I'm voting Kucinich for the comedy of watching the little troll rant about aliens....

Truthseeker58 December 10th, 2007 7:48 pm

"It sickens me that writers like this are still doing the bidding of the corporations when they use the word VIABLE. VIABLE only means the choice of the corporations! Why don't we all just lie on the tracks and let the corporate train run right over our bodies??"

It sickens me too - and if I can possibly be instrumental in stopping the "corporate train" from running over my body, I will. That's why I'm voting for Kucinich!

Sure, this article is satire. To a degree, anyway. The problem is that not all that many Americans really understand satire, unless it's way over the top (the Libertarian stuff was just that). I mean, if Americans understood satire why in the heck would the Navy run recruiting ads on The Cobert Report?

So, in my opinion, political writers who agree with Kucinich's ideas should flat-out endorse the man, avoiding any and all literary tricks such as metaphor, allegory, alliteration, satire, symbolism and so on. Like Gauguin once said, "If you see it green, paint it green," or something like that.

And I have to disagree with one specific point in the article, too: It won't cost more in taxes to pay for Single-Payer; all you'd have to do is divvy up the taxes so that less goes toward developing more efficient ways to kill people and more goes toward more efficient ways to help people. Maybe this is the real reason why the powers that be are so against Single-Payer: because they know that a society that cares about the health of its members is a society that won't spend vast sums of money on the war machine. Caring for people and killing them just don't go together.

What it all boils down to, I guess, is the incredible fear the powers-that-be (big corporations and their lackeys - the politicians) have for - gasp! - socialism.

Go Dennis!

It's disappointing that Paul Krugman takes the position that single-payer is politically impossible, so that one must instead support these bogus hybrid Corporate Democratic Candidate plans.

He believes that these compromised plans, which protect the insurance cartel, will eventually transform themselves into single-payer.

But I don't see the insurance companies going gently into the good night, and I'm also offended by the approach of forcing change by the "bottom-up" approach of mandating compulsory insurance. Krugman has way more faith than I do in the government's ability and willingness to provide adequate subsidies to disadvantaged consumers-- which is most of us.

It's not an exact analogy, I know, but this moderate position strikes me as comparable to endorsing "separate but equal" solutions to social inequality in the belief that this will naturally lead to true equality.

It seems preferable to agitate for a quantum leap to single-payer, which everyone but politicians and insurance companies (and wingnuts) know is superior to the flawed, failed and corrupt status quo.

It seems anyone who can support Single payer will not be considered "viable." so to of anyoned who supports prosecution of this administration for war crimes, anyone that demands an immidiate end of the Iraqi occupation or anyone that doesn't blindly support Israel.

I personally will not vote for anyone the ruling class tell me is "viable." If we can't do better than to fall for the realpolitic of "viability" than we should do ourselves a favor and stay home.

Let me repeat that closing, from "LASTLY," onward.

Be careful in how you support Kucinich's campaigh if you're really for it. Many who commented on this article by Warthen might frighten more eligible voters away than the story of Kucinich and the UFO could.

I'm perhaps mistaken, but much side with PJD's "take" on the article. While I perceived some negativism by the author of the article and towards Kucinich, reading the rest of the article gave me the impression that Warthen is actually and even very much PRO-UHC, Universal Health Care, [and] in single-payer fashion. That impression is due to his noting that the so-called health care plans of Clinton, Edwards, and Obama are seriously flawed and quite bs, and then his noting the $1mn and more these candidates, along with Romney and Giuliani, have received for campaign "donations", i.e., bribes, from the accident and health insurers.

And, of course, that impression that I got from considering the WHOLE article, instead of only the reference to the Kucinich-UFO account or story, well, the impression is reinforced with Warthen providing an excellent enough reference to what Physicians for National Health Care say and argue, which they strike me as doing well.

What bothers me far more than the note Warthen included on the UFO "bit" is in saying that it's still going to cost taxpayers, to have single-payer, and while the reference to the 31% bs use of health insured peoples' payments for private health insurance does not cover health care, and then adds the millions given to political campaigns, and as Warthen emphasises, are from the payees' insurance premiums, or whatever the costs are called.

