The payday loan industry has been the prime target for corrupt politicians, from all sides, seeking an increase in voter support at the expense of what’s best for their citizens. Governors of several states including, Georgia, North Carolina, and Oregon completely drove payday loan companies out of their states. The negative effects of driving out payday loan companies from these states, appears to have not been what was best for its’ citizens. For instance, in Georgia, the bankruptcy filings, bounced checks and foreclosures all skyrocketed after the cash advance product was done away with. In spite of these negative statistics, following the closure of payday loans in these states, several other governors continue to try and follow suit. Top national politicians, such as presidential hopeful Barack Obama, are now stepping into the arena in hopes of wiping the industry completely off the map. Should such efforts deem successful, the possibility is very real for increased unemployment rates, more debt, more foreclosures and an even more crippled economy.

Post Courtesy of Personal Money Store
Professional Blogging Team
Feed Back: 1-866-641-3406
Home: http://personalmoneystore.com/NoFaxPaydayLoans.html
Blog: http://personalmoneystore.com/moneyblog/

How old are you dougnwagner? It's my guess that you are one of those twenty-somethings with a little education and no real life experience, attracted to get involved in the Obama campaign by his feel-good rhetoric.

Don't misunderstand me here, I think that's a good thing, because young people need to get involved, as they have been uninvolved for much to long already.

Decisions have been made by presidents and politicians of both parties, bad decisions, over the last four or five decades that will, very surely, negatively affect your life, and the lives of your children and your grandchildren, and you, apparently, have no in-depth understanding of where we have been nor where we are going.

I see it in your child-like, infantile efforts to win for Obama by smearing the only other electable top-tier candidate, John Edwards, who is actually speaking the truth about what needs to be done in order to right the ship of state, that is listing so far over from the tidal wave of corporate money, that it is in serious danger of capsizing. You need to understand that if the ship goes down, you, your friends and families are going down too.

Don't let your zeal for short-term profits blind you to the bigger picture and the long term goals. Yes, it is about change, and it's about getting out the message of what changes are needed. And right now, Edwards is speaking the message of change while Obama is showing the face of change.

As I have said before, the best thing that could emerge from the Democratic primary would be a ticket with both Edwards and Obama on it. Now that is something to work for.

On January 6th, this came from Dennis Kucinich is a general mailing. He explains his decisions:

New Hampshire, Iowa and Edwards

Dear Supporter,

For the record:

1. New Hampshire is the first state where we are aggressively campaigning. Due to the Party lockout in Iowa, we chose to focus on New Hampshire.
2. I am the only person running for President who voted against the war, against funding the war 100% of the time, against the Patriot Act, and who stands for a universal single-payer not-for-profit healthcare system. Nevertheless I was excluded from Saturday night's ABC Presidential debate, or four tone monologue as it was.
3. In answer to your questions about why I didn't support former Senator John Edwards on the second ballot in Iowa: I have serious concerns about his connections to a Wall Street hedge fund, Fortress Investment Group. While attacking others for accepting campaign money from Washington lobbyists, he is up to his ears in money from Wall Street special interests.

He made half a million dollars in a single year for attending a few meetings for Fortress and has invested a substantial part of his own personal wealth in the hedge fund whose portfolios are responsible for sub-prime predatory lending practices, Medicare privatization, and an entire range of corporate sharp dealings that are driving the middle class into poverty.

While I indicated Senator Obama as a preferred second choice in Iowa, Progressives have fundamental disagreements with him and all of the other Presidential candidates on most of their major positions on the issues.

We must have the courage of our convictions to fully support and vote for what it is we really want. For once, we must realize our power, stop playing tactical games, and vote as a bloc - which, as you know, is what the religious right does and why they often win.

We Progressives are in the majority in this election. We will win only when we refuse to compromise and vote with integrity.

Dennis Kucinich

"Sellouts" to the Democratic party don't refuse to sign loyalty oaths to the Democratic party, which get them kicked off the ballot:

http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_7867042

Kucinich files lawsuit after party denies him place on ballot
The Associated Press
Article Launched: 01/02/2008 09:39:43 PM MST

AUSTIN—Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, along with supporter Willie Nelson, have filed a lawsuit to get Kucinich on the ballot in Texas after they say the Texas Democratic Party rejected his application.
The civil lawsuit was delivered late Wednesday afternoon to U.S. District Court for the Western District of the United States, Kucinich spokesman Andy Juniewicz said late Wednesday evening.
The lawsuit says that Kucinich was informed by the Texas Democratic Party on Wednesday that his application was "defective" because he crossed out a loyalty oath in the application that said he would swear to support whoever the Democratic nominee for president might be.
The lawsuit asks that a temporary restraining order be issued to stop the Texas Democratic Party from certifying to the Texas Secretary of State a list of candidates and to restrict the secretary of state from accepting any list that doesn't include the name of a qualified candidate who refuses the loyalty oath.
Kucinich, a congressman from Ohio, also wants the court to declare that the oath requirement violates the First Amendment and the 14th Amendment in the Constitution.
"He's right to challenge a blind loyalty oath to the Democratic Party because it's un-American," Willie Nelson said in a news release from the Kucinich campaign.
Calls for comment made to the Texas Democratic Party and the secretary of state's office after business hours on Wednesday were not immediately returned.

