select medium:

search for:

Advanced Search


set preferences and edit your own posts

announce events
add to the radicalendar

info library
how to use this site
contact info
mailing lists
mission statement
supporting the imc

Media Centers

south africa

thunder bay

euskal herria
united kingdom

latin america


south asia

united states
central florida
danbury, ct
minneapolis/st. paul
new jersey
new mexico
north carolina
ny capital
rocky mountain
san diego
san francisco bay area
santa cruz, ca
st louis
tallahassee-red hills
western mass

west asia

fbi/legal updates
indymedia faq
mailing lists
process & imc docs

satellite tv

This site made manifest by dadaIMC software
Kansas City IMC    Help us take back the media! Next kcindymedia meeting: Tuesday August 12, 7 PM, Crave Cafe
home | features | newswire | media gallery | the otherpress | picturebooks | calendar | links | info |
link to the other press | post an article | upload media |
Add a new Article | Comment on this article | View comments | Email this Article | Printable version |
Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Which one is the progressive? A comparasion of the two policies.

Dennis Kucinich VS. Howard Dean

Who is the Progressive Candidate?

And who is the pretender?


Dennis Kucinich

Howard Dean

Stance on Iraq

Continues to challenge the Bush’s policy, Led campaign to investigate Bush’s deceptions.

Is downplaying previous anti-war stance, supports occupation.


Death Penalty

Opposes in all cases

Said should have death penalty to kill prisoners before they are “released on a technicality.” That is opposing due process!

Military Budget

“I plan to make a major issue of hometown security -- healthcare, jobs and education for all -- and misspent Pentagon dollars, even as other Democratic candidates join President Bush in pressing for still more exorbitant military budgets.”

"I don't agree with Dennis about cutting the Pentagon budget”

Universal Health Care

Calls for “a universal, single-payer system of national health insurance.”

Derides any universal plan as “pie in the sky.” Tried to deeply cut Medicaid in his own state.


Adopts Dr. Martin Luther King’s platform of guaranteed employment for all.

Dean said some welfare recipients "don't have any self-esteem. If they did, they'd be working" and scaled back Vermont's welfare program, reducing cash benefits and imposing strict time limits on single mothers receiving welfare assistance.” Quoted from Nation Magazine


“I called for our nation to join with the world community in solving the challenge of global climate change, and work to reduce carbon emissions, greenhouse gases. America must lead the way toward sustainability and renewable energies. As the first step, I joined with Mayor Jerry Brown proposing an $50 billion solar initiative in cooperation with Mikhail Gorbachev's Global Green.”

"Dean's attempts to run for president as an environmentalist is nothing but a fraud. He's destroyed the Agency of Natural Resources, he's refused to meet with environmentalists while constantly meeting with the development community, and he's made the permitting process one, big dysfunctional joke." Annette Smith, the director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment

Social Security

Calls for it to be strengthened and expanded

Calls for it to be reduced and the retirement age raised

























Dennis Kucinich is the co-chair of the progressive caucus who has always stood by the progressive issues of working class America. His stand against the war on Iraq was not - like Dean - an opportunist deviation from centrist policies but a continuation of his progressive activism since he first ran for city council at 23 years old (and won).

To find out more a candidate standing up to Bush’s polices:



See also:

Add a quick comment

Your name
Your email Validate email (Strongly encouraged)


Text Format
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Howard Dean wants to get elected. Dennis Kucinich does not.

Electoral politics is no place for ideology or purity. Kucinich is boring and unconvincing, politics aside. Remember, he has to get a majority of the popular vote, otherwise all the virtue in the world is inconsequential.

Dean is your only chance, forget about Kucinich or Sharpton. It would be best that they dropped out immediately and endorsed Dean, but of course that won't happen. The left should leave politics to the pragmatists(that is of course before the revolution), because it only seems to know how to fuck things up.


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
In response to the response:

Dean is our only chance for what? A continuation of business as usual with a democrat tag? Pardon me but fascism is still fascism. What makes you think Kucinich doesn't want to be elected?

