Kos on Kucinich
Over at Daily Kos, big dog blogger Markos has something to say about presidential candidate Congressman Dennis Kucinich. Usually, it's just "ugh."
But in a piece entitled Why I say "ugh" on Kucinich, Markos explains:
First, there's Dennis Kucinich's long anti-choice record. Markos quotes The Nation from 2002:
In his two terms in Congress, he has quietly amassed an anti-choice voting record of Henry Hyde-like proportions. ... His anti-choice dedication has earned him a 95 percent position rating from the National Right to Life Committee, versus 10 percent from Planned Parenthood and 0 percent from NARAL.
And, then, Markos quotes Kucinich himself, who inexplicably once said:
Spirit merges with matter to sanctify the universe. Matter transcends to return to spirit. The interchangeability of matter and spirit means the starlit magic of the outermost life of our universe becomes the soul-light magic of the innermost life of our self. The energy of the stars becomes us. We become the energy of the stars. Stardust and spirit unite and we begin: One with the universe. Whole and holy. From one source, endless creative energy, bursting forth, kinetic, elemental. We, the earth, air, water and fire-source of nearly fifteen billion years of cosmic spiraling.
And finally, Markos points out that in a study of the thousands of mayors in American history, Dennis Kucinich, the former mayor of Cleveland, was ranked the seventh worst... right between two New York mayors who wallowed in vote fraud and graft.
Read the rest. And since there's 1300+ comments over at Daily Kos, feel free to discuss here.
|
Feb. 25, 2007
|
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Feb 26, '07
Kos obviously has an agenda and is perhaps paid by another presidential candidate. It is no coincidence that this hit piece followed by another the next day, appeared on the front page of his website shortly after Dennis made a powerful showing at the first Democratic debate in Nevada. Judging from the response of the audience,Kucinich won the Nevada debate. For all of the people who consider Kucinich 'unelectable' they sure do seem worried about all of the support that he has been getting.
Kucinich for President Volunteer Organizing Site DK2008
Feb 26, '07
nadia goodenu, I think kos's agenda has nothing to do with "being paid by another presidential candidate'. That is conspiratorial nonsense. kos's comments on Dennis Kucinich can be attributed to him not particularly liking him. Period.
9:50 a.m.
Feb 26, '07
perhaps paid by another presidential candidate.
Either you need to show some proof, or retract that statement. Kos has a long-standing dislike of Dennis Kucinich.
Here's an important point: All he did was quote The Nation (which in turn quoted NARAL and Planned Parenthood's report cards), the America's Mayors book, and Dennis himself.
There's nothing in there that's unfactual.
Now, would you care to actually defend your guy and tell us why you support him despite all this? Or are you going to rely on character assassination?
Feb 26, '07
The mayoral ranking argument doesn't hold water.
The reason Kucinich ranked so low is that he refused to sell the city's utility, Muny Light, to the robber barons. The city went into default but then Kucinich was later proved right. Today, Muny Light customers pay a fraction of what the surrounding utilities charge and Kucinich was elected to congress because he was right.
read about it for yourself
12:03 p.m.
Feb 26, '07
And his overnight conversion from anti-abortion postion, to pro-choice a week before he announced his bid for President in 2004?
Feb 26, '07
All I know on that score is what Kucinich has said.
That he came to the realization that the pro-life position was about controlling women.
I agree with Dennis, and having been raised Catholic I struggle with the abortion debate as well. The point is it is not a crime to change your mind. And, in any case, it's not a deal breaker for me.
Feb 26, '07
I think Dennis might have been drinking the bong water.
Feb 26, '07
Way to go with the ad hominem attack. I guess everyone who cares deeply about building a peaceful and more just world is just a pot-smoking hippy....
That spirit merges with matter crap is so overquoted and it makes me mad. So he said that at some wierd "Dubrovnik Conference on the Alchemy of Peacebuilding" --big deal.
Our current president is a religious wacko too, but he's also a warmonger.
Where it matters (on real issues,) Kucinich is right-on and that is good enough for me.
4:07 p.m.
Feb 26, '07
What ad hominem attack's Qwendolyn?
Are you missing any cheese to go with that beverage?
And your faith in DK's pathetic spin over his 11th hour "conversion" in going from anti-abortion to pro-choice only one week before he announces is touching. Do you also think if we clap hard enough Tink will live?
And stow your tripe about "everyone who cares deeply about building a peaceful and more just world" with your implication that we have to embrace non-viable nitwits like DK.
Feb 26, '07
I agree with Qwendolyn and Nadia that Kucinich's philosophical/spiritual meanderings matter little when compared to the immoral foreign policies of his opponents. As one who has uncomfortably switched positions on abortion rights during his life, I can identify with him on that one, too.
Having said that, I have to say that what bothers me about Dennis is that he has refused to pledge to support only a peace candidate for president. If he were to renounce the Hillarization of his party and promise to leave the party and unite with centrists and leftists who agree with most of his platform after the pro-war, pro corporate, pro-hegemony candidate is finally chosen by Dem money-mongers, I would not only vote for him, I would work my ass off for him.
