This candidate isn’t as sexy a choice as Barack Obama, but his progressive credentials are not sheerly based on hopes and dreams, either. Nor is this candidate as well known as Al Gore, who continues to tease us with his “I”m not running — but I might” Prince Hamlet routine. He does have, however, the best progressive credentials of any of the declared or likely candidates for the Democratic nomination. Who is he?
CLEVELAND (AP) – Democratic Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who unsuccessfully ran for president in 2004, said Monday he is planning another bid because his party isn’t pushing hard enough to end the Iraq war.
In a statement, Kucinich said he plans to formally announce his candidacy on Tuesday at Cleveland’s City Hall, where he served as mayor of his hometown in the 1970s.
The liberal, anti-war Ohio congressman said he was inspired to run because he disagrees with the way some of his fellow Democrats are handling the war, including approval of a proposal to spend $160 billion more on the conflict.
“Democrats were swept into power on Nov. 7 because of widespread voter discontent with the war in Iraq,” said Kucinich, 60. “Instead of heeding those concerns and responding with a strong and immediate change in policies and direction, the Democratic congressional leadership seems inclined to continue funding the perpetuation of the war.”
Right now, he’s got my vote. How about you?
I have always liked Kucinich, and I would say a real populist type candidate. His problem is in the ‘image’ thing, which has been the most important element in the last 50 yrs, since JFK. But if things are worse by ’08, people start to get past those things in real bad times. Then I see him being a serious candidate, along with Wesley Clark, another of my favorites right now.
Dennis had my vote last time until he bowed out. I don’t expect to be able to hear much about him again, though.
He is a fighter and a winner, which we really need now.
is why, when Barack Obama levels some mild criticism at the party, people jump all over him, but when Dennis Kucinich comes out and attacks the Democratic Congressional Leadership for not cutting off funding for the war (which would be a giant political mistake) there are crickets in the blogosphere. I like both of them, but, geez, it kind of pisses me off that Kucinich gets the green light on sliming the Dems.
You can’t have your cake and eat it, too.
Obama’s remarks echo the criticism of Republican talking points, that’s why.
PS. What political mistake?
60% of Americans want us out of Iraq within 6 months.
You get out of Iraq by getting out of Iraq, not by cutting off funding for the troops. Set dates, pass resolutions, cut off funding for Halliburton and other contractors, but, for the love of all things blue, don’t stop funding our troops. Part of the reason that the Dems won in 2006 is because of powerful ads attacking Burns and George Allen for failing to give troops body armor.
If the Democrats try to get out of Iraq by failing to give our troops the equipment they need to stay alive, it’s going to haunt our asses in 2008 and beyond.
As for the “echoes Republican talking points” meme, my response is “echoes Ralph Nader talking points.” I don’t see any difference.
At this point in time, and unless anything else changes (like Congress rescinding the authorization to go to war), than the purse strings are the only lever left to for Congress to get us out of Iraq.
Mr. Bush isn’t going to use his authority to redeploy. If cutting off the funding will result in the soldiers coming back sooner (and it will) then go for it!
There is already plenty of money left that was previously budgeted for this illegal occupation to cover the costs of supporting the soldiers while they pull out. Rejecting the requested ADDITIONAL funding of next years Iraq occupation budget early in the 110th Congress will give plenty of notice to Mr. Bush concerning the only option left to him with the money running out:
REDEPLOYMENT
How little faith we have in the power of Congress, in the ability of Democrats to hold the Bush Administration accountable–and this before the Democrats have even picked up a gavel.
Congress has several levers to get us out of Iraq, including (but not limited to) the ability to hold investagative hearings, the power to require the President to submit formal progress reports, the power to rescind the orignial resolution giving him the authority to go to war (which you raised in your point), passing laws about how often a soldier can be called up from the reserves, or how often an active soldier can be asked to enter a combat situation, etc. etc.
There are plenty of ways of getting the troops out of Iraq without opting for the politically suicidal act of cutting off funding for the troops.
