote for Nader in Arizona didn’t matter. That is true. But those who voted for Nader in Florida and Wisconsin did matter. Thus Nader running as an independent helped George Bush win. That is factual. That is just how it is, whether Nader and his supporters like it or not. Period.
I voted for Nader myself in Idaho in 1996. For the same reasons you did. And my vote out of Idaho meant nothing. I was glad he ran so I could vote for him in protest due to my hatred of the Republican party, and my total disappointment in Bill Clinton signing the Defense of Marriage Act.
But in 2000, his running drew votes from Gore in two states that would have denied Bush a chance to have the Supreme Court select him president. For that reason, I no longer support anybody running as a 3rd party. For those of us who live in states that are going to go republican, write in a vote if you want to protest. But don’t deny mathematical facts in how Nader affected the 2000 vote..
Ok I’ve trawled these comments again for rational or at least coherent plans. Lets see in the primaries I can support: no-one, a third party candidate (it’s not clear who) or Hillary. Another line of reasoning above suggests I could support DK, (or Gravel) even though he is a Democrat, so long as he has NO chance of winning. If he became a front runner however I’d apparently have to start supporting Hillary or some other now losing candidate I guess. So, done my very best to ensure appalling choices in 2008, I will then use my conscience about voting. Oh and I could support my left shoe in the primaries. I’d be just as tepidly committed.
If you want to debate or discuss issues with DK, use Youtube, (yes dears it’s soo plebian) he seems quite responsive there. He’s focusing on that medium to overcome the lack of MSM coverage.
Progressives need to revitalize, sure. The first step is getting Umlaut’s Joe Q. Public behind you on the big issues; such as climate, economy, peace and sustainability. Surely most every progressive fully supports that? But you don’t have to be irrational about these primaries to do that. It’s not “either or”. Its two avenues for progressive action that will gain synergy through their success. And then there is local community support work, tending our gardens, preparing for oil transition locally. There’s plenty to do, do what you can.
DK is an aberration among the Democratic party presidential candidates. He has remarkably progressive views. He could be elected, but it’s a long shot. Are you going to team up with the conservatives and the MSM to ridicule, silence and marginalize a progressive champion? Why, because against all the odds he is a Dem, or because he is short? Or would you like to try getting involved, even just to ask some questions about his policies, to challenge him about his positions? My compliments to the code pink activist that confronted Rice, it was so encouraging to see a properly frank and universally understandable message delivered in courageous direct action, rather than encrypted within some kind of self-indulgent eccentric circus. Joe Q. Public understood her, whatever the media says.
Right on, queny!
Dennis ought to be our next President. Aren’t we giving up by believing he’s a long shot?
Stranger (and more damaging) things have happened…He deserves our efforts. It was a no-brainer, but he voted against that Orwellian bill that passed making thought crimes illegal. That ought to count for alot!! Those of us who support DK really need to take his message out and make more coverage for him happen. His platform is one worth fighting for.
Peace
Umlaut,
“and if DK or Gravel don’t succeed in the primaries?
you’ll sit this one out or write in?
let’s make it simple, if Hilary wins the primary?”
As I said above, there’s too much that could change to answer that. What I will do is vote my conscience, which is what I suggest you do as well unless you want more despair and compromise, which it doesn’t sound like you do.
“I’m assuming you don’t think Joe Q. Public will be mobilized in to the action you both suggest in the next few months.”
To be frank, that’s not the way you get movements built *at all*. You have to stand on your principles first, rather than second-guessing what the always non-existent Joe Q. Public thinks. How can you know what other people think if you aren’t clear within yourself? There’s no place to even begin the dialogue. I hate to say this, but a lot of what I hear from Democratic Party, Do or Die supporters is fear and a rather disturbing lack of thought in the choices they’re making. Listening to people speak like watching the Clinton administration implode while it drifted even further rightward than where it started from all over again. It’s as if y’all don’t understand that you are the leaders in a democracy - the politicians are just the advocates, or at least they should be. (I personally don’t think that’s the way the system works; nonetheless, that is the theory.)
