It is the media that is keeping Kucinich from being elected. I was going to vote for Kucinich and then changed to Edwards but now I'm going to vote for my first choice and the person that represents me and what I feel is right for America.

If Kucinich were to run on a 3rd party ticket, no one at all would know about him. He has to run as a Democrat, and he's right, he is the only Democrat in the race. All the rest are neither Democrats nor Republicans. What strange minds they have. And he doesn't compromise his ideals, because what would be the point. He won't win the Presidency and he knows it. What he is trying to do is to be heard for as long as possible to enlighten whoever will listen as to what is possible. It seems that people don't realize what dire straights were are in. They think business as usual. A bird's eye view of the world would show this horrible, dark, ominous black cloud surrounding the world and everyone still going to football games and happy hour - oblivious to the imminent danger. Except us. And what a heavy burden we carry. What I will do if Hillary is my Democratic choice, is to write in Kucinich.

Finally figured out that the "Edit This" thing is a new edit feature, and not just that my long post was too long! Good idea, CD, but I tried to edit the post above and got some kind of syntax error message.

When I quoted ZeroPointField's "the cowards who run this country" two posts back I failed to use quotation marks.

I don't really think any of them are intellectually challenged (in the mental health sense of the phrase), and I wouldn't classify'em all as "cowards" either. I can't judge what factor prevents them from looking at DK's analysis...or from taking a serious look at Rosa Brooks' Lesson Four for instance. Based on their "frame" they might have calculated they could have garned oil for American (in a time when it's getting scarce) and diposed a dictator at the same time. Without knowledge maybe it took guts to go with the gamble, I can't judge everyone up there that's for sure.

But they needed/need the knowledge, so that must be our purpose in this world.

Had some questions about the new "Edit This" thing (questions I had originally put in this post)...but just realized it wasn't that I was being forced to edit the long one...but that CD has added an Edit Feature for all posts. Far out! It'll definitely help folks like me.

Right on mirf, d&G, Commentarian, Terran1212, Twister22, vangelaras, JamesG, Gail, Chimpeach...and many others!

Zoya, not convinced Americans are heavily in support of "fair-tax" anarchy.

Demerara, I think DK has more going (pragmatically) to focus on healthcare even over environment, as the current insurance-paradigm will put us all out on the street...and, once we are there, who will speak on behalf of the environment?

"Dennis never advocated having the Department of Peace REPLACE the Department of Defense. His plan is that the two agencies work together to increase the use of diplomacy and peaceful dispute resolution to reduce the 'perceived' need for use of military force to address our 'perceived' security interests."

Thanks for the above hawknh. I will probably quote you elsewhere.

"Until progressives gain power and enable instant-runoff voting, third party candidates will remain spoilers assuring NO progressive voices in government."

Thanks for that, Storky.

"2/3 of the focus of the Department of Peace would focus on issues of violence in the United States - domestic and family violence, gun violence, gang activity, and focuses heavily on prevention."

Crisis, what crisis? Thanks, Vega Rowe.

BC, maybe Obama just hasn't thought his way down to the root as of yet.

ProgStudent, Mike Gravel does not understand the vast inertia of government, hence he advocates nirvana/utopia with broad sweeps in terms of doing away with income tax. He understands its labyrinthian switchbacks/loopholes inadequacies etc ok...but so do a lot of us who realize a consumption tax won't tax the super rich worth squat. But Gravel is eloquent and right on the money re drug laws. BTW, if Dennis were to pick R.Paul as running mate, maybe there'd be a chance RP would see the light.

"Vested interests are accomplished at deflecting mass attention from underlying facts of issues...Condie Rice's 2nd cousin, Connie Rice, avers this truth clearly (she was privvy to some inside knowledge due to her Father's work as I recall). btw, Connie is like the split-off good side of Condie the storm trooper (serving at the behest of Darth Cheney)."

First sentence up there so well put. I saw Connie Rice I think on Moyers/NOW. Those two in the same family is really interesting. But take Albright for example, she looks back directly at past mistakes. Hopefully Condie Rice will do the same with same or even greater minimized-slack-factor.

ZPF, the cowards who run this country are not all intellectually challenged. Cheney is by no means IC. Their lives go like a housa'a fire, and then when it's time to retire and they begin to read about blowback...imagine realizing the essence of what you've promoted in the world throughout your entire life!

AdeleTheCzech, you're wrong. When the camera's on Edwards (not debatewise) he's always grinning like he alone has the mandate. If t'were Dennis he'd use even those brief moments to refute error riven policy points.

Anne Faith, we'll be less screwed when we get instant runoff voting like hawknh said. Being screwed incomewise, healthcarewise, violencewise, and terrorwise is not that nice a gift (from an administration). You'd think ZPF was right, but the fact is they're predestined in a circle. All questions get the same Realpolitik-clampdown answer. Their lives go by like a blur, and they answer all problems like ole pharoah.

Well, it looks like I'm merely a quarter way down the page! Up to 2:35 PM yesterday the 10th. For the moment anyway...gotta go.

Gabrielle "I was thinking of practical things we could be doing to help to negate the media blackout and also to give people courage to vote their hearts and convictions. I have decided that I will talk to 10 people in my life about Kucinich, the person (his integrity - I got to know him as a delegate in 2004) and his ideas (I have videos and quotes about his positions on various issues)"

Flyers, Find a local small business print shop and you can get 100 – 500, 8 ½ x 11 flyers printed up. Then you and some volunteers could visit the local Wal-Mart parking lot. Stay out of the stores, don't block the access points and don't touch people's cars. Working in groups of two you could easily and inexpensively get his position on the issues out to real Americans. The passing of flyers has to be done face to face with the people. We have to bypass the MSM.

The information on the flyers could be the following. Posted by someone else on a different article. I wish I had keep the handle of who it was that posted it.
Kucinich's platform:
* Creating a single-payer system of universal health care that provides full coverage for all Americans by passage of the United States National Health Insurance Act.
* The immediate, phased withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq; replacing them with an international security force.
* Guaranteed quality education for all; including free pre-kindergarten and college for all who want it.
* Immediate withdrawal from the World Trade Organization (WTO) and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
* Repealing the USA PATRIOT Act.
* Fostering a world of international cooperation.
* Abolishing the death penalty.
* Environmental renewal and clean energy.
* Preventing the privatization of social security.
* Providing full social security benefits at age 65.
* Creating a cabinet-level "Department of Peace"
* Ratifying the ABM Treaty and the Kyoto Protocol.
* Introducing reforms to bring about instant-runoff voting.
* Protecting a woman's right to choose while decreasing the number of abortions performed in the U.S.
* Ending the War on Drugs.
* Legalizing same-sex marriage.
* Creating a balance between workers and corporations.
* Ending the H-1B and L-1 visa Programs
* Restoring rural communities and family farms.
* Strengthening gun control.
I will be voting for Kucinich in November even if I have to write it in. Never again will I vote for the lesser of two evils. To me that would be like lying to my self, I'm not going to do it.

Yo, newageartist, well stated.

Kucinich is fatally flawed in respect to his continued allegiance to both a system and a party that is controlled by and answers to the wealthiest one percent of our citizenry. That his platform is great, his plans and vision for this nation align with my own is moot. That he thinks he can alter the path of his party or this system makes him irelevent.

