Kucinich Out of the Race
From the AP: Kucinich abandons White House bid.I have to say that I am geniunely sorry to see Dennis Kucinich drop out of the race for President. I may not agree with many of his policies and stances, but Congressman Kucinich is a rare animal in American politics: a man of integrity. He's one of the few I see who actually appears to believe what he professes to, and he always raises the level of debate when he addresses an issue. I trust him to see things I don't see from an angle of honesty and good conscience, and find his arguments difficult to dismiss. That's the definition of a statesman.
Kucinich will focus instead on a tough congressional race in Cleveland. The four Democratic primary challengers for his seat have a hell of a fight ahead of them.
posted by Andrew Hamm @ 2:52 PM
11 Comments:
At 1/26/2008 1:23 AM ,
Scott Wichmann said...
Thanks, Andrew. It's a tough pill to swallow for me, because he really was the last real cord holding me to the Democratic Party. (Both him and Chris Dodd)
In recent months, I watched in stunned disbelief as the DNC actively kept him out of debates in Iowa, and on NBC & ABC. The mainstream media ignored his candidacy and instead focused on deciding for us who was worthy enough to present to the American people in a televised debate. The real shame was that none of these supposedly upright, principled, noble Democratic candidates spoke up on his behalf or said "No-- this is wrong--Let Congressman Kucinich debate!!" Instead, Edwards stole only a few lukewarm and watered-down versions of Dennis' positions in an effort to look like more of a populist, ("My daddy worked in a mill!!") while Hillary and Obama tried to re-write their opportunistic voting records. Every time I think of them, I want to throw up in my mouth.
All my liberal friends now think I'm going to vote for either Obama or Edwards, but they're crazy. I'm seriously thinking of getting behind Ron Paul in the republican race. It all boils down to the fact that, while I disagree with a few of his positions, I can actually TRUST the guy, because he actually stands behind what he says & doesn't waffle like a spineless jellyfish. I may actually donate to Congressman Paul's campaign.
In any case, I will miss Dennis & his tenacity, heart and intelligence in the Presidential race. The voters of this country (and the DNC in particular) deserve far better than what they're getting to choose from. Now we get to watch as Hillary/Obama/Edwards fight over who gets to run the Al Gore/John Kerry "Stand for absolutely nothing and lose the election" playbook.
No big loss there.
Forget it, on election day, I'll just write in Ralph Nader's name and go back to sleep.
At 1/26/2008 9:44 AM ,
Andrew Hamm said...
And to think that I thought we had seen the dregs of the candidate pool in 2000 and 2004...
At 1/26/2008 9:49 AM ,
Anonymous said...
I'm seriously thinking of getting behind Ron Paul in the republican race.
Don't. Do some research first. Ron Paul is a wack-job. And don't throw your vote away on Nader either, all that does is marginalize your own vote.
Kusinich is a fringe candidate with some kooky views. He does have integrity, but he's a bit too far out there for me, and I don't mean too far left because I tend to lean that way more and more as the years go by, I mean out in left field so to speak.
The fact that he's willing to even sit and talk with the insane "9/11 Truth" people is enough to make me dismiss him based on displaying poor judgement. The same can be said for Paul who has courted the insane kook Alex Jones.
At 1/26/2008 10:16 AM ,
Frank Creasy said...
Ron Paul has been polarizing to many because he's got the courage of his convictions and is willing to say what he believes will be best for this country, even if it means he won't be elected. Kucinich was much the same way. They may be at complete opposite ends of the spectrum politically (pretty safe assumption), but both shun political expediency by sticking to what they believe and saying it consistently time after time.
I'll miss Kucinich as well, even though I'd not have voted for him. There are still some Republican candidates I'm interested in listening to in the coming months, but I'm very concerned about more closely aligning church and state as Mr. Romney and Mr. Huckabee intend to do (let's not kid ourselves). Ron Paul is not your true Republican, but had to find some way to gain a voice since Libertarians and Greens and other 15th-party candidates can't hope to engage in these debates controlled by the Thought Police (mainstream media).
There won't be a single party or candidate who can encompass all I believe, but in the end I'll make a choice. I hope we all do. It's unfortunate, almost tragic, that we typically have to make a choice between the lesser of the evils come November every four years. But I will choose. And outside of Billary, I'm leaving all my options open at this point.
At 1/26/2008 10:42 AM ,
Joey Fanelli said...
I'm going to miss his pocket-sized constitution.
At 1/26/2008 10:53 AM ,
Andrew Hamm said...
Hey, a pocket-sized Constitution attacked me in a Barnes & Noble once. Those things pack a wallop! Then the dimetrodon came...
I think a surprising number of Americans see 2008 as an issue as simple as A-B-C: Anyone But Clinton. In my case, though, I can envision "anything" being going to the poll to write in "I abstain." I'm not sure I can get behind any of these buys.
I kind of liked Sam Brownback for a while there. He had a cool plan to revitalize rural areas by giving huge tax credits to professionals and teachers to relocate to small towns for a span of years. It wasn't a sexy, headline-grabbing initiative, it was just an interesting idea that would have boosted small local economies and spread "citified" ideas into areas that aren't much reached by art and science.