Here is the list of top industries contributions to
The Barack Obama campaign -

1 Lawyers/Law Firms $7,940,424

2 Retired $4,955,387

3 Securities & Investment $4,505,199

4 Misc Business $2,510,077

5 Real Estate $2,292,188

6 TV/Movies/Music $2,203,317

7 Education $2,112,520

8 Business Services $2,073,202

9 Health Professionals $1,330,743

10 Misc Finance $1,291,272

11 Printing & Publishing $956,853

12 Computers/Internet $940,459

13 Commercial Banks $865,856

14 Civil Servants/Public Officials $729,442

15 Non-Profit Institutions $481,761

16 Retail Sales $402,368

17 Insurance $390,513

18 Other $388,964

19 General Contractors $314,022

20 Hospitals/Nursing Homes $307,816

Here is the list of top industries contributions to
The Hillary Clinton campaign -

1 Lawyers/Law Firms $9,596,748

2 Securities & Investment $4,735,730

3 Retired $4,139,270

4 Real Estate $3,939,008

5 Business Services $2,539,364

6 Misc Business $2,301,186

7 TV/Movies/Music $2,142,921

8 Health Professionals $1,695,830

9 Education $1,640,224

10 Misc Finance $1,545,181

11 Commercial Banks $935,658

12 Computers/Internet $883,125

13 Printing & Publishing $800,191

14 Civil Servants/Public Officials $777,775

15 Misc Manufacturing & Distributing $657,450

16 Retail Sales $627,226

17 Non-Profit Institutions $583,178

18 Lobbyists $567,950

19 Insurance $525,938

20 Food & Beverage $516,670

Here is the list of top industries contributions to
The John Edwards campaign -

1 Lawyers/Law Firms $8,161,150

2 Democratic/Liberal $2,001,674

3 Retired $1,168,681

4 Securities & Investment $773,600

5 Real Estate $638,755

6 TV/Movies/Music $458,990

7 Business Services $434,793

8 Health Professionals $419,326

9 Misc Business $358,325

10 Education $351,261

11 Misc Finance $278,000

12 Printing & Publishing $193,734

13 Computers/Internet $182,585

14 Civil Servants/Public Officials $178,995

15 Commercial Banks $153,650

16 Insurance $129,600

17 Retail Sales $102,756

18 Non-Profit Institutions $92,750

19 Other $91,950

20 Accountants $66,950

All info is from -
www.opensecrets.org

Here is the list of top contributors to the
Barack Obama campaign -

Goldman Sachs $369,078
Lehman Brothers $229,090
National Amusements Inc $220,950
JP Morgan Chase & Co $216,759
Sidley Austin LLP $203,325
Exelon Corp $194,750
Citigroup Inc $180,650
Citadel Investment Group $166,600
Jones Day $158,400
Skadden, Arps et al $150,900
UBS AG $146,150
Time Warner $142,718
Harvard University $141,700
University of California $126,972
Jenner & Block $122,419
Kirkland & Ellis $111,951
UBS Americas $106,680
Morgan Stanley $104,425
WilmerHale $102,360
Credit Suisse Group $92,300

And here is the list of top contributors to the
Hillary Clinton campaign -

DLA Piper $356,100
Goldman Sachs $350,050
Morgan Stanley $323,550
Citigroup Inc $307,350
EMILY's List $211,642
National Amusements Inc $193,850
JP Morgan Chase & Co $173,350
Kirkland & Ellis $172,000
Skadden, Arps et al $151,460
Greenberg Traurig LLP $150,900
Cablevision Systems $135,113
Merrill Lynch $125,550
Time Warner $124,150
Lehman Brothers $123,450
Bear Stearns $120,580
Patton Boggs $118,400
Ernst & Young $110,650
Blank Rome LLP $105,100
Latham & Watkins $100,950
News Corp $99,350

And here is the list of top contributors to the
John Edwards campaign -

ActBlue $1,965,274
Fortress Investment Group $187,850
Stearns, Weaver et al $131,000
Lerach, Coughlin et al $93,950
Goldman Sachs $77,100
Whitten, Nelson et al $66,250
Girardi & Keese $64,400
Beasley, Allen et al $61,850
Watts Law Firm $61,000
Morgan & Morgan $60,050
Skadden, Arps et al $54,950
Deutsche Bank AG $54,750
Citigroup Inc $49,200
Sidley Austin LLP $43,950
Brent Coon & Assoc $42,700
Kramer, Dillof et al $36,400
Motley Rice LLC $36,200
Baron & Budd $35,590
Brayton Purcell $35,100
Weitz & Luxenberg $34,600

Look at the contributors and the amounts and tell me who corporate America backs. Any questions?
Visit www.opensecrets.org

I'll vote for none of the above and beg mercy from my fellow countrymen.

Another reason that I'm glad I've supported Mike Gravel instead of Kucinich all this time. Wasn't it only a few weeks ago that Dennis was saying "If you don't vote your heart, your heart never wins?" Maybe he's hoping to get on Obama's good side and become his running mate. I can't see any other reason for him to give up before the primary is even over.

have you seen political compass.org?
below link shows presidential candidates ( 2008 primaries) scores

http://www.politicalcompass.org/usprimaries2008

Micheal Moore knows that EDWARDS is the man.
Check it out here on CD -
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/01/02/6108/

I think Kucinich recommended Obama because Edwards has latched onto his(Kucinich's) progressive program and would further dilute Kucinich's support in New Hampshire where Kucinich has been campaigning hard. It's all so convoluted but I truly think Kucinich just wants to keep his message out there as long as possible.

If Kucinich had an ounce of self-respect he wouldnt be in the Democratic Party. He sold out when he decided to stay with the Dems.

Kucinich has again shown his complete lack of leadership and his unconditional support for a corrupt and useless political party.

Ron Paul may be the only option for those sick of corporate puppets.

Is Gravel that guy from Alaska that Nader told George he liked on The Hour?

http://www.cbc.ca/thehour/video.php?id=1571

Nader said that the two he liked best were Kucinich and the guy from Alaska.

When circumstances change, living things and people must change and adapt, or die out. But not if conservatives get their way again. They've managed to frighten and fool most everyone, politicians especially, into thinking that adaptation is "flip-flopping" thereby maintaining the status quo no matter how disastrous.

I think Dennis is sincere and thinks Obama will become more progressive once he is in power, particularly if DK is VP. I've heard that seldom happens though. And being accused of "flip-flopping" is a big deterrent.

Nader's endorsement of Edwards is important once we realize that the oligarchy's banks and multinationals are responsible for ALL our troubles and that Edwards is the only candidate addressing the problem. For this reason, I'm leaning toward Edwards.