If you want change, real change, then it is past time to align yourself with a political party that is pedged to rid this nation of the influence of the wealthiest, any progressive third party vote is better than continuing to support the fraud of the Democratic Party.

I think it's worth reading the 'reviews' section on Amazon, concerning Kucinich's book, *The Courage to Survive*, -then buy and read the book itself!

Here's a snippet from one review:
"If you have lost all hope that our country will ever again have a leader that is courageous, honest, persistent, wise and compassionate; you need to read this book. I have had the unique privilege of scheduling for Congressman Kucinich during both of his bids for the Presidency of the United States.
I have watched him consistently act in a way that is ethical, intelligent, and heart warming, but it wasn't until I read this book that I understood the source and depth of his commitment to do what is best for the whole in all situations.

"If you long for a President who will make the right decision the first time, who will not be controlled by any special interest group, who sees the interconnectedness of all life and who knows that violence is not an appropriate instrument of international policy then you will want to vote for the author of this book.

"Match his courage, his determination, and his passion with your own. Stand for your family, your neighbourhood, your country and your planet! It will ignite a flame that will light the world!"

__________________________

Even if DK never got elected [ -I pray! ] to POTUS status, at least he has already contributed significantly to American consciousness, by depicting what *could and should be* occurring in leadership circles...

Without that crucial raising of consciousness, - without *someone* pushing 'the bar' up to a morally elevated level, there is little incentive for his fellow politicians to aspire any higher than their usual moribund standards, (-those political hacks who, ~as we all know, regularly behave with all the morality of the average crack-addict!)

*Real* leaders, (the heroes we might most admire and seek to emulate) -such as Buddha, Ghandi, M.L. King, Mandela, Christ, etc, have a common thread to their lives: **They never gave up, or caved in at the first hurdles or difficulties, they kept right on doing as they needed to do, no matter how tough the way ahead.**
~ As his book reveals, DK has loads of the same heroic qualities.

So what does the USA need?
It needs both leaders like Dennis Kucinich, ...AND... it needs clear-sighted Progressives to stand unflinchingly *behind* such people as DK!

The name 'Progressive' implies ...PROGRESS! –that is: to *progress* from one (sorry state of affairs) to a very much healthier state of being.
This is no walk in the park, but it is *essential* for the survival of our race. So this is no time to act like wimps and 'give up'! – Where is your strength, the courage of your convictions, your VISION, your hopes and aspirations, and your backbone? ~ Are we 'men or mice' ?

The best thing to do is to decide upon your course, [eg: one totally opposed to everything BushCo etc stands for], and vow that, *no matter what* you'll see that through until your very last breath, no matter what obstacles occur along the way.
That's what I've chosen, for myself, and THAT is the secret of success for our combined movement!

_____________________

We each are little drops in the ocean, but together we form a wave which, *if we stick at it* will eventually overcome the despicable devils at present ruining the planet. Those evil creeps, such as BushCo, got as far as they have to date, due to two main factors:
1. They kept at it, -even when the going got tough.
2. They were helped in their striving to gain power, by all the GOOD people, - who gave up too soon!!

Were you one of them? If so, time to make the big change! Back Kucinich no matter what, -not just because he might (who *really* knows what the future holds? –miracles DO happen!) –gain power; but also because it means you have then acted as he acts:

1. with stubborn, resolute *hope*
2. with incredibly inspiring *courage*
3. with real *vision*
4. with faith that humanity HAS to survive
5. with the unerring, unfaltering conviction that GOOD *must* win out over evil, or we are all lost.

Nail your colors to the mast! and make an unshakeable vow that no matter *what* the creeps in power and in the media may throw at you, YOU for one, will never EVER relinquish your vision, your striving and your hope!

THAT is the secret of success for progressives everywhere to finally overthrow the ruinous fools who have stolen our power, our lives, our happiness and welfare from us.
- Abide by that, and we'll get the world we hope, strive, and work for.

How 'bout it brothers and sisters!? :)

(Ps): and along the way, we can usefully remind ourselves of the value of UNITY, -wherein we as a group are a lot stronger if we look for the points we *can* agree on, and not chirrup too much about the aspects we have yet to see eye-to-eye on? ;)

Okay, so most of you herald Kucinich as the progressive leader inside the corrupted party and see no other alternative to support. Fine. I truly admire Kucinich. He has the guts and determination to keep pecking at the back of the beast's head. But just remember as you follow the pied piper down the yellow brick road this primary season that the road will come to an end way before the convention... a convention controlled behind the scenes by the same powers that thwart attempts by Kucinich's campaign to be heard and respected. And at that point you will need to make that hand-wringing decision. Will you knee-jerk back to supporting another not-so-progressive corporate Democrat like most of you did back in 2004? Or, will you listen to your conscience and support the Dennis Kucinich platform which is almost verbatim in the Green Party and their nominated candidate? Are you a true progressive or just a registered Democrat trying every four years to change a corrupted party that's beyond your progressive hopes?
The primaries are one thing. The election is where your conscience will matter. You can support the spirit of Kucinich in November by supporting the Green Party nominee.

I'll write Mr. Kucinich's name in on the ballot if the choice is Hillarious or O-bomb-a who represent more war, corporations, AIPAC, nukes on the table, a police state, and the status quo in general while claiming to represent "change."

Oh, my, looks like none of US can even agree. We are in a world of hurt. Now I'm really depressed. All of us so-called Democrats, or progressives, or whatever. We all hate Bush@Co. but that's the only thing we have in common. We can't win anything this way. Guess I might as well just stay home on election day. I probably won't even be able to afford the gas it will take for me to drive the 8 miles to the election headquarters. Won't be worth the trip anyway.

Tailcap, if Edwards doesn't win, you're going to get either Obama or Clinton anyway, no real difference between them, so why not give yourself a chance to win and
Vote EDWARDS '08 for a World of Change!

RichM, I understand what you're saying, but since the theft of the elections in 2004, when Edwards wanted to fight over the Ohio vote, and was stopped by John Kerry, Edwards has undergone a metamorphic change, as evidenced by John Kerry's endorsement today of Barack Obama, fellow ivy-leaguer(hopefully not skull and bones).

Edwards was a one-term senator in a very red state, in fact he took the seat of the infamous Jesse Helms. Even before the 2004 election theft, Edwards was preaching the message of two Americas. One for the wealthy and privileged and the other one for the rest of us.

He's not perfect, but he is sincere, and he recognizes that corporate money is the problem with our government, and he will work to give government back to the people. As I said, he is our last best hope to stop our slide into Fascism.

If he's not telling the truth, he's a bigger liar than Bush and Cheney combined.
EDWARDS '08

petsr4ever07 January 11th, 2008 1:49 am
I admire your optimism. I guess I'm a pessimist. Kucinich is a snowball and the election will be hell. I wish he had a chance.

MikeBinSC January 11th, 2008 2:04 am
Does Edwards really have a solid chance? I predict the winner to be one of the O-Billaries. Then what? Look, if a RADICAL were to get elected:

He would be elected on Tuesday.
Assassinated on Wednesday.
Buried on Thursday.
Back to work on Friday.

I like the SEP but they have way less than a snowball's chance in hell. So what to do?

gabrielle January 11th, 2008 2:17 am
Can't hurt.