I think the key here is what ComARC (if I recall) pointed out about the 1988 democratic primaries; namely, that a progressive (Jesse Jackson) got nearly 40% of the vote. From that point onward, “pragmatic” politics is what has eroded the progressive voting base on a national level, even as the progressive movement has gained steam again. Part of me thinks that’s a disaster, and part of me thinks that it’s a necessary step in people realizing that politicians are the symptom, and the system is the disease. Either way, I know that this centrist/rightward shift every four years is *NOT* the way to go.
As for the polls - honestly? If the MSM is willing to fake the polls as to who won a debate, what is to stop them from rigging polls altogether? I honestly don’t know who to believe when it comes to elections in this country anymore - we’re pretty much all suffering under what Edwardo Galleano called “the Mexicanization of the US voting system”. Trusting the MSM representation of polls is like saying “I trust the PRI.” It’s the path of fools and folly. What we need is more APPO and less Alpo. ;-D
Well OK, it’s MSM - and it’s a poll. nevertheless, what it reveals is anything but the usual MSM spin. So much for Joe Q. Public not knowing what’s up. Heh.
From another part of CD:
POLL: PELOSI’S NUMBERS TAKE ANOTHER DIVE
10/27/2007
WASHINGTON - California voters continue to disapprove of Congress even more than they do of President Bush, and for the first time Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s ratings are more negative than positive, according to a Field Poll released today.
The poll found that 22 percent of state voters approve of Congress’ job performance, with 64 percent disapproving. The discontent was bipartisan, with 70 percent of Republicans, 63 percent of independents and 58 percent of Democrats giving Congress negative marks.
Those findings, taken in a survey of 1,201 voters from Oct. 11 through Oct. 21, track national surveys. A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll during the same period also found a 22 percent approval rating for Congress. A CBS Poll registered a 27 percent approval rating.
Bush earned a 27 percent approval rating from voters in the same Field Poll.
Political analysts give several reasons for the low marks: Democratic voters’ dissatisfaction over the inability to change Iraq war policy, Republicans’ opposition to Pelosi and other Democratic leaders, and a sense by many voters that Congress can’t come to grips with tough issues such as immigration.
“Republican reaction has remained about the same this year, but the real trend is that rank-and-file Democrats and non-partisans are displeased because they expected more from the Democratic Congress,” said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll.
Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, earned a 48 percent approval rating in March, two months after Democrats took over Congress. That dropped to 39 percent in August and 35 percent in October, with 40 percent disapproving and 25 percent registering no opinion.
“Iraq is the anchor weighing down Bush,” DiCamillo said, “and now it’s an anchor on Pelosi because of the complete inability of Congress to change course on the war.”
Pelosi and other Democratic leaders held meetings in the last week to find ways to improve their “message” about what they call the New Direction Congress, highlighting such legislation as the minimum wage increase and ethics reform.
Despite the low marks for Congress, Republicans had little to cheer about in the new Field Poll. Voters gave an approval rating of 34 percent to Democrats in Congress, and 20 percent to Republicans.
Only 29 percent of Republican voters in California approved of the GOP performance in Congress, with 53 percent registering disapproval.
“That 2-to-1 disapproval by their own party really jumps out,” DiCamillo said. “Republicans in Congress are now playing ‘prevent defense’ for Bush on the war and on domestic issues, and Republicans in this state do not approve of that.”
The state’s two senators, Democrats Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, earned higher marks than Pelosi and Congress overall, but the approval ratings for each senator dropped 10 percentage points since March.
The survey showed that 51 percent of all voters approved of Feinstein’s job, with 31 percent disapproving. Boxer’s approval rating was 44 percent positive and 35 percent negative.
http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_7297497
aquietman,
Sorry, but you’re still missing the point, because my main argument to sequioabison, to you, and everyone else who says Nader supporters helped psych-boy into office is that you think these elections are a zero sum game. Most citizens in this country who can vote, don’t. By 1996, I had joined those ranks myself. Nader brought me, and alot of others, back in. In other words, many -I believe most- of us who cast ballots for Nader in 2000 wouldn’t have voted at all if he hadn’t been in the race.