Senator Gravel's candidacy is most important because he is the only candidate addressing the systemic corruption in our government with his National Initiative for Democracy. More than any other candidate, that makes him more dangerous to the oligarchy. I can only hope that whoever wins will seriously consider his http://nationalinitiative.us/ , make this a government of, for and by the people once and for all and save future generations from periodically having to fertilize the tree of democracy with their blood.

Frankly, while I am quite surprised Kucinich has decided to back Obama, instead of Edwards (I just kind of thought that's how it would go), this says a hell of a lot about who Obama really is. I saw him speak to a huge crowd of autoworkers not too long ago, and it was honestly amazing. I thought then that he will hedge his bets until he really has a clear shot at the Presidency and then you will see the real Obama - the one I saw that day - come out. I have more respect for Kucinich than perhaps any other candidate in recent memory. He is a man who ALWAYS stands by his convictions, so for him to back Obama simply means Obama is the man, in my eyes.

I hope Gravel won't break my heart and support one those establishment Democratic candidates like Hillary, Edwards and Obama. But then again, I get my heart broken every day.

Kucinich isn't going to make it in Iowa, so he asked his supporters to vote for another candidate. He didn't have to do that, but he did. His supporters don't have to do what he asked, but some of them will (and some of them won't). I would have preferred that Kucinich endorse Edwards, if he had to endorse anyone, but, since I don't live in Iowa, it doesn't matter what I think. Polls indicate at this time that Edwards probably has the best chance of any of the Democrats to beat the Republicans, so it doesn't look like Kucinich chose Obama over Edwards simply to support the Democratic party.There are many possible reasons why Kucinich endorsed Obama over Edwards, but there's no real way to know what they are for sure. Ralph Nader endorsed Edwards. Kucinich endorsed Obama. Neither endorsed Hillary. Polls indicate at this time that Hillary has the smallest chance of any of the top tier candidates to beat the Republicans. Put all of this together and the only thing anyone really knows is that someone will win Iowa.

Hopefully it won't be Hillary.

If you can't vote your principles (Kucinich) then vote lesser-of-two-evil. That's most likely to be Obama, but it could be Edwards too at least at this early stage. If I was an Iowan, I'd give my second vote to Edwards, why not? I think his anti-corporate rethoric deserves some reward. Of course here where I live (Pennsylvania) what I think is irrelevant. I'll be watching with interest how to Iowa caucus unfolds tomorrow night.

Misquotation...

'To be successful in Government, you have to screw your enemies. To be sucessful in elections, you have to screw your friends'

RE: - "I hope Iowans will caucus for me as their first choice this Thursday, because of my singular positions on the war, on health care and trade. This is an opportunity for people to stand up for themselves. But in those caucus locations where my support doesn't reach the necessary threshold, I strongly encourage all of my supporters to make Barack Obama their second choice.

So Obama is plan "B" - but why Obama? What issue(s) does Kucinich figure that Obama will stick up for?

RE: - When will Dennis join the Greens? The Democratic Party dances to the tune of its corporate master. Kucinich doesn't belong.

The Dems don't have a party platform that they voted on at Convention that a party leader would be beholden to. Therefore, every Dem candidate for President gets to define the parameters of the role.

In Canada, the party leader (and anyone who runs for the party) has to stand behind what was decided at convention. Though, not everything is decided at convention so there is a certain amount of wiggle room.

RE: - This doesn't surprise me as Dennis has a personal issue with John.

As a Canadian, I would like to know what it is.

RE: - Disappearing articles

It's happened before - usually they come back after a couple of hours.

RE: - Obama, a man who doesn't know what he's saying from one minute to the next … and changes his tune whenever Oprah gives him a nudge

Hey, all this tells me is that I need to know what Oprah's political beliefs are. She strikes me as being a bit right winged, but I am Canadian. What is it of Oprah's political beliefs that turns you off the most and that you see coming out of Obama's mouth?

RE: - i had it right the first time,when i unregistered as a voter

Doing as the neo cons want you to do is never the right thing.

RE: - I would vote for Dennis Kucinich and I'm going with Edwards because they really want to represent the people.

That is probably what I would do - if I could vote in American elections. Strange that, as a Canadian, I share the fate of many Black American voters who, through no fault of their own, are not allowed to vote for American president. Who gets in the Oval Office affect Canadians too.

Actually, never heard of him before, but just looked at his platform and Brian Moore's ideas seem fairly main stream and supportable. Tell him that he would be better off calling himself a Social Democrat, though, because it sounds less scary.

RE: - The fits start when someone starts calling you nasty names for voicing your opinions.

Isn't name calling sort of like admitting that you are losing the argument? In Question Period, when an MP resorts to name calling, it means that they find the question the other MP asked a bit too dangerous. Example:

Joe Volpe: "My critic opposite for example, [has spent] $106,000 [on travel]. I wonder, when he gets on a plane if he takes a champagne shower and asks for caviar?"

John Reynolds: "Mr. Volpe is a sleazebag."

As you can see, Reynolds just lost the argument because he resorted to name calling!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/cdngovernment/political_insults.html

RE: - how can we ever hope to form a society that coheres?

Did the founding fathers actually want a society which coheres? I think that this is the central question for both the fathers and Obama - coherence sounds like falling in line like sheep to me.

Yes, the more equal and free people are, the more opinionated they are and the less likely they are to cohere. Did Obama say, in the words that followed that this was a good or a bad thing?

Earthian - Thanks for the articles - will take a quick look at them now. If anyone has something else which contradicts what I am about to skim through ...

I read over on DailyKos that Dodd and Biden may throw their support to Edwards if they don't make the first cut in the Iowa caucuses. I hope they don't swallow Obama's "change" baloney. Voting for Obama is like changing your underwear--same shorts, different day.

Kucinich made a deal with Obama:

"Kucinich spokesman Andy Juniewicz said the deal was finalized today"

I doubt we can know what the deal is. What did Dennis get back in return for the endorsement? I doubt he will say.

I don't question DK's policies. As for his tactic this time, I am skeptical due to Obama's record of clear statements that make him a corporate, conservative militarist, not a true progressive.

But . . . if Obama wins and if DK ends up in the Cabinet with a new Dept. for Peace, we will know what the deal was.