It's good that he's placing that kind of emphasis and it should be important to people concerned about either or both health care costs and for ALL citizens and legal residents, immigrants to be covered.

What I would like to see, however, is the same emphasis, only with more accurate accounting of the costs as they presently are, vs what they expectably would be under single-payer.

As for the UFO story, I read the short intro. at FoxNews.com and will be reading the full story linked in that intro. I have a mind of curiosity, and the only thing I'd like to know, and from Kucinich, is if he would admit, informally, if he really had this experience.

Many of the people who have posted on this article are ... like flying sky-high just because of the mention of the UFO story, and I wonder why. I wonder if it's due to not believing that ET type UFOs exist, even can or could, even possibly, which is not as strong as probably, for the probability of something we think is possible may be 1%, which'd mean that we think it's possible but very improbable. Alternatively, maybe some of these panicking people are the types to be afraid of their own shadows. Or, ...?.?.?....

I was first unnerved a little by that mention in the article, but am no longer unnerved by it at all, and for minimally two reasons. Firstly, Warthen might be mocking U.S. voters who've not given Kucinich adequate attention, mocking them in a test sort of way; like putting out feelers to try to get a sense for how the population of voters now feel about Kucinich. And as we can see from the comments on this article, maybe many will be sending Warthen their rants, flames, which'll give him feedback like I'm speaking of; and all while he might get feedback of the sort to deride Kucinich for the UFO story. Both types of feedback can be used by journalists in producing subsequent articles.

The second reason is that while I'm not sure what the statistics are on the number of people who've seen UFOs, which like alexnosal said, means only and simply "UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT"; not necessarily the ET kind. All flying objects of presently identified nature ARE UFOs! I've seen plenty of what were UFOs to me; being far too high up in the sky, and surely far above our atmosphere, for me to be able to identify them, only knowing that they were flying ojbects, alright, for I watched them travel, including at least once with a very sharp and fast change in direction or trajectory, having taken a very sharp 90-degree turn, and having travelled very fast. That one went from the first point at which I saw the UFO, darted quite some distance, though not one I could estimate from FAR down below, took the very sharp turn, and travelled a distance about equal to what I had already seen the object fly, and all at what appeared to be very constant speed.

UNIDENTIFIABLE; all you could make out was the light emitted, and which appeared as if a single light, not like the multiple lights we see on planes at night.

And, I've read about many people having seen UFOs, and a few stories about so-called ETs abducting, whatever, a relatively very, very few people; whom I don't believe.

Anyway, the second half of this latter bit is the number of people who believe to have never seen UFOs but believe they do or may exist. From what I've read, plenty of people have this sort of belief.

I don't think these latter two groups of people would be put off by the story of Kucinich having seen a UFO; and that's if he really did, instead of MacLaine lying.

Furthermore, the paragraph immediately preceding the one in which Warthen mentions the Kucinich-UFO story, he says the following.

Quote: ""Government," in America, is a word that we use for a free people banding together to do something that we can do far better working together than working separately. Some people don't accept that fact. They seem to believe that "government" is some scary thing that intrudes on their lives from out there somewhere, like a spaceship full of aliens with ray guns that will turn us all into toads or something."

NOTICE:

a) In the very last sentence of that quoted paragraph, he's mocking the foolishness of people thinking that if ETs and therefore their types of UFOs exist, and they come here, then they're believed to be enemies; and, yet, NONE of us has ever had that sort of experience.

b) The Kucinich-UFO story is about a [good] experience, no aliens came out threatening to harm him, and if it was an ET sort of UFO, then they were minimally NOT unfriendly, even.

Okay, so they weren't particularly neighbourly, did not parachute down to drop in and say 'hello, Dennis, how ya doing man? Hope it's good for ya. Sionara, gotta get back to mother ship, now, but take care of your health, stay fit, and keep on with your principled political ways; ya doing good, man, so keep it up, nothing good comes easily ya know. Bye now, and it's been nice stopping in to say hello. Bye bye.' So, okay, they didn't do that, but they were not unfriendly or hostile; although might have been helpful by offering to MELT DOWN the White House of us; given it isn't made of wood and would not be easy to burn down anymore, shucks.