It is really a breath of fresh air to read the comments and share the passion for true progressive change. I too have decided to vote for Kucinich in the primaries and Mckinney in the general election. I've given the Kucinich campaign time (calling sympathetic voters in New Hampshire) and have contributed $ to the cause. I was thinking of practical things we could be doing to help to negate the media blackout and also to give people courage to vote their hearts and convictions. I have decided that I will talk to 10 people in my life about Kucinich, the person (his integrity - I got to know him as a delegate in 2004) and his ideas (I have videos and quotes about his positions on various issues). I'd be open to any other ideas about how to promote his candidacy and the discussion of real issues (global warming, war, the ecomomy, health care, so called trade agreements, etc. Peace

Apparently New Hampshire would rather die than live free. Go Dennis Kucinich!

petsr4ever07, as I said earlier on this thread, I like Dennis and have supported him. He is the most progressive of all the candidates, I just wish that he would have taken his own campaign more seriously.

He knows how the system works, but he didn't spend the time needed in Iowa before the caucus and didn't even have an office there. I don't excuse them for excluding him from the debate, nor do I excuse the repugs for excluding Ron Paul.

Without dedicating the time, manpower and resources to Iowa, the first contest in the nation, Dennis gave the media an excuse to marginalize him. John Edwards is the most progressive of the top-tier candidates who actually has a chance to win, despite neglect from the corporate MSM.

John Edwards is talking the talk and walking the walk, and has been since the election theft of 2004, which he wanted to fight, but John Kerry said no.

We don't need a woman, a black man, a white man, a uniter, a smooth talker or a negotiater as president, what WE NEED is a FIGHTER, and Edwards is a fighter. He has been knocking the chip off the shoulder of corporate America since he got out of law school, and they're afraid to get in the ring with him or even talk about it.

The only way to take power from these bastards is to beat it out of them, and that is what John Edwards is all about!
EDWARDS '08

Well, MikeBinSC, of the 3 corporate Dems remaining, I prefer Edwards. The other 2 are completely unacceptable. And I thoroughly agree with you about the need for radical change.

But let's not use a word like "radical" for Edwards. He's no radical. He's hardly even a real liberal. Let's say he's a very centrist figure, who seems to have shifted a bit to the left at a late stage in his career -- only within the last few years, really.

His term as senator would be characterized as entirely mainstream, for an American politician. That includes the standard fealty to militarism & corporatism. If he'd violated those standard allegiances in any way, he never would have made it to 2nd place on the 2004 ticket. (Democrats don't nominate "radicals" for high office.) And his '04 campaign was also filled with the usual militarist bullsh*t. // In the last few years, since leaving the Senate, he's apparently had a change of heart, & is making constructive noises. This is enough to make him better than the other 2 corporate whores, but still -- he's no "radical."

Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate that represents everything I think is important to the future of this country. There is absolutely nothing in his platform that I disagree with. I know, I am preaching to the choir here with alot of you, but it helps knowing that there are others out there that are in agreeance with me. I live in North Dakota where most people are brain-dead when it comes to keeping up with what's going on out there in the REAL world. Anyway I've been thinking lately that I won't even bother to vote in the next Pres. election. It seems so hopeless. But, my husband has convinced me to vote and to write in Kucinich on the ballot. And that's what I'm going to do. Do you suppose that if all of us Kucinich fans write him in, he could win? Why don't we start trying to convince people that just MAYBE it could work (as long as everyone spells his name right). I know that there is no way I can vote for "the lesser of the two evils", as I so often hear people say. As far as I'm concerned, Dennis is THE ONLY ONE. Period. Everyone else running is the EVIL. And, by "evil", I mean everyone else who has been bought and paid for by big business-big oil. Kucinich represents the poor and middle class, and it is the poor and middle class who make up most of this country. Strength is in numbers. We have the numbers, let's use the strength.

So, what it all comes down to is more of the same meddling in other countries affairs for the benefit of multinational corporations and American hegemony, using the military not for self defense, but to unilaterally advance our foreign policy by other means, spending your tax dollars on larger military for empire, which means NO CHANGE.

What we really need is RADICAL CHANGE. Radical change starts by changing the decision-makers, taking control of our government away from corporate lobbyists and big money special interest groups. Obama and Clinton have already sold out to them. John Edwards is the only candidate offering radical change who has a chance to win.

So, if you want business as usual, Obama or Clinton will be fine, or you can shift paradigms and
VOTE EDWARDS for a WORLD OF CHANGE.

Read this article :
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jan2008/elec-j11.shtml

"Obama is a conventional bourgeois politician, dependent, like his rivals, on lavish financial support from corporate interests and the wealthy. He is not the product of any sort of genuine movement from below in American society, but rather the latest in a long line of demagogues employed to foster illusions that the big business-controlled political system can serve the interests of ordinary people.
Working people have absolutely no stake in the outcome of the struggle between Obama and Clinton for the Democratic nomination. Neither has any answer to the social crisis affecting ever wider layers of the population, and both defend the use of military force to secure the global interests of the US corporate-financial elite. The Democratic Party, no less than the Republican Party, is an instrument of the financial elite that monopolizes the wealth and dominates the political life of the country."

Thanks RichM

BTW, EDWARDS is the only one of the three who will have us out of Iraq in 10 months! Obama and Clinton will have us there past 2013.
EDWARDS '08

You won't catch Obama or Hillary taking public funding, beacause they have both sold out to big-money interests.
VOTE EDWARDS '08 for a "WORLD of CHANGE"

dougnwagner, Edwards isn't taking their money, if you don't believe me, go to -
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00002283&cycle=2008

This is what they say -

"Edwards is maintaining his steady fundraising pace behind Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, though he has announced that he will be accepting $10 million in public funding-and is encouraging the others to do the same. At the end of the 3rd Quarter, Edwards had $30.3 million, which means he will easily reach the $35 million his campaign originally said he'd need to bring in to be competitive in the early primaries. The former North Carolina senator has vowed not to accept money from registered lobbyists or PACs and only had minimal debt to re-pay after his 2004 campaign."

Can you say "public funding"? I knew you could!

EDWARDS '08

"Judge Him By His Laws"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303303.html

"Obama Forged Political Mettle In Illinois Capitol"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262_pf.html

"In Illinois, Obama Proved Pragmatic and Shrewd" (Graphic of Illinois Legislation)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/us/politics/30obama.htm

tailcap - They are indeed brilliant, but they most definitely do NOT advocate "violently" taking over the government. I've read them daily for years, & have never seen a single word even hinting at any such crazy thing. These guys would be the last people in the world to be under any illusions about what would happen, in these Orwellian times, to any leftist organization advocating any such nutty idea.

That's not what they're about, not in the slightest. They're about building a party to represent the interests of working people. They publish political analysis, 6 days a week, which is of consistently outstanding quality. And they run candidates in elections. But that's it.

// OK, now I see your follow-up post. Yeah, OK, maybe a member said something like that, in a casual off-hand way. But that doesn't represent the SEP viewpoint. And he might just have meant that "it would eventually come to violence", meaning that there is inevitably going to be unrest as society is less & less able to meet the needs of the population -- and that the State would act to crush the unrest (ie, that the violence would come from the State). // But if he really meant that "violence would be necessary" from the side of the people, he was a very stupid SEP member, & not representative of the party!

For a sample of the brilliance of the site, read the top article that was posted there tonight. (I'd gladly supply the link, but have learned that the CD software has problems with links, sometimes.) The article is titled, "The US elections: In whose interest is the campaign for "bipartisan unity"?