"Electoral politics is no place for ideology or purity. Kucinich is boring and unconvincing, politics aside. Remember, he has to get a majority of the popular vote, otherwise all the virtue in the world is inconsequential."

What? What makes you think the popular vote has any bearing on the outcome of the "election"? Have some principals and stand up for what you believe in. If the "right" can get a fucking nazi like bush elected then the left ought to be able to get someone just as extreme elected.... or maybe the system is broken and we need a radical re-organization of the system based on egalitarian means of fufilling our needs and wants. The truth is you don't want to change anything, your a spineless liberal reformist to the point of rendering yourself politically, economically and socially impotent-and encouraging others to follow your lead. The so called democrats/left havent had the guts to make a strong stand in this country becuase they don't want to offend the majority of people and not win the popular vote... maybe there is a problem if this is the truth. I think that if we have to hide our motives and true beliefs from the majority of folks in the US then something else needs to be done. I think probably the real reason this is never embarked upon by the "left" is because there is no true distinction between our ONE PARTY SYSTEM masquerading as a two party system and both "sides" actually have same agenda and cater to the same ruling class that exploits the majority of people in the world. The majority of people in this country don't vote because no one represents their views, or when someone claims to and is then elected they carry on business as usual rather than do as they promised.
I bet very few people would come out to vote for Dean or Kucinich. Most people in this country are too busy living in poverty to worry about petty things like symbolic voting; The middle class experience is not the majority experience. I advocate nothing short of a revolutionary re-organization of society based on egalitarianism, free association of free independent people and mutual aid. Any thing less is insulting to humanity at best. You should use your name when you make comments in order that you can be be held accountable for what is said.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Thank you for posting this chart. The information clearly illustrates the glaring differences between Kucinich and Dean.

(interesting discussion here).

- Kucinich 2004 -

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Do the Kucinich supporters want to get together and start talking? I've had a problem with the manner in which the 'official' left in KC seems to be rallying behind Dean, totally ignoring things such as his stance on the death penalty or the influence of AIPAC upon him. It seems like some people got together and decided we'd all support Dean and, as this discussion has demonstrated, we do not all support him.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
I'm for getting together, let me know. You can reach me kc direct action message board or my e-mail.

News: Elections & Legislation
Click on image for a larger version
Does a Kucinich group currently exist in KC? Good idea.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
I'm also interested in getting a group active on the campaign here in Kansas City also. Those interested can email me at the above e-mail address. -


Commentary: Elections & Legislation

I think you missed my point. Let me try again.

Ideology is all fine and well, but in politics it just really isn't that effective.

If you want to make real change, devote your energy elsewhere (besides an empty hope such as Kucinich) and stop voting for chrissake.

But to pretend that Kucinich is electable is an over zealous delusion.

On the other hand, you are right, the system is broken. In fact, it has never worked. it was broken from teh day it was born. So we either muster the courage to try to change it, or work within it as much as we can stomach. But I refuse to be deluded.

Dean is electable. I grant that he is not perfect, but understand a lot of his posturing lately is political and may not reflect his own beliefs...this remains to be seen. Either way, it does not make him "fascist". This is just a convenient label you use to disparage anyone whom you don't like, and I might add that is a cheap trick as well.

Finally, you have the sophomoric tendency to parrot leftist propaganda (half your email I've read in some form 100 times before), and in that same vein, spew insults to all those who have a different opinion. Let me say that this tactic more resembles fascism and autocracy than it does the true left.

As for your judgements of me, you know nothing. you are just randomly firing empty assumptions, which I might add, are all wrong. And the reason I don't use my full name has less to do with you than it does with my own sense of security. By the way, "Jeremy" isn't your full name either, so what does it matter? How are you accountable? There are thousands of Jeremy's. On the other hand, anonymity is worth something, especially on a server like this. I'm not stupid, and I know better.