Sorry, I couldn't tell you if the UFOs I saw were triangular, circular, box-shaped, ...; they were far too distant to be able to perceive form.

My aunt saw a UFO sort of temporarily parked in the middle of the old route we were travelling and were alone on one night, she and her friend sitting in the front saw this vehicle that they described to me, for I was asleep in the back seat; woken up by two bloody screaming women who evidently don't know to stay silent when it's a good time to do so. If they saw that thing, which they described well to me, well based on the assumption that they weren't lying, then maybe the ETs heard the screams of freaked out panic, being sensitive to the sound waves, perhaps, and this caused them to take off like a "bat (would to get) out of hell".

Screams like that and by someone near water would surely be hearable by dolphins and whales, I figure, so why not ETs, I also figure.

If that UFO was there, then it took off very, very fast and was out of sight too fast for me to be able to see it; and I immediately looked in the direction my aunt and her friend both told me the vehicle flew off in.

Were they lying though? That's something I don't know, and the incident happened around 1973.

The UFOs I saw were all late at night, and when I'd go down to a river side in rural country, where I'd peacefully listen to either nature's sounds or the radio, and would spend considerable time just observing the night sky, the stars; a great spot, for there was virtually no light pollution at all there. I went there often for this purpose and relaxation, while observing the sky only one night now and then might not have permitted me to see these UFOs.

I expect anyone who does night sky observation enough will come to notice UFOs flying about, and maybe they're satellites. That's what I thought they were, until the one that did the fast trajectory with a sharp 90-degree turn, in which case I wonder, and still do, if satellites are moved around like this. Other lights, UFOs that I saw traveled, but, and from what I recall, for it's been several years now or since, they traveled without changing directions, pretty much straight-path trajectories.

Satellites do need to be occasionally repositioned; those to be positioned and remain in a relatively fixed position with respect to a selected location on Earth do, anyway. But I have no idea how fast this is done or how fast they can fly.

What my aunt and her friend saw, however, now that was NO satellite. It also was not triangular; it was saucer in shape. That's how ET type UFOs were long represented in cartoons and sci-fi movies, but the aunt and friend described lights like I had never seen in any of the cartoons and sci-fi films I've seen. Anyway, I rarely see her, and when I do, there are other people, and she's always in a serious hurry when visiting. So there's very little opportunity to ask her whether they made up that story and just wanted to blast me out of my comfortable snooze, or if they told me the truth back then. I've never heard people scream like that in real life.

LASTLY, the way people are ripping-apart and -away in panic in the comments on this article, this tells me something else. It's not a good approach; it can potentially do more harm than good, and I mean in terms of being activists for Kucinich's campaign.

He certainly doesn't need his supporters to be flaming and blasting away over such things; he'd surely prefer to have people discuss the topic of him and the UFO calmly, or to do like him, and not make an issues of the matter at all.

Good intentions can sometimes produced awful outcomes the people who had the so-called intentions then REGRET.

Be SANE activists or supporters for his campaign; NOT A BUNCH OF NUTCASE CHILDREN, child-ish. I suggest.

Brad: get a clue. You're not helping single-payer when you frame as "viable", and fail to note the lemming rush to make fun of Dennis. R U a lemming?

He is ganged up on because they're afraid of him, and you're afraid to be ganged up on.

Perhaps you've seen something for which you have no name, a shimmering phenomenon in the distance, vaguely familiar.

It's not a UFO. It's single payer coming down, and you don't know what's happening here, Mr. Jones.

A brain washed corporate whore lesser-evilism creature doesn't believe a real Democrat is "viable" ? So the F what !

I don't consider theirs "viable" and when the Fakeocrats finish marginalizing then destroying the only real Democrat running...... I'll support Nader.... after that....Cindy Sheehan and anybody else who is not a fakeocrat...because to me the Wal-Mart Witch and her ilk aren't "viable"

Brad Warthen is a willfully ignorant pawn

I admit I didn't read all these posts. If anyone did, can you tell me if they found a single article against Single Payer?

I DID NOT READ THIS ARTICLE.