BTW, If the SEP or the Green Party is your first choice, consider making Obama your second. He is the only candidate in this race who has actually authored legislation to create a single transferable voting election.

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

Mike,

Next time you see Edwards be sure to thank him for voting for the Iraq War that continues to kill Iraqis and Americans.

Obama is the agent of change. Obama opposed the war in 2002, like Kucinich.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132×3969318

Dennis Kucinich: "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."

Top Contributors to Edwards Campaign

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00002283&cycle=2008
#2 Contributor

Fortress Investment Group

"The hedge fund that employed John Edwards markedly expanded its subprime lending business while he worked there, becoming a major player in the high-risk mortgage sector Edwards has pilloried in his presidential campaign."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/10/AR2007051002277_pf.html

anne faith (12:07) -- Some touch screen machines will let you type in the name of a write-in candidate. Whether or not your district will offer machines with that option is of course a different question.

Also - it's not true that the Greens are the only progressive option. There are also many small socialist parties. (Eugene Debs was a socialist, of course.) You might want to check out the Socialist Equality Party (www.wsws.org)

I've also been thinking about what to do after I vote for Dennis in the primary. Come November, a lot of you say you will write Dennis in. But how do you "write in" a candidate on an optical scanner ballot or touch screen machine? If it were a paper ballot, you could do that. But short of a paper ballot, how do you do that? Am I missing something?

Short of that, I guess I'll vote Green Party. I've toyed with voting for Obama if he ends up as the Democratic nominee (I cannot vote for Clinton) to try to prevent the Repugs from winning another presidential election. But I promised myself I'd stop playing that "lesser of two evils" game.

These choices suck. But like Eugene Debs said (I think), better to vote for who you want and see that person lose, than to vote for who you don't want and have that person win.

amacd January 10th, 2008 9:49 pm

"Dennis has expanded the debate on the imperialist oil-war in Iraq, on the domestic economic oppression and executive branch tyranny, and many other crimes of this government."

In contrast with: "In Derry, NH when an audience member asked John McCain what he thought about President Bush's plan to keep troops in Iraq for 50 years, McCain answered, "make it a hundred."...."

And of course, Dennis Kucinich is the only (Congressional) Democratic presidential candidate who voted against the war and continuously votes against any bill that would perpetuate it.

If the rest of the country falls in line with the mentality of Iowa and NH, our country is going to be in deep sh$t for a very long time.

texrey, don't get the wrong opinion, I like Dennis and have supported him. He is the most progressive of all the candidates, I just wish that he would have taken his own campaign more seriously.

He knows how the system works, but he didn't spend the time needed in Iowa before the caucus and didn't even have an office there. I don't excuse them for excluding him from the debate, nor do I excuse the repugs for excluding Ron Paul.

Without dedicating the time, manpower and resources to Iowa, the first contest in the nation, Dennis gave the media an excuse to marginalize him. John Edwards is the most progressive of the top-tier candidates who actually has a chance to win, despite neglect from the corporate MSM.

John Edwards is talking the talk and walking the walk, and has been since the election theft of 2004, which he wanted to fight, but John Kerry said no.

We don't need a woman, a black man, a white man, a uniter, a smooth talker or a negotiater as president, what WE NEED is a FIGHTER, and Edwards is a fighter. He has been knocking the chip off the shoulder of corporate America since he got out of law school, and they're afraid to get in the ring with him or even talk about it.

The only way to take power from these bastards is to beat it out of them, and that is what John Edwards is all about!
EDWARDS '08

Kucinich asks for New Hampshire recount in the interest of election integrity

DETROIT, MI – Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, the most outspoken advocate in the Presidential field and in Congress for election integrity, paper-ballot elections, and campaign finance reform, has sent a letter to the New Hampshire Secretary of State asking for a recount of Tuesday's election because of "unexplained disparities between hand-counted ballots and machine-counted ballots."

"I am not making this request in the expectation that a recount will significantly affect the number of votes that were cast on my behalf," Kucinich stressed in a letter to Secretary of State William M. Gardner. But, "Serious and credible reports, allegations, and rumors have surfaced in the past few days…It is imperative that these questions be addressed in the interest of public confidence in the integrity of the election process and the election machinery – not just in New Hampshire, but in every other state that conducts a primary election."

Also, the reports, allegations, and rumors regarding possible vote-count irregularities have been further fueled by the stunning disparities between various "independent" pre-election polls and the actual election results," Kucinich wrote. "The integrity, credibility, and value of independent polling are separate issues, but they appear to be relevant in the context of New Hampshire's votes."

He added, "Ever since the 2000 election – and even before – the American people have been losing faith in the belief that their votes were actually counted. This recount isn't about who won 39% of 36% or even 1%. It's about establishing whether 100% of the voters had 100% of their votes counted exactly the way they cast them."

Kucinich, who drew about 1.4% of the New Hampshire Democratic primary vote, wrote, "This is not about my candidacy or any other individual candidacy. It is about the integrity of the election process." No other Democratic candidate, he noted, has stepped forward to question or pursue the claims being made.

"New Hampshire is in the unique position to address – and, if so determined, rectify – these issues before they escalate into a massive, nationwide suspicion of the process by which Americans elect their President. Based on the controversies surrounding the Presidential elections in 2004 and 2000, New Hampshire is in a prime position to investigate possible irregularities and to issue findings for the benefit of the entire nation," Kucinich wrote in his letter.

"Without an official recount, the voters of New Hampshire and the rest of the nation will never know whether there are flaws in our electoral system that need to be identified and addressed at this relatively early point in the Presidential nominating process," said Kucinich, who is campaigning in Michigan this week in advance of next Tuesday's Presidential primary in that state.

http://www.dennis4president.com/go/homepage-items/kucinich-asks-for-new-hampshire-recount-in-the-inter...

Oh my God. George Will called Edwards "the Trotsky of this campaign"? (amacd 10:03 pm). I think I'm going to be sick...

off22 (9:51 pm) -- Exactly right. Edwards is a watered-down Kucinich, who in turn is a watered-down socialist. // And Glenn Beck is simply raw sewage floating in the toilet of television.

Kucinich was denied by ABC and there were phone #'s email addresses for all to take advantage of. Levine, she was the ABC media coordinator or some such nonsense. The next day ABC had a message up that her voicemail had been turned OFF.
I will vote for Kucinich, I will not change my mind.
reva55, the Kucinich/Paul thing has been around for awhile, it was Elizabeth that was asked that question, not Rep. Kucinich. If that occurred then I would NOT vote for them. Paul is a misogynist, religious zealot and is dogged by white Supremacists. Had enough of that nonsense for 7 1/2 years. I was there, I saw what he did and I will never change my opinion of Paul. If the next post says "...Dr. Paul", run for cover.
safiyyah, you are shameful, indeed a GOP pleasantry.

Thanks MikeBinSC, Ill research that, but your certianly intitled to your opinion. Mine is that Dennis the right man for the job.! Thanks Tex

off22, "I think this could be the start of a great friendship", as Boggy said.

Yes, you and I are thinking alike.

If the establishment corporatist Empire is already attacking any serious (and some not so serious) left of center candidates as 'Commies' (George Will on "This Week" called Edwards "the Trotsky of this campaign"), then why not show the ruling-elite what change really looks like when 80% of the people don't buy into their BS.