I am not holding my breath though.

I'd like to know from Dennis what the deal involved from Obama for the endorsement.

If anyone knows or finds out, please do tell . . .

The way the Iowa Caucus works if a candidate doesn't get 15% in any given precint, he gets zero. For Kucinich this will be virtually all of them. Therefore for a Kucinich supporter to have his or her vote count they will have to go with someone else. Since they are smart and the the kind of people that think for themselves, they will use their vote they way THEY think is best.

Oh, that's rich. A Kucinich true believer advising everyone else to get with the program.

And you think, really, that we are one step from a socialist system with Obama, Hillary or Edwards? Keep dreaming, we are not getting any closer to that anytime soon with them at all. At least with Ron Paul (even if we do not agree with him when it comes to other issues)we know that he is the only candidate, along with Kucinich and Gravel, that is anti imperialist- anti war ; something Obama, Edwards or Hillary are definitely not.

Interesting set of comments. I'm for Edwards (it's always been a 2nd choice to Kucinich); I'd rather Kucinich had recommended (he didn't order) that his supporters go there, but I understand the logic of backing the most likely person to defeat Hillary. Many of the CD posts reflect that understanding, and variations on that. But, and depressingly as always, many posters (the disappointed to disgusted crowd) are living in some fantasy world of screaming truth to power, ready to go down fighting, picking apart every problem with every candidate, until we all go down together. Goddam folks,this is real, people are dying, and the planet itself is in dire peril, and the ideologically pure set are holding on to their precious virtue. Grow up, already!!!!

GilMendoza - you beat me to it - Obama is the repugs dream come true. [Hillary too] So many of us live in this dream world - that racism is gone - if almost half of this idiotic country voted for W. - do we really think they will vote for the darker fellow?

I would like to first say, Kem, why is your head in your butt? LOL JK....Hope all is well with you friend. I'm not terribly shocked by this announcement. Let's face it, DK is just not a viable candidate in this election. I'm thinking we are going to see an Obama/Edwards or Edwards/Obama ticket. Hillary is not going to get in, or at least I don't believe she will. She is just too devisive and come general elections the Reps will come out in droves just to vote against her. I like Biden but he just doesn't seem to be gettin much support either.
Ron Paul loonies: If you think RP is "progressive" in any way you may want to join Kem with your heads in your butts. He's all for laissez faire capitalism, he's a Libertarian and loves, loves, loves corporations and unfettered capitalism. A vote for him is a vote for corporations...

Sounds like a bait and switch to me. I would have more respect if Kucinich simply endorsed the Green party, since they are more in sync with what Kucinich espouses.

I agree with Rebel Farmer:
Kucinich has one of the better online organizations, so I would have perfered that he polled his own supporters as to who they would support as a second choice. He could have provided agruments for Obama and Edwards (I do believe he knows then better than I). He had the mechanism... he could have shown us the power of democracy in the modern age.

vote for Ron Paul and kiss social security bye bye. in fact kiss every social program bye bye. no money whatsoever, not for the elderly not for children not for the poor, not for anything. bye bye.

I think Kucinich was in the race so that those views on the left could be heard. The MSM can not competely ignore a presidential candidate (but they try to)

The US as a nation is very far to the right for the west. The numbers incarcerated, the death penalty, no universal health care..and its a culture based in greed..with each US household owing about $10,000 in credit card debt.

The US is simply not a progressive nation and it has been historically slow for a western nation to establish basic human rights...like the vote for women or the end of slavery

So I support all of your views and encourage you to continue to speak out as loudly and as often as possible..this will take courage..because the US is a nation that has a very strong, powerful and wealthy right wing...

The right wing believes that the US is economically strong because of these right wing ideas about no strong safety net and no universal health care ..and limited government. I think we will see that the US will become very weak in the future precisely because its people will not be well educated and the children will not get good health care. The reason the US has done so well is because it was, by comparison to Europe and Japan, unaffected economically by WWII. That WWII effect is diminishing and now we will see how well a nation does that does not provide basic services in health care and education to large segments of its population.

DOUGWAGNER. If someone does not agree with you, they have their head up their ass.

That's typical of you to write crap like that. Just like the crap you posted yesterday. My my, if you are an example of progressive, we do have a problem Houston.

You are for Senator Obama, nothing wrong with that, that's your opinion and choice. I like him too, but I like Edwards better. I would favor an Edwards/Obama ticket. I don't have my head up my ass BTW.

John Edwards is my choice right now, because he won't give big business everything they want. Edwards is the only person running who will do anythng productive about the global warming issue. He is the only candidate who will pull our troops out of Iraq and stop wasting our money and others lives on a rathole.

You keep posting that Senate vote record DOUGWAGNER, to show us Senator Edwards voted to authorize Bush, the right to use military force in Iraq, ___ (if it was absolutely necessary.)

Everyone knows how Edwards voted, he admitted in 2003 or 4, it was a mistake, and he'd been mislead, lied to with a faulty intelligence report, supplied by Bush, Cheney and George Tennant, the director of the CIA, who had altered the NIE report at Bush's orders.

77 Senators voted for it and 100 heard the faulty intelligence report. 77 belived the NIE report was the truth. It was a crime, perhaps the most serious crime in history, ever committed by a United States President. That crime has about ruined both Iraq and the United States.

Because of that sensless and evil crime, Millions of people have been killed, We are broke now, near a depression, owe our asses to China and have a broken army and National Guard. Had that NIE report not been altered, it is not likely any Democrats, save perhaps Lieberman, would have voted for what Bush had been begging them to vote for.

John Edwards is a good man, and would be a fine president. I hope it's okay with you, to let you know that we who believe that, don't have our heads up our ass because of it. Thank you for being so pleasant too, that was pleasant by your standards, I have seen far worse from you. You Got 08 started out great __ right, __ DOUGWAGNER. __ Grow up.

pathetic little man who capitulated on cue.

We told you so.

Obama/Kucinich 2008! No more warmongers.

Question: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 114 ) Vote Date: October 11, 2002, 12:50 AM Required For Majority: 1/2 Measure Number: H.J.Res. 114 Measure Title: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.