I CAME HERE ONLY TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE PARENTHETICAL REFERENCE TO DENNIS KUCINICH, CHARACTERIZING HIM AS NOT VIABLE.

>>> DUDE, HE'S VIABLE IF PEOPLE VOTE FOR HIM!!! <<<

SO INSTEAD OF BEING SNIDE, WRITE AN ARTICLE ABOUT HOW EVERYBODY OUGHT TO VOTE FOR DENNIS KUCINICH, BECAUSE HE'S THE ONLY CANDIDATE WILLING TO ADVOCATE A SINGLE PAYER SYSTEM.

THAT'S ALL YOU HAVE TO DO!

SORRY FOR YELLING, BUT YOU PISSED ME OFF.

-- ARG

ACEMOAB__My sentiments exactly. It is not as outrageous to have witnessed a UFO, as many people have, than to claim to have a direct line to God for advice. Bush should have been laughed out of the country for that arrogant nonsemse. Besides that, if he had taken his own father`s advice, we might not be in this mess now. Looks like a born again Christian would have remembered to Honor your Father and Mother(Ten Commandments. As for single payer health care , does anyone think the powers in control of our country are going to give up the lucrative health business they now have? Maybe after the depression is over, things could change for better or worse.

Dennis Kucinich 2008!

Go Dennis! I'm sending another $100.00

I did not yet get the chance to read this article, but the title and the first line pissed me right off. Dennis Kucinich is a viable candidate. And he would have a chance at winning if bone heads like Brad Warthen would stop buying into the lie and allowing the MSM to dictate who is and is not electable. Didn't Mr Warthen read Sean Penn's rant yesterday!

Don't be scared vote for Kucinich he is the only real choice!

The media is going to do their best to convince people that Kucinich is not viable. A lot of people who would otherwise support Kucinich will say "Oh well he doesn't have a chance, who should I pick that is better than HC"

I like Kerry's idea of letting people buy in on the same plan that Congresspersons get -for a start.

Or expanding it so that all children are covered first. You have to start somewhere.

And think of these children who are used to having it and then

a) seeing a parent or grandparent die because only children are covered; or

b) being annoyed when they reach 18 and are no longer covered;

Think of what these kids are going to think when they grown up or see grown ups suffer because of a lack of coverage.

It sickens me that writers like this are still doing the bidding of the corporations when they use the word VIABLE. VIABLE only means the choice of the corporations! Why don't we all just lie on the tracks and let the corporate train run right over our bodies??

DENNIS KUCINICH is VIABLE to the only thing that matters --- THE PEOPLE!! I'm sick of the weaklings going, "Oh gee, if Corporate America doesn't like my candidate, I guess I can't vote for him/her."

Do you think if Clinton or Obama were really for a not-for-profit single payer health system, that the media would be giving them such a free lift??? You are wondering why the 'major' candidates aren't pushing for this? The corporations deem the "top runners" the people who do their bidding, that's why.

Get a backbone, Warthen, and stop cowtowing to the choices of big money. We'll never get our country back with this kind of sheeple thinking.

The problem is that Americans are not aware of the real facts about national health care. If you want a short video education about these facts, go to:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9E-8etrE2o

Disgusting. This reporter's strategy is perhaps the most harmful of all to true reform. Ridicule the one candidate who supports what the people need and want. It is F***ed up. "Yes we all want single payer but the only candidate supporting it is a Shirly-MacClain lovin UFO watchin and not VIABLE." How long will the American people keep swallowing this shite and vote in their own interest???? The MSM corporate matrix just needs to keep up the illusion that DK is not viable as long as possible because he is the greatest threat to their interests.

Go over to Daily Kos and see all the "Liberals" extorting the wonderful virues of the HRC, Obama, Edwards, health care plans. When I post the simple FACT that all three of these plans are nothing more than huge corporate welfare give aways just like the Republicans engage in, I am immediately branded a "troll". No one responds to the issue or the the facts, just post ofter post of personal insults staying AWAY from the subject.

You got it COMarc. They kicked Mike Gravel out of the race because he hasn't raised enough money to be "viable". Some democracy.