If Dennis (and even Edwards) is being called a revolutionary, then why not show what 'change' really should mean, when a whole society of people demand change ---- REVOLUTION.

RichM i think commented on the concept of crossing the line in terms of acceptable debate. To give an example, I have heard many comments of Dennis being "socialist" and such from somewhat intelligent people, but especially in the corporate media. He is, if anything, as Rich M said a watered down socialist. That being said, look what the media is doing to John Edwards, a watered down Kucinich... (the socialist factor is getting pretty diluted at this point), and yet he is outside the appropriate range of debate.

For Edwards, I saw Glenn Beck a couple days ago say something along the lines of "listen to this guy, you might as well put the soviet star on him right now!" OK glenn. But this is just one example of his treatment. And this is a guy whose record has been well discussed and debated on its merits of progressiveness on this forum. Keep in mind Edwards, as i recall, started this debate focused on poverty. At the last debate and the clips of speeches I have seen it is now the "middle class". It used to be forbidden to talk about helping the impoverished since Clinton, and maybe the powers that be have done it again. And if he is outside the acceptable debate, Dennis is screwed, and any "real" socialist, if you will, does not have a shot in hell.

Along the lines of poll numbers vs public opinion, we can't forget how horrible these debates are, and how horrible the moderators are. The fawning over change makes me puke. The cloudy proposals and fluffy rhetoric are mind numbing. The reports are all about how the position somebody has gets votes or doesnt get votes. There is no substance on the implications of the policy for farmers, for teachers, for the poor, for the rich, for the children of the poor. Just what their cloudy position is, and how that may affect the race. And that is an in-depth debate. Usually it is just "who will change things".

Yuck. Sometimes I want to work for CNN and act conservative so I can get a moderator position and actually ask some questions and demand answers that are at least half-way intellectual in nature. Can somebody bar the word "change" from being used. Thank you.

Dennis has expanded the debate on the imperialist oil-war in Iraq, on the domestic economic oppression and executive branch tyranny, and many other crimes of this government.

His courage and clarity of truth has ignited other candidates and the general public to look beyond the very narrow scope that the ruling-elite empire attempts to enforce through economic domination and the deceitfully complicit MSM bullhorn.

Since Dennis has already been excluded from participation in the facade of democratic campaign process by the very corporatist Empire that he rails against in all his issues exposing domestic tyranny and foreign war abuses, it would only make sense for him to more explicitly identify the common thread of this ruling-elite monopoly of evil power for what it truly is: a global corporatist Empire hiding behind the facade of a phony two-party 'Vichy' American government.

Hell, it not only wouldn't hurt his election chances, but possibly improve them since a large majority of the American public (75% of whom think the government is on the 'wrong track', and 80%plus have no faith in the Congress or the Executive Branch) might well say, "Hey, buddy, you're probably damn right", and be more likely to vote for him.

As long as Dennis is being a truth teller, why not go all the way with truth about this corrupted, proto-fascist, corporatist Empire before it really bites him and all of us in the ass.

Even if Dennis did not win for himself, he certainly would be further broadening the discussion, debate, and truth about this metastasizing cancer of corporatist Empire which is already well on the way to killing our country and the world.

How great would this be: Kucinich/Edwards ticket or vice versa!!! -

"We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams." - Willy Wonka

texrey, Edwards isn't taking their money, if you don't believe me, go to -
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00002283&cycle=2008

This is what they say -

"Edwards is maintaining his steady fundraising pace behind Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, though he has announced that he will be accepting $10 million in public funding-and is encouraging the others to do the same. At the end of the 3rd Quarter, Edwards had $30.3 million, which means he will easily reach the $35 million his campaign originally said he'd need to bring in to be competitive in the early primaries. The former North Carolina senator has vowed not to accept money from registered lobbyists or PACs and only had minimal debt to re-pay after his 2004 campaign."

Can you say "public funding"? I knew you could!

EDWARDS '08

SOME POST above said that progressives are foolish to support dr.paul.ya think? seriously,to me kucinich represents the democratic wing of the democratic party-us henry wallace supporters who have been marginalized since the end of the second world war.we see patriotism as a perspective rather than a damned pose or a brand.we know that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link,that bourg democracy requires a LARGE MIDDLE CLASS,that racial and ethnic divisions need to be healed through justice,not exploited for crass political gain,that the national association of manufactures and their ilk,along with the oil companies,and the defense contracters,and the insurance companies don't need to be WRITING,AND EXECUTING OUR LAWS.i'm proud to support the still youthful boy mayor.by the way,this is the only industrial nation in which the young man's program would be considered hard-left or utopian.but you already know that.

Rumor is floating around that DK will be filing for a NH recount tomorrow.

Obama definitely got shafted by the Accuvote machines.

Dennis' time has not yet arrived but for those of you who keep urging him to leave the Democratic Party, I would counsel you to remember Winston Churchill.

That brandy-swilling, imperialist, drunk who was variously responsible for the disaster of the battle of Galpoli, the partition of the Middle East into what is now called Iraq, and other monumental blunders was similarly boxed in and trivialized by the Tory elite in Britain in the 1930's.

Ramsey, baldwin, and Neville chamberlain all were too smart by a half to take Winnie's warnings of the Nazi menace seriously. They were willing to let Der Feuhrer remilitarize the Rhineland, expand his army beyond Treaty of Versailles limits, annex Austria, and even hand him Czechoslovakia on a platter in the fervant hope that he would then fulfill his destiny and go east to take on Stalin's Soviet empire.

Imagine their shock when he inastead gobbled up all of Western Europe (except for Spain and Portugal) and was poised to devour Britain. So finally the brandy swilling, imperialist drunk got his chance since nobody else much wanted the job.He was too old, had made too many enemies in his own party, and how would he form a new government anyway?

He did it by reaching out to the political opposition and making them a part of the ruling clique. This may be Dennis' future too--the country has to get so far down that nobody else much wants the job and then he gets his chance.

I intend to vote for him during the primary even though I know he will not win. I intend to write him in on the general election ballot I think what Dennis is doing is exactly the right thing for a future time that has not yet arrived either for him or somebody else. I hope he will at least get to address the convention out in Denver.

Any message that stresses ideas like Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul put out is good for American politics. Of course I support Kucinich's ideas, but hearing ANYTHING that under the wildest imagination seems like the mere kernel of an idea in American politics is very rare.

This is why we must abandon this destructive early primary/caucus system that serves no purpose other than to eliminate our most honest and capable candidates from our most important office. The irony that this can be acheived using only ~2% of the population only adds to the outrage.

Thank you BLESSTHEBEAST for clearing that up for me. I do agree that Kucinich is our man, now...how do get the rest of America to feel the same way?

Count me in on the Kucinich Rocket. This cat just doesn't quit! Neither will I. Hunter Thompson says it best....When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. Dennis needs money. He doesn't take any from corporate sleaze bags, unlike the other candidates, EWARDS included! The longer he's able to stay in, the harder it will be for the Corporate sponsered Media to completly ignore,or exclude him. Dennis Kucinich takin names kickin ass! Thanks Tex

Progressive Student January 10th, 2008 2:51 pm

I like Mike Gravel who is genuine and ready to take on the elite globalists. However, he is considerably older than Kucinich and his mind is definately not as sharp. Aside from that, Dennis Kucinich has been laboring for "We the People" in Congressional role in recent years while Mike Gravel has been retired. Dennis knows from first-hand experience what is and has been taking place on that "dreadful" place called, Capitol Hill since the U.S. joined the WTO and NAFTA.