4:38 p.m.
Feb 26, '07
I don't find anything new here, and Kos was just explaining his position on a candidate--certainly a legitimate thing for a blogger to do. As my old pappy would say, in '04, he only had two chances for the nomination: slim and none. This year, he's lost slim. The only reason for his candidacy is to act as an advocate for the Peace Department he's proposed (which is structurally sound, and Kos could be criticized for cherry picking especially dopey language) as well as other pro-peace positions.
Feb 26, '07
Yes it is an amazing coincidence to change your mind exactly when you decide to run for president.
My point is that I don't care, --it's not a deal breaker for me. Kucinich is too right on everything else.
"implication that we have to embrace non-viable nitwits like DK?"
Ummm, no. Embrace whomever you want. Embrace a guy like John Kerry, because he was oh-so-viable and electable, wasn't he?
You vote for whoever you think will win, and in the meantime, I will vote for who I believe in.
1:03 a.m.
Feb 27, '07
Kucinich is a wacky dude. It's unfortunate that he gives liberals such a bad name.
The Left would be much better served by a candidate like Bernie Sanders, or Barney Frank, or Pete Stark, or Jim McDermott, or Linda Sanchez, or Jan Schakowsky, or any number of other folks.
1:38 a.m.
Feb 27, '07
Kos could be criticized for cherry picking especially dopey language
Seriously, Jeff? It doesn't take much.
How about this - let's examine Kucinich's performance in the only presidential debate of the 2008 cycle so far... Or the 2007 DNC Winter Meeting where he closed, repeating over and over, "Crown Thy Good America" - whatever the heck that means.
Seriously, can the guy give a speech without closing on a wacky watch-me-board-the-flying-saucer ending?
7:45 a.m.
Feb 27, '07
Neither Bernie Sanders, nor Barney Frank, nor Russ Feingold, nor any of the other progressives who speak to some of the same issues that Dennis Kucinich is raising have shown an interest in jumping into a presidential campaign that they have no chance of winning.
Kucinich is a good man who's biggest sins from a Democratic point of view appear to be a Catholic upbringing and an unwillingness to avoid asking embarrassing questions about the leadership of the Democratic Party when it comes to matters of war, peace, and support for trade policies that are hurting American workers.
All things being equal, these are issues that the establishment-types on the Democratic side would rather not have raised in the 2008 presidential primary, which is why it's not terribly surprising that Markos came off of the porch to take a bite at Kucinich.
In all likelihood, I won't be voting for Dennis in the primary, but I'm glad that he's in the race and believe that he deserves much better than the treatment that Markos gave him on Friday.
As for Kucinich's performance in the Fox News debate...
I'd love to see us have a Presidential candidate emerge from either party who comes to us with no strings attached. Of course, that's just not possible in a day and age where political viability at every level is measured almost entirely by a candidate's ability to dial for dollars.
Feb 27, '07
Right on, Qwendolyn! We should always be skeptical of 'received wisdom' about who CAN and who CANNOT win. It's disheartening to see so many professed liberals giving up on their principles so easily (at the prodding of MSM pundits and spinmeisters).
If I had a dollar for every time some 'sophisticated strategist' announces that s/he agrees with everything Kucinich says about the issues but won't vote for him 'because he can't win', we could fill Kucinich's campaign coffers with funding that could match--or overtake--the funding that all the sell-out 'Democrats' accept from Big Pharma and other corporate entities whose goals are anything but progressive.
As Kucinich has said in the past, "I CAN win...if you vote for me." Sounds to me like an excellent point that apparently goes over the heads of those geniuses who tailor their strategies to "winning the last campaign". The only votes that are 'wasted' are the votes cast for candidates whose positions/policies we disagree with...that strategy defeats the very purpose of elections, and it's precisely the reason the Democratic Party continues to nominate candidates who look very much like Republicans. 'Lesser Evilism' encourages 'Cynicism' which, in turn, discourages voters from even bothering to show up at the polls.
9:37 a.m.
Feb 28, '07
It's remarkable the Dennis Kucinich is such the whipping boy on a position that he has agonized over. Yes, he was opposed to abortion, but and after much soul-searching and reflection, he changed his opinion. Even before he adopted a more pro choice stance, he consistantly advocated for contraception access and opposed the Bushco policies of abstinence only education. Further, when the opportunity presented itself to vote on a Constitutional Amendment to ban abortion, Dennis voted against it.
If we're so damn progressive and Dems are such a "big tent" party, what's the problem here? Dennis has never waivered in his advocacy for peace, for universal health care, and for the rights and opportunities for workers.
He has adamantly opposed the Iraq occupation from the beginning, opposes the budding conflict with Iran (voting against the "Iran Freedom Act of 2005), and voted against the Patriot Act and its reauthorization. He has consistantly opposed NAFTA and other trade agreeents, and would work to repeal them.