Is that what you think, PJD? Warthen's UFO comment links to a snide FOX News website. And what exactly in his article clearly expresses his admiration for Dennis? I missed that part. I only saw one word linking Dennis to single payer and it was "except". I wasn't impressed.

By definition, any candidate that says "single-payer" is not a "viable" candidate.

Or, to look at it another way, the candidates that are considered front runners are largely there because of their fund-raising. Success in fund-raising means you are treated like a 'viable' candidate and thus given media coverage. Since no voter has gone to the polls yet, its this combination of money for campaigning plus free media coverage that leads to name recognition and a place in the polling data.

If a candidate says 'single-payer', then they won't get the corporate money. Then the media will decide that they are at best a 'second-tier' candidate, if not one who's completely not viable. From that point on, the coverage of the candidate will then say that they can't be elected.

Its corporate money and corporate media who are telling us who is 'viable' and who isn't. And therefore, any candidate that takes a position that is opposed by the corporations will immediately be declared to be 'not viable'.

Are we reading the same article?

Mr. Warthen, is making fun of the MSM treatment of Kucinich vis a vis the UFO thing, not Kucinich himself. Will what passes for the US-left PLEASE get a sense of humor!

Here a summary of what I read:

1. Mr. Warthen strongly strongly supports single payer and the right to healthcare.

2. Mr. Warthen is sick of the free-marketeering Libertarians and gave them a dose of the the derision thay so well deserve.,

3. Mr. Warthen mocks the useless sold-to-the-highest-bidding-corporation-Democrats (except one named Kucinich) for refusing to support single payer.

4. He makes fun of the media's Kucinch/UFO thing - not Kucinich himself, whom he clearly admires.

In summary, lots of damn good points, concisely and humorously done.

Duh! The Democratic Party is awash in corporate money and thus supports the corporate agendas for war, privatized health care, etc.etc. Both Republicans and Democrats support the corporatization (privatization) of government. Both parties support the Project for the New American Century... global hegemony and pre-emptive war to benefit multi-national corporate greed. To hell with the environment. A million Iraqis have been slaughtered to secure the Middle East for oil profits and militiary-industrial complex.

Dennis Kucinich, Cindy Sheehan, etc. need to issue a new call to found a new political party of, by, and for the people's needs. A People's Peace Party. First Princples: No funding from corporate interests. End the war(s) in the Middle East. End the corrupt looting of the entire economy to profit a tiny
few.

Use the funds saved from ending war, shutting down 700 bass overseas, cut the military budget 50%, re-instate tax cuts on the wealthy, .... to fully fund public health care, maintain social socurity, create jobs transforming economy to a sustainable economy.

Yes . .... a socialist party of by and for the economic interests of the people.

Nothing less will work.

see World Socialist Web Site http://www.wsws.org

Everything else is trivial babble.

The nice thing about single payer (while as noted, not free) is that they cannot deny you for a 'pre-existing' condition, for having cancer, for being other than White, for being poor,for being pregnant, for being old, for being anything. The only thing that is not covered, is cosmetic/non-necessary surgery. Plastic surgery is covered if you have been or are disfigured through birth defect or accident. Three quarters of vision exam costs are also covered as well as many mental health clinics, chiropractic clinics, holistic medicine,physiotherapy, and certified massage clinics (all limited in no. of visits/year). Let me pay the extra tax instead of your undecipherable, not to be believed, private medical coverage. Service is not always fast but it has always been reasonably good, and if I was not satisfied, I merely changed my doctor.

Dennis doesn't need to be in the White House, but We need him in the White House. Gandhi said "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win". So maybe we're getting closer.

Interesting that Brad Warthen goes on about single payer while ridiculing Dennis Kucinich. I think the reason these pundits can't talk about integrity is because they don't recognize it.

Warthen also distorts the costs of single payer to the taxpayers. A 3% tax increase (the average tax payers' share of the cost) is only part of how it's paid for. It's offset by no more premiums, deductibles, or copays and provides complete coverage including dental, prescription (NO doughnut holes), and your choice of any state licensed professional as primary provider. It also has a small employer tax which is far less than those providing coverage pay now, closing corporate tax loopholes, and 1/2 of 1/% tax on stock transfers. Pretty fair to me. Of course we don't live in a fair country. But things are going to get very interesting with the economy falling apart. That's how the New Deal revolution started. Overreaching greed brought the whole house of cards down, and now we're repeating history, being stupid enough not to have learned from it.