If you don't believe those two predatory memberships haven't been primarily responsible for the coming collapse of this country, then you haven't been doing your homework.

In short, Kucinich is our best bet from every angle.

I'm reading "The Courage to Survive," written by Kucinich. Out of a horrific childhood came a man with more character and integrity than anyone else running. No other candidate can match his passion, dedication and heart, and I will vote for him in the primaries, no matter what the pundits say about his chances.

Byrne--Kucinich has NOT endorsed Obama. He merely recommended his supporters to switch to Obama in IOWA ONLY, if he (Kucinich) didn't reach the 15% threshold to continue. I received the same email.

I love Dennis and I support him; however, I have a question that I wish someone would answer: why did I recieve an email from Kucinich (which he sent to all of his supporters just before the Iowa vote was tallied) that in the event that he should drop the run for the presidency; he would endorse Obama (which he hopes his supporters will follow suit). From what I understand, Obama has no intention of winding down the military spending. This seems to go against Kucinich's platform, so I am confused as to why he would endorse him.

PS iam a voting for Dennis in the primaries and in the general election its the green party and
cynthia mckinney!

i got so damn depressed when i heard what number Dennis got in the NH primary
i often ask that same question "why? when his views are quite similar to the public's?"
it can only be reasoned that:
a.) majority of people are stupid and ill-informed (most just vote for the "winner" like Amer Idol or something - its all about glam & guts absolutely NO substance ! people are so unaware of the ISSUES, and their candidates' stance on them
and
b.) the "powers that be" totally make sure he is not seen in MSM (cuz thats where most stupid people get their info from) its sickenly brilliant and if any of you have read Howard Zinn's peoples History of the US
you would know that this has been going on since day one of our "great US"...

When i hear Dennis' ideas -it is the only time i feel hopeful about what we can do to stop global warming , not be dependant on our depleting oil supplies, bringing the troops home, killing NAFTA, revamping our health care system, all the while boosting our economy...
its so brilliant its scary WE CAN DO IT if we're smart
but we're not...
i just look at the 04 election and that reminds me we dont have a chance in hell
we're more stupid than i ever thought possible
anyways
here is a link to Dennis and his brilliance (with hope and depression)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqVwkKL859A&feature=us

Today I read an article which helps me understand what is impeding Congress, and it also helps me implore my Congressman to muster the strength necessary to support and uphold the Constitution, which is the main function of Congress, I believe. It is also my hope that when others read it, they may get a sense of the courage that Dennis Kucinich displays. I hope so.

Please refer to this article in its entirety, when you have time, but until then, I include this excerpt from the last paragraph of the article: What Is He Capable Of? The Presidential Psychology at the End of Days By John P Briggs, M.D. and JP Briggs II, Ph.D. on the internet site: T r u t h o u t - Perspective, Thursday 10 January 2008:

"Members of Congress can stop being victims of the president's abusive psychology. You can confront a polarizer about his behavior without yourself becoming a polarizer. Instead of splitting ambivalence as Bush does, ambivalence can be used it to think through a clear course of action . The Constitution helps, in this case. The Democrats might, for example, articulate their balancing duties under the Constitution and carefully and firmly distinguish them from acts of partisan opposition. They might publicly acknowledge that this president, with the past complicity of Congress, has damaged our institutions. They could insist on the investigative and deliberative process called for by our system of government. Methodically holding Bush and his administration to account for his abuses (such a thing has never before happened to him) may be the most effective way to neutralize the further acting out of his dangerous psychology. It would empower others in his administration to resist him. It would refocus Congress on its own responsibilities in the constitutional process. Of course, to accomplish this would require some adults and "profiles in courage."

Ask your Representatives to Be Courageous, and wish them Good Luck

Did anyone here hear about the protests in NH when ABC (aka the mickey mouse network) excluded Kucinich from the debates?

No, I didn't think so.

ABC and the rest of the MSM are afraid of the message he brings and the level of discourse he would add to the debates. So not only did ABC exclude him on a pretext, they gave no coverage to the hundreds of Kucinich (and Ron Paul) supporters who protested the exclusion. So the rest of America never hears his intelligent responses and does not even know that he is a real candidate.. They dismiss him as a person who could never win. Their strategy is to marginalize and ignore him, and unfortunately they are succeeding. So we are stuck with the meaningless "more change of the same" message from the big three candidates.

His campaign could use some organizational help. Please consider volunteering time and donating money.

A TRULY courageous stand would be for Dennis to persuade the entire Progressive Caucus and much of the Black caucus to drop out of the Democratic Party, ally themselves with the Greens and other contrarian groups to run on an independent ticket. They'll lose, but they may just be able to introduce a new, meaningful third party out of this alliance. The public support IS there.

Just another supporter of Dennis, logging in and swearing off,,,,what the hell,,,as we know from history the Democrats have borrowed from the Socialist platform in the past, see The New Deal,,,,but true revolution with redistribution of wealth, well, tax the rich,,hell hang the rich! start with the lawyers, whoops there goes half the candidates,,,,I think it is high time to get rid of the Presidency all together,,this hero hollywood worship bullshit is f-cking sickening, An Executive Board of Regional Governers, with rotating spokesman/chairmanship,,,give us all a little more democracy and eliminate this lemming rush towards idiocy

I feel DK was betrayed by so-called progressives like Michael Moore, Thom Hartmann and many others who insisted that even though he was by far the best candidate, he's "unelectable" (what a ridiculous term). They turned to progressive-lite Edwards and guess what--it turns out he's not electable either! Surprise!
If all true progressives had supported Kucinich, the corporate media would not have been able to marginalize him as much as they have and his message would have reached far more people. It could have been a turning point, maybe not in this election, but for the future. Now we're left with Hillary or Obama and sadly, we deserve them.
I'm still supporting Dennis though. I even convinced my parents to vote for him in Michigan.

I have been told that I lower the discourse here at Dennis Kucinich Worhip Dot Com. But wait 'till Dennis lowers the discourse by endorsing Hillary Clinton. You guys really believe in God.

solrak, the foreign press has quoted Kucinich supporting Ron Paul as a good running mate :
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=38222&sectionid=3510203

Re: "Lack of results for Kucinich in these primaries is a real head-scratcher for me."

No head-scratch here. Between the corporate media and the DNC, Dennis has been substantially neutralized, rendered invisible. But all that he represents has not. So, come the presidential election I will "neutralize" my vote by writing in Dennis Kucinich, even at the risk of getting yet another Republican in the White House. In enough of us did that, perhaps the DNC would get the message they will need to provide a real, meaningful alternative.