Zenbowl, you seem to have overlooked which ass is holding down the White House throne at the moment. Your list of alternatives is fine and dandy, but the only power Congress has, given its craven approval of the Iraq invasion, is the power of the purse. Refusing to approve Bush’s $160 billion request would not suddenly cut off the troops. It would serve as notice that they have to get out of there before the current budget runs out.
I just hope the Dems don’t take your advice and pass toothless grandstanding “resolutions” that only showcase their own futility.
The power of the purse is one of many congressional powers. See my comment above in response to your belief in a “toothless” legislative branch.
This is actually quite simple, and I am surprised you are not bright enough to understand the difference. Kucinich criticizes the party from the left, while Obama admonishes the party from the right, reifying Republican talking points. Kucinich’s form of criticism aims to bring the Democratic party to the left, while Obama’s form of criticism drags it toward the empty center. I thought this was obvious.
Wow-
Thanks for the backhand.
But frankly, I’m surprised you’re not bright enough to think about the ramifications of a Kucinich. If you have a left-wing candidate with no charisma hammering the Party for being soft on Iraq withdrawal, it excuses anyone who wants to take a more centrist root, because it makes a more hardline position unattractive.
At the same time, you end up with a lot of far-left folks pissed off about the current Democratic nominee for not being Kucinich, possibly inspiring them to go vote Green or otherwise indirectly support the Republican party.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I think Kucinich has a definite right to voice his opinions, and to run for the nomination however he wants. I just happen to think he could make his points on Iraq without hammering the Democratic party. I think the same is true of Obama, and it pisses me off when he makes commentary that criticizes Democrats as well.
But maybe I’m not smart enough to understand Dennis Kucinich’s grand strategy.
It is bad enough that you are saying things that will keep the Overton Window firmly planted in the right wing hemisphere:
“As for the “echoes Republican talking points” meme, my response is “echoes Ralph Nader talking points.” I don’t see any difference.”
Way to marginalize the left there! And, also, there is nothing like blaming someone else for a problem that was created by the Denmocratic party. Naderites were nothing more than the symptom of the Democratic party disease of the time.
But you cross the line when you make personal attacks:
“But frankly, I’m surprised you’re not bright enough to think about the ramifications of a Kucinich.”
It is very rare that I am tempted to zero out a comment. I won’t. I will leave it unrated. But I won’t be surprised if others do zero yours out.
So you agree with Ralph Nader that Al Gore is a centrist who doesn’t care about the environment, and that he would have been no different than George W. Bush?
crickets
Yeah.
I’m not “marginalizing the left”, I’m trying to avoid just that. Echoing Nader’s opinion that the Democratic party has abandoned its left-wing principles reinforces the idea that Democrats are a feckless bunch of poll-watchers that only do what is politically expedient at the time. So, no, it’s not helpful.
That said, I stand by Kucinich’s right to say it and admit that it’s a debatable criticism of him. I simply want to point out that anyone who attacks Obama for his comments must then accept criticism of Kucinich for his.
As for the response about being “bright”, you’re absolutely right, I was retaliating and shouldn’t have done so.
was brought into the equation by the comment zenbowl is responding to. Responding in kind to personal attacks isn’t a great idea, but perhaps you might want to take the original offender to task before ripping on the respondant.
This is actually quite simple, and I am surprised you are not bright enough to understand the difference.
A simple question: What is it with the petrsonal attacks today? I agree with your point, but that is a personal attack. Do not be surprised if it is zeroed out.
i also think its because obama comes off as more of a threat (to manhood) than kucinch, so he will be attacked more.
I’d have probably voted for Kucinich in ’04 if I wasn’t a registered independent (I’m now a Dem).
I like him, despite his ever-changing position on choice. I especially love the Kucinich narrative, the way he stood up to the powerful interests of Cleveland — and won — despite it costing him his job as mayor.
He’s honest, which is really saying a lot these days.
Too bad he has the charisma of a bowl of oatmeal.
I agree. He has an authenticity to him that other potential candidates lack. And I’m sure he knows his candidacy is doomed, but feels that the issue of the war, and his party leadership’s stance on it, are too important not to run, if only to gain visibility for the issue.