At 1/26/2008 10:54 AM ,
Andrew Hamm said...
"Buys" might possibly have been intended to read as "guys." That's an interesting slip, though...
At 1/26/2008 11:54 AM ,
Anonymous said...
Ron Paul has been polarizing to many because he's got the courage of his convictions and is willing to say what he believes will be best for this country, even if it means he won't be elected.
You can think that if you like, but the real reason Paul has been polarizing is he's an out-and-out kook with mostly ludicrous ideas. What he thinks "would be best for this country" is absolutely insane.
The fact that he published obscenely offensive racist materials in newsletters with his name on them is evidence of someone who has extremely poor judgement.
His isolationist ideas make Pat Buchannon seem tame, his idea of ditching fiat currency and going back to the gold standard bely a complete failure to grasp economic realities on any level. The guy is a joke who appeals to disenfranchised people who don't generally pay attention to current events.
At 1/26/2008 12:35 PM ,
Scott Wichmann said...
Dr Paul is a 'whack-job' who has been elected to 10 consecutive terms in congress and has NEVER voted for a tax increase. Congressman Kucinich is a 'Kooky' 'Out there' six-term congressman who has stared major corporations in the face and sacrificed his own political career to preserve Cleveland's municipal power company in the late 1970s.
Both espouse the Non-Violent message of Gandhi and Dr Martin Luther King, Jr. What a couple of coconuts. Both want American industry to thrive. Both want to get out of NAFTA and the WTO. Both want to end this horrible, unnecessary war. Both have done their homework on the history of American intervention in the Middle east.
Dr Paul wants to end Social Security Double-Taxation (something my dad is maddeningly having to put up with right now) secure the borders (we have to, it's simple common sense) and get back to sound monetary policy. It's as simple as this: If we don't have the money, we can't keep printing it out of thin air-- Inflation is an invisible tax that lowers the value of the money already in circulation. Dr Paul says "Let's stop living beyond our means or we're going to crash and burn."
What a whack-job.
And yes, he wants to cut a bit too much from the federal government for my taste-- But it is readily apparent that if the Government can't (and won't) make sound choices with my tax dollars, then let me keep them. I'll sock that money away and save it myself, rather than watch the government piss it all away in the sands of the middle east while my social security benefits dry up.
(Good lord-- I -- I sound like a REPUBLICAN!!!)
And as for the people who support Paul & Kucinich (Alex Jones, 9/11 Families for Truth, etc) who cares?? Are you really more concerned about Dr Paul answering the questions of the host of 'Prison Planet Radio' than Jerry Freaking Fallwell or Pat Robertson?? I mean, come on-- as long as we're talking nutjobs-by-proxy, you might as well disqualify every candidate who rolls with a Rapture-ready group of tambourine-whackers hellbent on speeding up the book of revelations through nuclear war in the holy land. How about disqualifying Romney for his creepy association with a made-up fairy-tale religion that refused to accept blacks as actual people until the 1970s?? Huckabee peddles his theological background as evidence that he'd be a great President. That scares me more than Alex Jones and his cottage industry of 'New World Order' Podcasts.
I'm really not interested in getting into any more political back-and-forth stuff, as I've been really tired of politics lately, but I think you should probably amend your vocabulary when talking about the political careers of Kucinich and Paul. 'Kooky,' 'Out There' and 'Whack Job' is simply another way of saying you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
At 1/26/2008 12:51 PM ,
Anonymous said...
I just took a bunch of classes on global management and economics.
Anyone who wants to "get out of NAFTA and the WTO" is completely ignorant of economic reality of the world.
Same for anyone who wants to go back to the gold standard.
These guys are both kook magnets and neither deserve serious consideration. They do both have some kind of integrity if you count integrity as sticking to simplistic ideas which ignore reality.
The fact that Ron Paul and Kucinich were elected lends them no credibility; there have been plenty of wack-jobs who have been elected through the years. Heck, Cynthia McKinney served many congressional terms and she's bats**t crazy.
At 1/26/2008 12:57 PM ,
Frank Creasy said...
Phil, it's clear Scott and I couldn't disagree with you more, so we'll leave it at that. God bless you, and I hold out no high hopes for a Ron Paul presidency, and I'm still undecided - but I will vote my conscience and I will listen to Ron Paul's ideas. I believe the government that governs best, governs least, and in an era when people will line up behind most any Pied Piper promising them something for nothing (meaning something OTHER taxpayers must pay for), a Ron Paul and a Dennis Kucinich are breaths of fresh air.
But Andrew, I don't see it as Anyone But Clinton, just as NO CLINTON BY GOD! The woman is keenly intelligent, and also perhaps the most duplicitous and self serving we've seen in our lifetimes. "Machiavellian" doesn't even begin to describe the evil of which that woman is capable. So, if she is not on the ticket in November, I'll enter the polling location with a great deal of ease.
But Scott - I'm with you brother. This has worn me out and the election is still nearly a year away. God help us all!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home