If you tried to make and sell the best toothpaste ever invented you would not be able to compete with the advertising budgets of the Fortune 500's toothpaste brands.

Kucinich is the best candidate. Unfortunately the Fortune 500 advertising budget is dedicated to selling Clinton and Obama. Kucinich cannot match those advertising budgets anymore than you could with your fantastic toothpaste.

Unfortunately, there are too few of us who are not influenced by Fortune 500 advertising budgets.

So the correct question should be: "Can any viable voter interested in single payer vote for Dennis Kucinich since he is the only contender even seriously noticing this option as the solution for American healthcare?"

I've been toying with a new way to expose framing, media black-holes, etc.

For instance, go to http://www.npr.org. Search for keyword "Iraq". You'll get about 25,556 hits as of today. Search for "single-payer". You'll get like 102.

It's a taboo topic. Even more taboo is a politician who might campaign that we shorten the work-week to 32-37 as other modern countries, demand paid maternal/paternal leave (how's that for the Family Values crowd), and longer standard vacations to rejuvenate ourselves.

If this were a democracy, NPR's results would be reversed. Before Bush Sr. started screwing around in Iraq, most Americans couldn't have cared less about the place. I find it interesting that we don't have 25,000+ hits for single-payer instead.

Re:goner "Everyone is viable if you just vote for them. It's that simple."
Well said. As for that UFO comment, Kucinich said that he and a group of people saw something flying in the sky that they couldn't identify (unidentified flying object) and that was it. Since then GOP sycophants have latched onto this as if he said he believes in Martian invasions! Get over it people!
The problem with Kucinich as I see it, is that he draws his support primarily from the intelligentsia, academia and the politically well informed. This is a very small portion of society. nevertheless if he were to get just equal coverage by the MSM, he would rise above the rest pretty quickly simply because his platform represents the majority of Americans.

Warthen writes for my local paper, so I am plenty familiar with his "moderate" views. His hypocrisy in calling for boldness when he is the first to mock any candidate who actually exhibits it is breathtaking, though. Even though he lives in SC and not DC, he is typical of the Beltway insider mentality for whom a lack of boldness is seen as a desirable quality in a candidate. Preserve the status quo, don't frighten the horses and Warthen will be among those praising you for your "sensible" approach.

Concerning UFO's and their viewing:

If totally objective Fox News says totally sane Shirley MacLaine said something about someone in a for-profit book, then holy effluent, it simply HAS to be true. We distort, you deride.

Certainly people who don't or can't look at the sky probably won't ever see a UFO. I have seen strange things in the sky several times. One turned out to be a natural event, and one clearly was an experimental military aircraft. The other items remain unidentified. On each occasion, I felt a sense of wonder, literally wondering what the intercourse I was actually seeing. Big deal. So I am not a qualified atmospheric scientist and aircraft expert. I have never seen a Wal-Mart or Costco either, and could not tell one from the other six inches away. The hatred against Dennis Kucinich is because he is the most dangerous candidate to the establishment. The irony of all this is that he is the only one that is seriously sane. I can identify with someone who is curious about the unknown like Mr. Kucinich. Our President, what is his name, Voldemort or something, I really can't recall, claims that God talks directly to him and suffers no ridicule. The last time I looked, there was exactly equal proof of God and cute ET's. Now I am not an atheist, but I manage that leap of faith without having a deity babbling torture instructions at me. Dennis needs to be in the Oval Office. The Dark Lord needs more meds and a safe cell to recover in for a few decades. Perhaps a nice (and, of necessity, severely visually impaired and totally lacking in taste) cellmate will finally deeply satisfy our Decider-in-Chief. Hopefully, he will finally discover that it was not God, but his prostate gland that was talking to him all along. Sane folks already know from which of his orifices his better utterances emanate.

"A free state is formed and is maintained by the voluntary union of the whole people joined together under the same body of laws for the common welfare and the sharing of benefits justly apportioned" This is cut into the marble wall of Oregon's Capitol building. Would that it was a truth.