YEAs ---77 Allard (R-CO) Allen (R-VA) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Bennett (R-UT) Biden (D-DE) Bond (R-MO) Breaux (D-LA) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burns (R-MT) Campbell (R-CO) Cantwell (D-WA) Carnahan (D-MO) Carper (D-DE) Cleland (D-GA) Clinton (D-NY) Cochran (R-MS) Collins (R-ME) Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID) Daschle (D-SD) DeWine (R-OH) Dodd (D-CT) Domenici (R-NM) Dorgan (D-ND) Edwards (D-NC) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Feinstein (D-CA) Fitzgerald (R-IL) Frist (R-TN) Gramm (R-TX) Grassley (R-IA) Gregg (R-NH) Hagel (R-NE) Harkin (D-IA) Hatch (R-UT) Helms (R-NC) Hollings (D-SC) Hutchinson (R-AR) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Johnson (D-SD) Kerry (D-MA) Kohl (D-WI) Kyl (R-AZ) Landrieu (D-LA) Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Lott (R-MS) Lugar (R-IN) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Miller (D-GA) Murkowski (R-AK) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Nickles (R-OK) Reid (D-NV) Roberts (R-KS) Rockefeller (D-WV) Santorum (R-PA) Schumer (D-NY) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Smith (R-NH) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME) Specter (R-PA) Stevens (R-AK) Thomas (R-WY) Thompson (R-TN) Thurmond (R-SC) Torricelli (D-NJ) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA)

NAYs ---23 Akaka (D-HI) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA) Byrd (D-WV) Chafee (R-RI) Conrad (D-ND) Corzine (D-NJ) Dayton (D-MN) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI) Graham (D-FL) Inouye (D-HI) Jeffords (I-VT) Kennedy (D-MA) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA) Reed (D-RI) Sarbanes (D-MD) Stabenow (D-MI) Wellstone (D-MN) Wyden (D-OR)

IRV? Both Obama and Kucinich support it. So does the Green Party. Come on people. Edwards and Hillary are not progressives. Get your head out of your ass.

http://fairvote.org/?page=1755

http://www.kucinichonline.com/pdfs/Kucinich_Campaign_Reform_and_IRV.pdf

I don't know about where the rest of you live, but I've seen more Ron Paul stickers here in Oregon than any other and wonder if it's possible he'll split the Republican vote and affect the election like Perot in 1992. As for DK's "advice," it's normative to provide such info, but perhaps more discreetly. I agree that Obama is a poor choice and thank earthian for posting the Paul Street essay links; please read them.

The point made by poet--ABC: Anyone But Clinton--carries weight, as it's normal, shrewd american politics. I think that ABC should be the goal of the primaries. The Clintons must have as little power at the Convention as possible, and given the polls backing Obama in Iowa is part of that strategy.

New software is available for tax year 2007. It's called RussoPaulTax. No matter what you enter, the amount listed after "You Owe" will always say $0.00.

If Dennis is really for change he better come over and change my underwear, I just shit my pants.

Frank Lieb: "While I'm hot, how about that IMPEACHMENT movement?"

Kucinich should drop out of the race and concentrate with Wexler and others on impeachment.
Getting impeachment is more important than winning a tainted White House. To condone the behavior of this administration for political pragmatics or any other reason is beneath any form of human dignity, and sets up the Union for it's final disolution before attaining it's greatest good (accepting the lie of WMD while spewing "depleted" uranium into the atmosphere is suicidal insanity - make the stand now or forever hold our peace).

Wow, Surprise, Surprise ... Kucinich backing one of the pro-corporate candidates. It says alot that he wouldn't even toss his support to Edwards, who seems to at least care about some of the same issues Kucinich raises.

Obama's message is that the problem is that we are divided, and that this divide exists because some people have dared to stand up and oppose the right wing corporatisation of our government. So he wants to solve that problem my making nice to the Republicans.

Sometimes some division is a good thing. Its means we aren't all brain-dead slaves yet. Yet Obama seems to be set towards making sure there is no division or opposition.

And Kucinich backs this guy? Over Edwards who at least sounds like maybe workers who've seen their jobs lost and their pay cut might at least have a reason to complain?

Typical Kucinich. The man's campaigns are a waste of time and effort. And they always end with him standing there supporting some awful pro-war, pro-corporate Democrat. When will people learn this is just a waste of time. Probably not soon. I'm guessing in 2012 I'll still see posts from Kucinichistas who will tell me that the man can win and change the world if only we all just believe in him and disbelieve the polls showing him with now support as a corporate plot.

Ah, if only all that time, effort and money that's gone into a Kucinich campaign had gone into building a strong, independent progressive party.

Ooops, I forgot, there's two words in there Kucinich opposes. 'Strong' and 'independent'. Kucinich seems to want a week progressive movement that's ineffectual and permanently tied to the Democrats.

As a strong supporter, I paid my way to Boston and lived with the Kuchinich contingent for a week during the Democratic convention. Dennis caved and released his delegates to Kerry long before he should have. Some principled ones still cast their votes for Dennis.

His support of Obama disgusts me. Edwards is the only candidate brave enough to take on the corporations, and it is their rule which enables our entire merciless capitalist worldwide domination and destruction. Obama was quick to volunteer that he would invade Pakistan if necessary.

Dennis has made a reprehensible move. Sadly, I am not surprised.

Well, Obama wasn't in the Senate so we don't know how he would have voted. We know what he says (which for a Democrat is worthless). As a State Senator representing a very anti-war, minority community, he made a statement opposing the war. That says very little about how he'd have voted as a US Senator.

But now Obama says that once there we have to stay, and is one of the many Dem candidates who have openly told voters that if elected he'll still have tens of thousands of American troops in the country in 2013.

Obama's strange. To me he's got John Kerry's problem. He stands there and talks for awhile, and sounds good doing it. Then you ask yourself what did he really just concretely propose, and there's nothing there. There are very few real solid actions he says he would take that make me think he's progressive or anti-war.