Oh, and that mayor rating? Holli surveyed his 1600 "experts" in 1993, and the rankings are rather subjective. (Chicago Mator Richard Daley received a top 10 rating!). Dennis became Cleveland's Mayor in a tumultous time, elected because of a promise to keep corporations out of City business, and he honored his commitment, refusing to sell the electric company to bankers. In the short term, it threw Cleveland into financial throes. In retrospect, Kucinich has been lauded for his foresite and courage. In 1998 he was honored by the Cleveland City Council for saving the City an estimated 195 million dollars between 1985 and 1995.
I'll gladly stake the Kucinich positions and policies against any candidate. Let's talk about the war; let's talk about gay civil rights; let's talk about NAFTA.
The glaring truth is that all the other candidates reveal more problematic positions than the Kansas City Royals, and they're smooth and polished enough to avoid talking about them.
Dennis may be a wacky little American car drivin' vegan, but I'll take his crazy little idea of peace, any day.
Feb 28, '07
So an ex-gooper military brat like Kos wants to take someone to task for what he used to believe. That's a good one.
2:18 p.m.
Feb 28, '07
It's kind of funny and ironic how Kucinich supporters give him a free pass on his flip flop on the abortion issue, claiming it is ok to change your mind, yet then turn around and crucify any other Democrat for flip flopping on the Iraq war vote, saying in this case it's not ok to change your mind, and it must just be for crass political purposes.
I hear a lot of talk about how Kucinich is somehow more pure and less beholden to corporate interests and what not, yet I never hear any examples or evidence of this.
I would like to see a list of issues comparing Kucinich's positions against other mainstream Democratic positions, that highlight specifically cases and examples where most Democrats have allegedly "sold out" while Kucinich supposedly has not.
Feb 28, '07
Who's criticizing Dems who said they were wrong on Iraq? I don't recall Kerry or Edwards getting any grief, from the left anyway.
Feb 28, '07
Then, nsr, you aren't at the DailyKos very often. Lots of people say they cannot support Edwards because of that.
My take on Kucinich: too self-righteous. His supporters are even worse.
Feb 28, '07
Naw, I don't go to Kos.
Feb 28, '07
I am sick of the undermine kucinich vibe. This reminds me of the progressive v. progressive slander when dems undermined Nader. Disgusting.
Feb 28, '07
Kari,
I think one of the main problems with the electorate today is, they are much more focused on the material aspects of a candidate, like your comment above, rather than the substance - the issues.
So what if he looks odd to you or doesn't speak well. At least he is right on where it matters, policy. All these other candidates I see all look great but dont stand for anything other than what special interests tell them to. We have someone who is brave enough to get past the superficialities and better our nation and our world by advocating these issues. At least give him that.
6:24 p.m.
Feb 28, '07
I am sick of the undermine kucinich vibe. This reminds me of the progressive v. progressive slander when dems undermined Nader. Disgusting.
But it's ok when Nader or Kucinich supporters undermine mainstream Democrats?
The Nader campaign to discredit and undermine Al Gore in 2000 was intense and vicious. Same with a lot of Kucinich supporter's attacks on the Democratic "establishment."
Mar 1, '07
i won't vote for kucinich, but i respect him for what he's doing: holding the left flank of the party. much better that he do this from within the party and pass his delegates on to barack obama, or john edwards for a small amount of leverage on an important issue, than to have ralph nadar do this from outside the party and strip away the winning percentage.
1:16 p.m.
Mar 1, '07
Excuse me, but niether Kucinich nor any of the Kucinich folk I worked with in 2004 "undermined" John Kerry. Such a broadstroked comment, lumped together with Nader is ludicous.
While Nader and Kucinich are alike in philosophies, and Nadar has lauded Dennis, Kucinich has adamantly honored the Democratic credo entoned by Bill Clinton, Howard Dean and a host of others: vote for your favorite in the primary; vote for the Party's favorite in the general.
The little boy having a tantrum, on the outside lookin' in, is Ralph Nader. The guy on the stage, graciously encouraging his supporters to support the candidate of the party, is Dennis Kucinich.
As far as us "self-rightous," "undermining" Kucinich supporters... I'll stack my volunteer time in the Kerry campaign against anyone, anytime, and I've included my name so you can check.
I suppose I am a little self-rightous now, but I do tend to get that way when typecast and insulted.
KC
NOTE TO ZMAN: "Flip-flop" is a Frank Luntz bunperstickerism, and he just loves it when non-republicans use his terminology. The insertion of such phrases is by nature designed to reduce any discussion to the limits of a 3 word (or less) phrase.
To the discussion, instead:
I wouldn't characterize Kucinich's reflection and evolution on his perspectives on choice as simply a cavilier "flip-flop". Niether do I discredit John Edwards for his reflection on his vote regarding the authorization of force. I give them both a lot of credit for having the maturity to evaluate facts, listen to different perspectives, and be willing to say "I've changed my perspective, and here's why."
How much finger-in-the-wind mentality played into their choices we can conjecture ad nauseum - and I suppose that's what this blogging thing is all about. But don't we want the will of the people to be reflected in the musings of our representatives? Don't we write and call our reps because we want them to see the light on one issue or another? Don't we want to see some indication that We the People can influence a legislatior to view something from another perspective?
For those of you that complain about the "flip-flop," I give you the unretractable George Bush and Dick Cheney.