PJD: that was an astute and reasoned take on the author's mention of DK's unfortunate notability in the wacko ranks of Shirley-ites. But while I commend you on your ability to remain dispassionate in the face of satire-in-journalism's-clothing, I must insist that the effect of so marginalizing a candidate for the highest office in the land should be seen for what it is: political hackery. BW deserves the fuss, and the fuss is indeed warranted.

DK may believe that he has seen a UFO, but he will not base his domestic or foreign policies on that. The Republicans, on the other hand, believe in the fairy tale of Creationism, and you can bet your bottom dollar that they WILL base policy on that. Most of the other Demo's believe the shrub's fairy tales about Iraq and Iran, and they will definitely base policy on that. Whose belief is more dangerous? Whose belief is crazier?

The writer of this article does the cause of single-payer health care a serious disservice when the dismisses DK over such a trivial matter.

Brad boy's e-mail address for his redress:

bwarthen@thestate.com

PLEASE state your feelings to him because I find it hard to believe he will be reading C.D.

I think the satirical author of this piece has tongue quite firmly planted in his cheek when he wrote Kucinich/UFO remark - so I didn't think such a fuss is warranted.

His point was spot-on. I especially liked his mocking of the Libertarians.

I am quite dismayed that many even some purported progressive groups call for nothing more than "affordable health care". What the hell does that mean? "Affordable" to whom? when will the USA wake up and join most of the rest of the world in treating healthcare as a Human Right - not a commodity to be made a bit more "affordable".

Nicely done, Brad. The one candidate who's platform would satisfy your goal (and thus render your tirade moot) is shot down by...by...by an article from FoxNews?!? I'm callin' it as I see it: you're full of crap. Even if I weren't a Kucinich supporter, I'd still have the requisite pair of brain cells to see how much you're in love with those blinders you're wearing. Personally, I don't think you write well enough to hoodwink the large portion of the electorate that only runs on one neural cylinder, but I may be wrong, and since you've been published on CD, you should fully expect the pasting you deserve, and think twice about trying to redeem yourself as a journalist to the rest of the masses.

The selection of our country's chief executive is not a horse race. We are not at the track, and we are not handicapping.

Think for yourself, and base your vote upon the issues. You will not lose money. You are not betting. You are voting.

Inform yourself about the candidates and their positions on the issues. If there is a candidate who holds the same views as you, for example, if there is a candidate that distinguishes themselves by calling for a single payer, not for profit health care system, and that issue is important to you, then you should vote for that candidate.

Do not allow the corporate media to turn the election into a farce. Anyone who is on the ballot is a viable candidate. In many ways, that it what it means to be on the ballot.

Think for yourself, and vote for the candidate whose positions on the issues you most agree with.

What's this "viable" crap? It was just a short time ago that Mike Huckabee was running the same numbers on the Republican side that Kucinich has on the Democratic side. Nobody says that the Republican is not viable. Of course, he doesn't piss off the powers that be. People like this author perpetrate this myth and contribute to the problem. Everyone is viable if you just vote for them. It's that simple.

I have written this "alleged" journalist with my anger at his directing the (parenthesis) comment at Kucinich. I hope ALL of you Dennis supporters will do likewise. These Damn "journalists" must be called to account for this type of slight and lack of democratic commentary.

http://www.december2007.com

Is that the only Fu*king thing anybody remembers about Dennis? Come on people, look at the record!!!!

I am in agreement, with this -- except for one thing, and I'm not sure if it's "positive" or what: The article points to Dennis Kucinich being the only one who says, single payer. But, in that vein, it "claims" he is not averse to UFOs and such. Is this positive? Or negative?

Dennis is "viable"---"viable" in that he is the only one running who could ever succeed in truly reforming our health care system in America. His past history as mayor of Cleveland proves what he is capable of. I am referring to the Muny Light debacle he fought through and survived because he had the courage to keep the electricity government-owned.

While other candidates at this point seem more "viable" than others, only one candidate seems "viable" when it comes to reform and radical change in America. That candidate is Dennis Kucinich.