In fact, when he does get to specifics, you get these gems like committing to keep American troops in Iraq during an entire first Obama term of office. Or talking about how Social Sec is in danger and needs to be privatized. Or opposing single-payer health care. Or supporting nuclear power. ...

The Cindy Sheehan article was removed by mistake. It was returned as soon as CD became aware of it. I emailed the webmaster, and here is the reply:

Me: Why did the Cindy Sheehan article re White Rose Society disappear suddenly from CD front page?

Webmaster reply: Someone accidentally erased today's views when adding the Kucinich headline. But they're back. Thanks for letting us know!

indeepshiitak

Its just this gut feeling I have but I have a feeling that Edwards is a plant for the Cheney bunch and Edwards has sold out... ..because of how Cheney treated Edwards during the vice presidential debates for the 2004 election...After observing Lieberman and his clear prioriies for Israel..I simply do not trust the political candidates.

However Kucinich is the exception, and he seems driven by a desire to bring truth into the political process..and I have some trust for him..so I will be more in support of Obama because he has opposed the war and has some chance to win the presidency. And God help him if he does become president..because he will have a very difficult presidency.

I gotta say I am disappointed by Dennis's endorsement of Obummer. I am sorry but every time I hear the guy ,Barack that is, talk I get the urge to check my wallet and my watch. Sure he is well spoken, but so was slick willy and look at the messes he got us into, centrist bastard! I also do not think Obummer has a good chance in the general election, hell even if he goes to South Carolina and eats Pork Barbecue he ain't gonna shake that middle name. I will stick by Dennis through my states primary because I really think he is the best candidate. But I would rather he through in with Edwards than Obummer. Not that Edwards is all that great, and I am having some difficulty buying his populist act, but hey Nader seems to think he is the real deal. Funny that Dennis and Ralph aren't on the same page here.

Rebel Farmer did you see the documentary that I listed above?

Please watch its on Google movies now; America Freedom to Fascism .Aaron Russo exposes how the Federal reserve and the IRS are both illegal and this is at the heart of reason for the economic state of the country.
Ron Paul is interviewed in one segment.
It will change you and PJD 's views as to Ron Pauls economic policy.

Yeah, and therefore we will see a green candidate win the election. ___ Right.
We are still the vast minority. __ Vast.

"Kucinich spokesman Andy Juniewicz said the deal was finalized today ..."

The deal? Dennis maybe sold a promise of votes to the highest bidder?

I guess Washington deals are ugly even in the best of circumstances.

Clinton/Obama/Edwards are all basically the same: neo-liberals.

Only the Green Party will have a progressive/anti-imperialist candidate on the ballot in most states in 2008.

http://www.gp.org/

workreno: I think PJD has a good point. My problem with Paul is that he would gut the government of regulations over corporations and banks. And that gutting has aready happened over the past 27 years starting with Raygun. That is how we got into this economic mess. But, I would add, that I would vote for Paul before I would vote for Clinton. She is worse on so many levels, I can't even go into it.

Though I am disappointed that DK didn't just advise his caucus goers to cast their DK support to either Barack or John, at least he made it clear that Clinton was not an option.

DISAPPOINTING. Wish he had gone with the Greens or
an indie. Look what Bernie Sanders did with the
latter. How do you think Dennis feels going back
to the House Of Representatives and taking orders
from the Quisling Pelosi. She may not even give
him permission to leave the room.

To Dennis Kucinich:

Since Sen. Obama sits on the Senate Homeland Security Committee (chairman - Joe Lieberman), I certainly hope you will encourage Sen. Obama to vote NO on the upcoming vote on the Homegrown Terrorism Act that the House already OVERWHELMINGLY PASSED.

In case you don't realize how bloody unconstitutional it is, here is the information about it and all the other rotten legislation that has been passed stripping us of our Constitutional and God given rights:

http://words-of-power.blogspot.com/2008/01/campaign-08-update-open-letter-to-sen.html

I hope Sen. Obama votes the right way on this legislation. Heck! I hope he even shows up to vote at all!

funeocons wrote the most intelligent comment I've seen here yet that isn't my own, and I'm going to copy and repost it verbatim:

#

One more thing on Kucinich's choice of Obama for the second choice: I think he perceives that Obama, in the end, would be more responsive to the people over corporate interests. I have always had the sense about Obama that he has high ideals, but also a pragmatic side that says you play the game to some degree until you are in a position where you can lead them in a new direction (rather than coming in combative and being instantly dismissed). In an election that he stands a reasonable chance of winning, he is going to play the centrist card to leverage the resources and backing he needs to be successful. But once he gets to a position of leadership, I think Dennis perceives that Obama will be true to his convictions and the people. Personal or not, Edwards has shown himself to not have the same kind of integrity that garners Dennis' respect. I think Dennis is a good judge of character, and I appreciate that he has given his supporters his thoughts on the subject. These candidates have spent a lot of time together on the campaign trail and on the hill — they know each other pretty well by now.

PDJ

You've obviously missed something if you think Dr.Paul is anything like the (neo con ,neo liberals)that have brought our economy to it current sorry state.

Google Freedom to Fascism and educate yourself on the"philosophy" that all other candidates seem to have forgotten aside from DK and Mike Gravel

Once again here we go into anothwer political presidential campain with prety much the same selling stories from both sides,the same 2 parties, with candidtaes pretty much chosen by the news media well in advance by choosing who they give and give not air time there fore makingg it fisible for those the news media considers potential candidates. Kucinich as I have noticed has even been barred from debates and given hardly any airtime. So the selling has so far given us Hillary,Barak,and John, which are pretty much middle of the road tipical politicians.With the problem of electronic electoral fraud not solved GEORGE BUSH maybe just right when he said thwt he expects the republicans to keep the white house again.Roll over America.