The Democrats might not take Kucinich seriously now, but when the primaries are over, they will be soliciting Kuchinich supporters for their support for the nominee. It is at that point that you respond with Dennis' message: single payer, no more war, end corporate welfare, and his other messages. If they have not accepted, at that point, enough of Dennis' program, tell them you will stay home on election day. One must not fall into the age old trap of supporting the best of the evils. They are still evil. An alternative strategy for the 2008 election is that if Hillary, the likely nominee, or Obama, are still tepid, do not vote for either of them. If a Republican wins again, the Democrats might begin to get the message. In the interim, we could work on Al Gore to change enough to support single payer and withdraw all troops in Iraq, where they will still be with HILLARY, Obama or any of the Republicans. Gore is the best choice to pressure to carry forward the banner of KUCHINICH among mainstream Democrats, although he is going to need much prodding. Dennis will eventually be seen in the same way as the Progressives such as Fighting Bob Lafollet who did not win the presidency, but did influence future generations that paved the way for the improvement of the U.S. Dennis is far too radical in his views for the American people now, but the time of his ideas will come if we can hang on long enough, and it will be difficult, but adhering to the same imperialist way of life in foreign policy, and the continuing decline of the populace that is sure to occur under any of the "front runners" is a losing strategy for now and the future. Hillary is as much a war monger, and war criminal, as John McCain.

reva555:

progressives voting for ron paul are silly.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca

Kucinich is a great candidate. But his campaign sucks. The people that work on his campaign just don't get it. They just don't do the hard work to get the initial support and votes that get your campaign the exposure it needs to get the votes it takes to be a major candidate.

Imagine a country without Dennis and Elizabeth pouring out their hearts to preserve the Constitution and human decency in politics. What an utterly sad, vapid place this would be. While the MSM is bullying them to get out of the race, the American people, whoever they vote for, should be grateful (and that goes for Ron Paul and Mike Gravel too)that they toil on. Imagine if all we had to look at were the other stiffs, if no one was putting impeachment and universal health care on the table?

I am voting for Kucinich (Gravel is not in the ballot), if i can't vote for him i will support libertarian candidate Ron Paul. I am never going to vote for pro war/establishment candidates like Hillary, Obama or Edwards.

Progressive Student,

You asked how we'd vote in the general if Kucinich doesn't get the nomination. My backup plan is to vote for the Green Party's candidate.

The Democratic party has betrayed me for the last time. After Kerry's giving away the 2004 election that he won, I can only conclude he works for Bush now.

Unless a Democrat shows the kind of courageous leadership that Dennis Kucinich does, I see no point in giving credibility to the farce we have for elections anymore.

The Greens get some benefit from votes and from voters who change their party registration to Green (which I did after the Kerry betrayal).

My overall strategy is to support Dennis Kucinich with early money contributions ( http://www.dennis4president.com/), vote Green ( http://www.gp.org), and support public campaign financing (clean money http://www.publicampaign.org/).

The Democrats are capitalist pigs.

Kucinich and Gravel are the only respectable mainstream candidates, to my eye. Of course they are marginalized.

I would consider voting for one of them in the primaries. The others are simply too conservative or complicit to earn my vote.

It is too bad that DK has been used as window dressing, a pretext for corporate Dems to demand the votes of progressives. No such snake oil for me, thanks.

I am proud to have voted for Dennis in the NH primary. There was almost a complete lockout of information regarding his campaign in the NH media. One pollster who called my house wanting to know who I was voting for said, upon my response, "Would you spell that? Is he a Democrat?" The Manchester ABC affiliate station did allow DK and Gravel a few minutes of commentary following the debate. Apart from that concession, I never heard his name mentioned.

Voters seem to have an emotional need to pick a winner and I think that is why they desert a long-shot candidate in the booth. For instance, my spouse didn't decide on Obama until the last minute, but then was intensely (and uncharacteristically) interested in staying up late to see if Obama might pull it off. DK continues to do important work in the Congress even while campaigning, and I will continue to say thanks by giving him my support.

I too yearn for DK to run as an independent, but I read that to do so would force him to give up a powerful chairmanship of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee, of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. I can understand choosing to remain effective in that capacity.

We all have an opportunity to do our part to save this country. If we do not work for and elect Dennis Kucinich President in 2008, I dont believe we'll ever be able to get the United Corporations of America back.
Dennis did well in Oregon last year, because out here they actually count the votes. He'll do even better this time.

Not only do we need to give up on the DLC, we need to give up on MSM... I'm talking independent wi-fi networks, webstreamed networked low power fm, independent video like youtube developed into more consistant 'tv' format, web magazines, independent newspapers and magazines....

Yes, the MSM has trained us to go for "likeability", and you don't win those contests by saying everyone is wrong and stupid, especially if it's true.

The corporatocracy intentionally minimalizes Kucinich. He is by far the best one with his hat in the ring. Those who say he's just a shill for the dems are unimformed. Look at his congressional record. He has been calling for a relatively radical departure from the status quo for a long time. He's so good, that many of the dems consider him to be an oddball. After all - he's crazy enough to call for the establishment of a "Department of Peace". Unfortunately most American have their minds so full of bullshit that they can't see how good Kucinich would be for the Nation and the world.

---

The stock markets are going to totally collapse very soon. When they do, it will be a wonderful thing - the end of the world - as we've come to know it. From the ashes, new economic structures that serve the greater good will be built. The current insanity that is so typical in the halls of power now will soon become just a dark memory of our hideously ignorant past.

I'm bummed. At the end of primary, Dennis probably personally knew every one of the people who voted for him. Just the same, when our primary comes up (2/12) I'll vote for him, for my last, best (for now) chance to vote for an America that would have him as a frontrunner.

Gravel and Kucinich, two of the most honest, compassionate humanitarians. No wonder they have been shuffled out the door. Totally against the grain of american politics.

I have come to the conclusion that Common Dreams is a beautiful site to exchange views and important info.

When we start getting on the soapbox and telling each other who to vote for, we just pick fights with each other... I have done that in the past, and I really want to break the Habit.

PS when the Media trashed Arnold for bein a sex maniac... He got more votes!

OOps there I go again... the Ugly American.

That the American press so ridicules and dismisses an intelligent man with great ideas and a great record of public service makes me ashamed to be an American.

Websites like Commondreams, and the blogosphere may be our only hope.

Safiyyah, your comments bring down the whole level of discourse here. Is that really your aim?

"safiyyah January 10th, 2008 12:38 pm
Dennis Kucinich is a pretty face mask on a dead mummy."

Truthseeker58, you say: "Not to mention the corporations control our voting machines and the vote counting machines and they can do whatever they want. We saw hundreds of votes disappear from Kucinich's totals that night of the NH primary! His count was going backwards!" Has this been written up anywhere? I would like to read more about it.

We are in desperate trouble with these voting machines!!

I had everyone in my office take one of the polls today to pick the candidate who would best serve their beliefs. Every single one picked Dennis K. (to their surprize.)Strange that he meets the criteria for so many. I also listened to his financial advisor and got the impression that closing all of the tax loopholes would eliminate the entire elite voting block from voting for Dennis. But, these things definitely need to be addressed/ The rest of the candidates are hollaring for Change, but not too many are laying out plans for Change. The MSM is going to do the electing and we will be stuck with the same junk politics we have been seeing for the past decade. Time to break the cycle and pour in some new blood, give our country the transfusion it needs desperately.

The mainstream media seem to have one project---teaching people to vote on something as vacuous and easily manipulated as "like-ability" rather than on well-founded facts and policies, and that to me is why Kucinich is exiled: there will be no unpredictable voters here any more than unpredictable consumers are wanted, encouraged or recognized. Great idea above, that Kucinich should run as an Independent and spoil the party at least. Look at people's comments about Kucinich on YouTube---except for the troglodytes who can't spell anyway, they are incredibly energized and positive. STICK WITH IT DENNIS, your numbers will go up with the passage of time and with the droning dull Dems all around you!