It may be the “image” or the “charisma” thing that others have mentioned, but I don’t think Dennis has the capability to get a majority of people to take him seriously.
One reason I supported Dean, who was more conservative that Kucinich, was that he convinced me that he was capable of bringing some of his ideas to fruition. Partly it was his personality, but mainly it was the way he had achieved a lot in Vermont. He often adapted his tactics in order to achieve the goal. We see that still in his work with the DNC.
Kucinich has great ideas and great progressive values for the most part, but I haven’t seen him be able to advance them even incrementally. Maybe I need to do more research.
Nonetheless, I would seriously consider supporting him in the primary, just to keep progressive pressure on whoever eventually wins the nomination.
I was a Kucitizen in 04 and gladly will be again. Caucused for him in Kansas and got a delegate to the state out of our precinct!
I also spent way too much money helping him retire his debt – but got signed convention floor passes and a packet of Iowa corn out of the deal.
(and the leadership of our Kucinich group, along with some local Deaniacs, got along great and helped found Kansas Progressives, as a part of Progressive Democrats of America . Members of the group were involved in Boyda’s upset of Ryun up in District 2 🙂
I won’t be voting for him. I feel he lacks the charisma neccessary to win the presidency. Even though I often like what he’s saying, he leaves me limp, and if I can’t get excited about his canidacy even on those subjects I agree with him about, how can I expect him to appeal to all the voters who aren’t paying attention? I’m hoping for Gore, and I don’t expect him to announce any time soon. It would be silly of him to announce at this point when he’s getting much better press by being coy. He can afford to wait, and in the long run waiting will only help any campaign he might run.
but I wonder if you have ever heard him speak live. I saw him speak at the Democratic Caucus in Portland, ME last cycle and he brought the house down. Force of expression, clarity of thought, passion.
Still went with Dean, though.
im with you on both kucinich and gore.
Won’t be voting for him. He has a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the nomination. Besides, by the time primary time rolls around in either PA or NY, the nomination will already be locked up by one of the more serious contenders.
I remember writing a post on the AOL political boards during the elections that summed up many of the bush and cheney “sales pitches” for the Iraq invasion. The basic theme of it all and the final question I asked the readers/posters:
“Would you buy a used car from bush or cheney?”
I forget exactly what legislation was being pushed that I was mocking but it was another of those “unread bills/laws/whatevers” that was being pushed through without the oversight of “kicking the tires and taking it for a drive” in a Patriot Act kindof way. It elicited the exact kind of reaction I had hoped for. Steven D hit the nail on the head when he wrote this:
I wouldn’t. You would have to be a fool to buy this war from the bush mis-administration and the ever-incompetent GOP. This Iraq occupation makes a “skateboard with a Lada engine” look like a good deal in comparison. And there is no “Lemon Law” for used wars.
Don’t buy it.
I have no patience for centrist back peddlers , those who associate with the powers that be; that work against the peoples best interests. You can count on Dennis Kucinich to do what’s best for the American people. I’m so grateful that he has the courage to speak the truth and hold out his vision of Peace as part of a viable American future. I’m with Dennis all the way.
Kucinich has been laying out his ideals for the future for a while. He walks the walk talks the talk and has a bill for paper ballot, the fact the Kucinich is the least wealthy guy in congress shows his intentions are honorable.
Will he get the nomination? Doubtful, considering who still runs and who funds the Democratic Party. Also, if the media doesn’t flat out ignore him, they’ll start a chain-joking about his vegetarianism.
I find that there are many misconceptions about him and often times attempts to discredit him by others with incorrect information. It helps to correct people when they don’t know, an old habit from the last round of Presidential elections. But he also has learned from the last campaign, and hopefully this time will be different. Kucinich will definitely do better than he did in 2004 because he set up a nice netroots campaign last time that will get him out of the gate faster. He took almost 20% of the vote in Minnesota’s Caucus. There are people who want to hear the man speak. And his message is good!
He brought up a lot of issues in 2004 that no one else did. He adds a lot to the field even if his chances politically are not so good.