As a person who will be voting in the caucus in two days I am relieved. Let's face it revolutionaries don't reside in the Democratic Party. It's not its function. I think the reason why Dennis made the decision is simple, stop Hillary Clinton from becoming president. John Edwards may be the most progressive of the three top tier candidates, and in the general election he may be the best candidate against the republicans, but he will not make it out of the primaries alive. His organizational base is limited to Iowa, Obama is young, intelligent, he was a community activist, and he did not vote for the war in Iraq. I'm tired of apologies. Even from a skilled attorney like Senator Edwards. And then there's Hillary. Images of Lady Mac Beth come to mind. This person is sycophantic the notion the two political dynasties can control the government through rigged elections honestly revolts me. I was disgusted when the voters of New York dismissed legitimate homegrown progressive candidates and chose the president's wife as their senator to stage this campaign for presidency, to restore the Clinton Legacy to the American mantle above the fireplace in the white house. This Clinton/Bush leadership debacles must end. If the opposing forces in the Democratic Party do not set aside their ego trips (I'm talking about both Edwards and Kucinich) and coalesce in the primary season to stop her, Clinton wins the nomination and probably the presidency.

Personally I think the best two-person team is Obama/Edwards. As a working person here, I've encountered a lot of poor working class whites who would support Obama in the general. From a practical position having Edwards on the ticket would also help those racist voters in the south swallow the pill.

Yes. If he was serious about Peace, he should have thrown his support to Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is also anti-corporate and his top priority is dismantling the military-industrial complex.

Brian Moore for President!
Vote Socialist! www.votebrianmoore.com

A lot of you think it is inconsequential that Edwards recently bought a $6 million dollar 29,000 square foot house in NC.

Well, actually this is quite consistent with Edwards true regard for the environment. He is not an environmentalist and his voting record while Senator demonstrates this.

There is an organization called the League of Conservation Voters which tracks environmental votes in the House and Senate. Please check this out:

Edwards' score: 59
http://presidentialprofiles2008.org/Edwards/tab1.html
Obama's score: 96
http://presidentialprofiles2008.org/Obama/tab1.html

Also, if you look at the last two years of record-keeping for each candidate you will see an even a greater disparity between Edwards and Obama:
Edwards' score: 27
Obama's score: 96

If you delve deep into Edwards voting record, you will be surprised. Here is an example. On Oct 30, 2003, the Senate was asked to vote on an amendment that would:

..provide for a program of scientific research on abrupt climate change, to accelerate the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States by establishing a market-driven system of greenhouse gas tradeable allowances, to limit greenhouse gas emissions in the United States and reduce..., amending S. 139 [108th]: Climate Stewardship Act of 2003.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2003-420

Edwards was conveniently absent during that very important vote in 2003. Yet, now Edwards promotes his bold plan of tackling climate change by reducing carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. One can only conclude that Edwards is blowing a lot of hot air.

Don't think that Edwards doesn't have his corporate sponsors...like Goldman Sachs.

I'm not endorsing Obama (I support Kucinich), I'm just bringing a little clarity to the question of why Kucinich would turn his back on Edwards. Kucinich knows Edwards and Obama better than we do.

Ugh. Somethin' about this just doesn't fit. Whatever it is also doesn't smell very good.

I must admit to a certain feeling of disappointment. Obama wants to be be warm and chatty with those who'd slit his throat without a second thought. Why would DK support this?

i would have more respect for kucinich,right now,if instead of throwing his support and supporters to obama,he had said'i wouldnt tell my supporters whom to back.the people that have supported me are intelligent and educated.i trust that they will be more than capable of making up their own minds.'

Ron Paul's economic philosophy is why the US is in the condition it is in. If you want more of his dog-eat-dog prescription, give him your support.

I hope all Iowa Kucinich caucus-goers ignore Kucinich's endorsement of Obama. It makes no sense at all and has considerably diminished my opinion of Kucinich. If they can't get the minimum in the caucus room for a Kucinich delegate, Edwards is the only other second-choice worth considering.

I sent money to both ,but must admit I've had a Ron Paul sticker on the truck since spring.

This being the first ever politcal sticker on any vehicle I've ever owned.

Here are five articles by Paul Street that expose Obama for the corporate, conservative militarist he is—because of his policies.

"Obama's Audacious Deference to Power," ZNet (January 24, 2007), read at http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=11936; published also at Black Agenda Report,
 
"The Pale Reflection: Barack Obama, Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Meaning of the Black Revolution," ZNet (March 16, 2007), read at http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=12336
 
 "Obama's Insults," ZNet (October 3, 2007), read at
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=13940
 
"Barack Obama and The Audacity of Deception: Reflections on the Manufacture of Progressive Illusion," ZNet (December 6, 2007), read at http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=14448
 
"Obama Speaks: 'Oh Great White Masters, You Just Haven't Been Asked to Help America," ZNet (December 11, 2007), read at http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=14481

Ron Paul

Obama is a conservative, corporate, militarist.

Here are my favorite two Obama-the-Conservative quotations:

"The Founders recognized that there were seeds of anarchy in the idea of individual freedom, an intoxicating danger in the idea of equality, for if everybody is truly free, without the constraints of birth or rank and an inherited social order...how can we ever hope to form a society that coheres?" (Obama, The Audacity of Hope [New York, 2006, pp. 86-87) 

"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."
www.barackobama.com/2007/08/ 01/remarks_of_senator_obama_the_w_1.php

So equality is dangerous, individual freedom is anarchy, and it is a good thing to attack other nuclear-weapons-possessing nations in violation of international law. Some progressive.

For Kucinich to endorse him two days before competing against him is (without further explanation) completely bizarre.

a member of congress,is a member of the club.dem,repub,indepen or green,all the same broken-down machine.i would like to see the wonderful ms. sheehan,tell them all to go to hell and stay with us,where she really belongs.the winner of the election,will be whoever the deciders want it to be.maybe i'm not dealing with a full deck,maybe you are not dealing with the full deck.i am tired of wasting more time,talking about illusions,goodnight.

I hate to say this but, there is nothing attractive about the Democratic party if Kucinich is not there. They all support the war one way or another, I cannot vote for anyone like that. I have to say then : Ron Paul 2008 for peace

Beyond the dsitinction between a caucus and primary that has already been elaborated in this thread, it is instructive to note that what DK is saying is as simple as ABC...anyone but Clinton.