Jim Glover (3:12 pm) writes, "I think if Arnold the Governator could Run, and his position was the same as Dennis, He would win in a landslide, even as an Independent."

- That's not so. I understand what you mean, but it's not really true. If an Arnold-like figure came out expressing positions that challenged the war machine & big business, the media would go into overdrive to paint him as a lecherous sex maniac, with no background or skills that could possibly qualify him for public office. They'd invent stuff, they'd find stuff, & would destroy him overnight.

Dennis Kucinich regularly wins or gets more votes in the polling than he is credited with. As of an hour ago, he was running at 2.7% in the LA Times poll. It is at http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-campaign9jan09,1,4414257.story?coll=la-headlines-...
If you are not registered on that site, you will have to register to vote.

If the election were today, who would you vote for?
32.2% Hillary Clinton
6.7% John Edwards
2.9% Rudy Giuliani
3.9% Mike Huckabee
2.7% Dennis Kucinich
6.8% John McCain
30.9% Barack Obama
6.0% Ron Paul
1.0% Bill Richardson
5.3% Mitt Romney
1.6% Fred Thompson
9110 total responses

As you probably know, when he won the ABC poll after that earlier debate, ABC took the poll down. Other CD commenters are certainly correct that the MSM seeks to cut him out of any discussion, publicity, etc. This is the first part of the fixers plan.

The second part is the actual ballot fraud that is done in the counting. When the computer programs are fixed to give any election to their candidate, they move votes from other candidates to theirs. So, like Ron Paul's 31 votes not being reported in one NH precinct (He is having the election reviewed or contested.), then DK's votes are siphoned to the winner in the primaries. This goes on in both primaries and general elections. And this is the true reason that non-establishment candidates and third party candidates finish so low in the count.

Until we all think our elections are important enough to work on fixing them as hard as we work on our candidates' campaigns, we will continue to get the fixers' choice.

RichM:

"The Democratic Party uses Dennis as an "Left Ornament," simply to prevent antiwar types from defecting to the Greens or socialists."

I agree. Obviously, Kucinich is fully aware of this. He claims he is trying to reform the party. He is too intelligient to think this is truly possible. BeaverCleaver wrote something along the same lines. It just doesn't make sense. We don't need somebody to keep the dems "in check", because it doesn't work. I love the DK platform, but is this all I have to look forward to in 2012, 2016? One percent of the primary vote? THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS NOT GOING TO REFORM. Forget about them. Please, move on and support some sort of worthy 3rd party. It is our only hope for true change.

I was 18 when I cast my first vote in the year 2000. I think we got off on the wrong foot.

rmax --- If EDWARDS had any integrity at all, HE'D bail out and support KUCINICH. For all the boohoo'ing Edwards said about the evil corporate funding of candidates, he sure accepted a huge amount of that corporate dough for his campaign and now he's beholden to those corporations.

Kucinich is the only one who deserves to be President. He's the real deal. HE LIVES WHAT HE SAYS. He is the ONLY one who remembers he's a PUBLIC SERVANT and not a Corporate Servant. But the populace of this country is dangerously asleep, and when they wake up, they will find Fasciscm has taken a hold of their lives.

Come on people. Wake up. You are wondering why his numbers are low? Kucinish IS electable by the people -- but the Corporate-owned media won't let him speak or be seen! ABC even cut him out of the picture of all the candidates last year claiming it was a mistake. And at debates while Clinton & Obama get about 27 and 29 minutes eat, Kucinich gets a measly 7! He won't take corporate money, so they won't talk to him. WAKE UP! Don't you see that the media is playing you all for fools??? They are controlling your thinking and opinions and you're confused on why people don't know who he is?? Not to mention the corporations control our voting machines and the vote counting machines and they can do whatever they want. We saw hundreds of votes disappear from Kucinich's totals that night of the NH primary! His count was going backwards!

I think if Arnold the Governator could Run, and his position was the same as Dennis, He would win in a landslide, even as an Independent.

Dennis has great ideas almost all progressively Correct, and he will run next year too if his people in Cleveland think he is doing good for them.

8 years of running for Prez can take lots of time from his duties at the House and home turf.

A leader for Prez needs the majority that will follow the leader.... after 8 years his positions are pretty well known, but it takes animal magnetism to win a presidential election.

Folks want a leader who not only agrees with them but who can get the military and the big corporations to at least not block them out.

Who thinks Dennis can do that...Please stand Up!

When we are in grade school we are told that anyone can be Prez... and yes if everyone thought that Dennis could win, he would have been elected last time.

Now you have to convince those that agree with Dennis that he can win.

I just think in the real world not everybody can really be Prez.

But vote your heart out anyway...

I still haven't decided who I will vote for and think I will keep it to myself... everybody likes a mystery.

Vote your heart and go with Kucinich. Vote your head and go with Edwards. If the primaries are to whittle down the candidates to a few *viable* ones, you won't feel bad about yourself if you support the progressive positions of Edwards over the status quo candidates of Hillary and Obama. I don't mean to support the main stream media, but this was DK's second run for the presidency in NH and both times he got around 1%. I will let you decide whether that is DK's fault for being *too* progressive, or the media and/or the electorate's response to his positions or his personality (and you can't deny that personality is an issue with many, if not most, voters).

If Dennis were truly concerned about this country, or stood firmly behind his principles and positions, he would have told his supporters to support Edwards in the Iowa caucuses. As it stands, he's a politician just like the rest, looking out for himself and his own ego. Don't kid yourselves, a vote for Dennis is a vote for the status quo.

- I'm sympathetic to Kucinich supporters, having worked in his '04 campaign. But it must be understood that it would require something very like a "revolution" to allow someone like DK to have any chance of winning. In today's USA, with its corrupt media, its 2 big-business parties, & its dumbed-down electorate, he can't possibly get more than a few percent. He has no more chance of being nominated than a real socialist does, despite being a member of one of the big-business parties.

Changing those conditions would require something tantamount to a "revolution." Yet DK doesn't call for that kind of fundamental change. He has noble policy positions, sure -- but underneath it all, he rests his candidacy on a proposition that's just not true: the notion that an antiwar candidate advocating policies that would hurt the profits of large corporations can be elected in the current political framework. // As we see from the early primaries, even John Edwards, who is much less antiwar & less anticorporate than Dennis, is being painted by the media as "out of the mainstream." Even the very-Establishment Edwards doesn't stand much of a chance, despite being a rich Southern guy & former VP candidate. The media is "Kucinich-izing" him, & he'll soon be knocked out of the race. His crime: he spoke some of the truth -- and that's too much, & unacceptable, in today's USA.

Kucinich supporters should recognize that since it would require a revolution for a DK-like figure to even be taken seriously as a nominee, they ought to start thinking in terms of bringing about that "revolution." The Democratic Party uses Dennis as an "Left Ornament," simply to prevent antiwar types from defecting to the Greens or socialists. As long as there's a 2-party system where both parties are arms of the capitalist Establishment, you'll have figures like DK being marginalized. // Once you start listening to real socialists, you'll see that DK is sort of a watered-down socialist. He's a "noble" figure compared to the other Evilcrat whores, but not compared to thinkers who tell the full & unstinting truth about capitalism & the US political system.

Why not prove to me that you're for real Dennis. Grab Cynthia Mckinney as a running mate and run independent.