I think a truly populist, progressive movement (maybe similar in description to the “Labor” coalition descibed above) would, over time, bring many more of our disaffected citizenry back into the electorate, whether that would be under the banner of a third party, or within the Democratic party, as DK is trying to do. And that would be a majority, achieved without having to choose the same steady diet of corporate owned whores put up by the DNC and the RNC every 2 to 4 years. Right now the only candidate walking the walk is DK, and it matters little to me whether he calls himself a Democrat or not.
But lets focus on what we have in common. It sounds like most of us on this thread will be casting ballots for DK in the primaries, and that’s encouraging. We’ll see what happens after that.
OK well, if Kucinich does the impossible in the primaries with or without dedicated progressive support I hope at least some of us can bring ourselves to vote for him. I’m yet to see an argument about his platform, which is hardly an ambiguous one. And how about supporting Kucinich in his efforts as a congressmen to impeach Bush?
To quote the article:
“Kucinich may be running for the White House, but his message is most relevant to Capitol Hill. “Congress,” he says, “must take back its exclusive authority to declare war from the Bush Administration.”
He’s right.
But being right is not always enough in tenuous times.
Being heard is what matters.”
Well, Cheney at least:)House resolution 333.
restive
“As I said above, there’s too much that could change to answer that. What I will do is vote my conscience, which is what I suggest you do as well unless you want more despair and compromise, which it doesn’t sound like you do.”
Which do you think will provide more despair and compromise a republican win or a democratic win?
“As for the polls - honestly? If the MSM is willing to fake the polls as to who won a debate, what is to stop them from rigging polls altogether?”
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08dem.htm
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll
Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll
CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll
USA Today/Gallup Pol
Reuters/Zogby Poll
American Research Group poll
Associated Press-Ipsos poll
Cook Political Report/RT Strategies Poll
Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll
ABC News/Washington Post Pol
Quinnipiac University Poll
Newsweek Pol
…are all faking the same results? Give me a break.
“WASHINGTON - California voters continue to disapprove of Congress even more than they do of President Bush, and for the first time Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s ratings are more negative than positive, according to a Field Poll released today.”
we’re talking about the presidency here, but yeah if you want to talk Pelosi I’m sure Sheehan will mop the floor with her. there’s also no worry in a vote split there as only about 10% vote republican in the 8th district, wish the rest of the country were the same, but let’s face it, the rest of the country isn’t San Franciso.
besides what actually is your point?
no need to argue on what comes of the primaries or of Congress. the point is those who will go for a vote split in the presidency if a centrist wins the primary.
we’re all on board with full speed ahead tooth and nail for Kucinich, hell I’d rather even have Nader win the primaries but my argument is that the populace is smart enough to know that Bush and Congress are bad, but not smart enough to know that most the Dem candidates are as well. Hell I’m further left than all of them, I’m a Social Democrat. I’ll pay half my salary to have pristine roads to drive on, no trash laying everywhere, no homeless wandering the streets, safe vibrant city centers you can walk home from at 3 in the morning without worry, well educated children, free university and health care, have 6 weeks of vacation a year, live in a country that’s beautiful to look with healthy functional people is worth and extra 15-20% tax. But I am realistic. In order to get well, you have to first admit you have a problem. the problem is that too many people still get there info from the TV, and they don’t know really anything. That needs to change, but it hasn’t yet.
if the primaries are a big surprise great, but if the best information we have now is accurate there’s a pragmatic dilemma.
I see good things comming out of the 8th district Ca. If Sheehan wins that could spark a big step forward for the third party movement, and I’m hoping the far right does the same with their anti-choice group. As in Europe, the multi-partied have to have at least 4 parties and many have 5 to fairly represent the people. 3 is worse than 2. 3 means 1 will always win.
The point however, is that if the primaries, which are a few months off, end up like the best information we have now says it will, will you use your time and energy to build a new party or stop the worst of all scenarios from happening, and we can see clearly already what everyone thinks here.
I still challenge you that republicans getting in the oval office will do far more damage for chances of a 3rd party and destroy what’s left of the constitution, our way of life and the environment, and that’s what we’re really talking about here splitting the vote in the worst of scenarios in 08 which looks to be what we’re heading for.
Besides you think there’s no difference between the reps and dems? Do you actually read the roll call votes?
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll906.xml
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll965.xml
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00320