On that I think we can all agree. It is also importwant to note that the Des Moines Register today released a poll showing Obama opening up a lead over Clinton and that any and all Kucinich delegates who might add their voices for Obama could only increase that trend. Looks like a smart move to me.

I am not convinced that Obama knows the concepts, language, or dynamics of the change process. He just uses the word change and no others. He has not educated people about the change process. I have never heard him speak about the process of visioning and how to accomplish it successfully, or about streamlining the processes of legislation by lowering the walls of control and decision making to allow for greater and more rapid communications in all directions. Nor have I heard him speak of decentralizing the process and perhaps even considering decentralizing the politicians to get them out of Washington and into their own districts. Technology makes this a reality and makes Congress both more effective and survivable in an age of terrorism. All that I have heard Obama speak about is trying to get along with other legislators especially those
in the Republican party. This is twinkle-bunny politics. The Dems are in the fight of their lives and they better have a pres that knows how to fight and fight hard. Edwards has had the courage to openly zero in on the central problem of Corporate Democracy and indicate a strong willingness to fight it. Edwards seems grounded enough to do it. IMO Dennis showed poor judgment in supporting Obama as the candidate for change.

John Edwards voted for the war in Iraq. You had to be mad or corrupt to believe Bush over the weapons inspectors. I wouldn't vote for him for dog catcher.

lillulu: Good choice. I'm leaving my options open, however.

nayoibi: You aren't dealing with a full dect. NOT voting is how we got into this mess in the first place. And Cindy is running as an independent. How in the world are they going to corrupt her? Please explain how that would work exactly.....

what a gigantic waste of time.this is how the story goes;the deciders use people like dennis,ralph and cindy,to promise hope and change and rope in a whole lot of stray sheep,so they can be blasted back into the same old corral.cindy is the biggest fool of all cause she thinks she's gonna change them,they will change her into whatever they want or need.what the deciders really want is for you to vote like good little sheep-citizens,so they can blame you when things go wrong,UNREGISTER-DON'T VOTE !i did have it right when i unregistered from voting in this sham.

No Rebel, that does not qualify as a fit, that is sensible reasoning. The fits start when someone starts calling you nasty names for voicing your opinions.

Am I dumb, do I just not get it? I know that I'm leaving myself open by the question, but here goes.

OBama sounds like Osama and didn't we just hang a man in Iraq with the name Husayn just like Barracks middle name. Jesus, Obama is the best thing going for the republicans. Oh yeah, and he's black to boot. I look at the audiences that Obama rallies and I can pick out the republicans plants. (The whites that are there and are not clapping too loud or anything else). He hasn't moved me with any thing that he has said because I feel like yelling at him and saying "you don't light a candle next to Jesse or to Ron Dellums and lot of other black men and women that have paid thier dues" and they didn't and wouldn't stand a chance.

I would vote for Dennis Kucinich and I'm going with Edwards because they really want to represent the people. Ms Clinton is an up hill battle (first woman in the history of the US that might stand a chance) Obama also is up hill except steeper. The best thing that could happen to the republican party is to have Obama as the democratic candidate because they would win hangs down.
gil

Maybe hoping Obama will make him his running mate. If Edwards picks Nader, things get really interesting. If one or neither chooses his supporter, the DLC will.

This (DK business) reminds me of self sacrifice for a higher goal. We can always write in whomever we want.

GWB has brought America to it's knees - will UBL bring America to it's senses?

i give up,i had it right the first time,when i unregistered as a voter.nader backs lawyerboy edwards,dennis backs nukeboy obama and cindy wants to join up with the enemy.what a fucking mess ! next,ron paul will be backing satan's spawn.

Okay KEM, I'm having a fit now! Maybe a grand mal seizure!

Why in the world didn't DK give his caucus supporters the choice between Edward and Obama? Let them choose which way they wanted to go depending on how the first vote went? I'm a huge DK supporter, but I'm really unhappy about this. It doesn't seem very democratic to me.

So, KEM, does that make me the first to have a "fit"?

Welcome to the year of the rat!

Perhaps we should emulate John Galt and withdraw our efforts and wisdom from the cleptocracy.

NO NUKE PLANTS,NO NUKE PLANTS !!not 'clean',silent and deadly !!

And AWAYYYYYY we go. Let's see who has a fit here first.

This is very disappointing, and it makes me all the more certain I've been right all along to support John Edwards as the true agent (warrior) of change. DK backing Obama--whose health plan isn't universal, who will keep troops in Iraq, who will build nuclear power plants--confirms all my suspicions about Kucinich.

funeocons,the "rhetorical" me,thinks the rhetorical you,has had his mind 'snatched'..what the heck do you mean,"reign in the media" ?isnt that one of our most profound problems ? the rhetorical you is the idiot.

What we have here is a lack of understanding. Understand that Rep.Kucinich is reputed to have a thing with John Edwards. What has that got to do with the more electable candidate? If the Democrats are to win this coming election for the Presidency, we need John Edwards! He has strongly stated he will stand up against corporate interests. This is the most important issue the country has to face to-day. The corporations have dictated to this administration and prior administrations and what do we have? Changes in medicare, out-sourcing, higher fuel prices, higher food prices, failed school programs, failed unions and more.
While I'm hot, how about that IMPEACHMENT movement?

colleen,the last thing i posted on that sheehan article was a quote from john lennon's 'working class hero'..."FIRST YOU MUST LEARN TO SMILE AS YOU KILL,IF YOU WANT TO LIVE LIKE THE 'FOLKS ON THE HILL'." (thank you,colleen)

Well Dennis has showed his true colors ... barak obama ??? ... The pubs only Dem hope to do away with Social Security and eliminate the dream of "health care" for all ... Obama, a man who doesn't know what he's saying from one minute to the next ... and changes his tune whenever Oprah gives him a nudge ...

Dennis, you can go to the back of the room now ....

colleen,thanks for the re-print of cindy's article.but what i am most concerned about is that it disappeared from my viewing and posting pleasure,what gives ?am i being singled out for the censure,or what ?any answers ?