If you want to engage in substantial discussion, tone down the self-righteous rhetoric, stop with the frivalous insults, and let's be honest for once.


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
What organizations do you associate with which lead you to believe that you represent the "true left"?

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
"If you want to make real change, devote your energy elsewhere (besides an empty hope such as Kucinich) and stop voting for chrissake."

Since you are on such a left high horse, you might be directed to Lenin's Left Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder. There is an excellent basis of fighting to publicize issues of concern within the electoral process and in the form of coalitions while simultaneously participating in revolutionary activity.

The fact remains: Dean is more than slightly influenced by AIPAC. Dean does not represent what we should be fighting for. At least not at this point, while the primaries still have not taken place. That sort of argument needs to be made AFTER the primaries and then only if Dean has in fact won. While we have the chance to have someone like Kucinich, who more closely resembles what one might speak of as a 'left' position participating in the primaries and debates, we should do our best to support him.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
to Roberto; an organization does not represent me, and an organization does not represent the left. By the way, I never claimed to be the "real left" anyway.

Someone got it right earlier, the system is broken. A 2-party, majority-take-all machine is a disaster. If the machine is broken, anything that goes through it will be fucked up. Kucinich maybe be great, but he has no chance.

That's all I'm saying. Dean may be worse, but if you're going to vote at all, then do it intelligently. That said, I'm not voting for either one of them. I'm not going to lend myself to this democracy's legitimacy.


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
As strong as your opinions ring mpg, it certainly seems disingenuous that you will not be voting.

I wonder: Just why exactly would someone encourage non-voting?

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
fey, when it can do some good, voting may be worth considering, but once you start participating in a cruel and corrupt system, you lend it legitimacy.

When the Chicago 8 were arrested in '68 they had a chance to fight the case on its merits and probably win. But instead they chose to totally non-comply, and in doing so, they showed what a true sham the court was.


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
"But to pretend that Kucinich is electable is an over zealous delusion."

Never said he was.

"Dean is electable. I grant that he is not perfect, but understand a lot of his posturing lately is political and may not reflect his own beliefs...this remains to be seen. Either way, it does not make him "fascist". This is just a convenient label you use to disparage anyone whom you don't like, and I might add that is a cheap trick as well."

He is fascist and caters to fascist ideological tenets running through our current system. It's not a convenient label; It's very serious and not used as a cheep trick!!?? How do you know that I use this as tactic to disparage those I disagree with? Do you presuppose to know me as an individual? Have you heard me speak before? Oh, that’s right, later in your writing you claim that I have e-mailed you before, although, truth be told, I’ve only had the email you associate my name with on this message board for a couple of weeks now.

"Finally, you have the sophomoric tendency to parrot leftist propaganda (half your email I've read in some form 100 times before), and in that same vein, spew insults to all those who have a different opinion. Let me say that this tactic more resembles fascism and autocracy than it does the true left."

I don't believe I've ever e-mailed you before in my life. My e-mail is vladamir (at) s-mail.com and I invite you to cut and paste an e-mail I've sent you to this message board if you still have a copy; Not only do I doubt I've ever e-mailed you I've only had this e-mail address a couple of weeks. I've never e-mailed anyone about someone I've disagreed with, let alone spewed insults directed at an individual. Sorry but once again it seems that you presuppose to know me or have had communication with me in the past. I don't know you and would not have had the opportunity to e-mail someone I don't know. Not only that but later in your writing you claim that I don't know you which indicates that it would be impossible for you to even know if I am the same "Jeremy" whom you claim "... have the sophomoric tendency to parrot leftist propaganda (half your email I've read in some form 100 times before), and in that same vein, spew insults to all those who have a different opinion.” It would necessitate that you know me in order for you to make this assertion; you would have to be able to associate my previous email address with me personally and then know that I have changed it in the last few weeks.
But if you don't know me...

"As for your judgements of me, you know nothing. you are just randomly firing empty assumptions, which I might add, are all wrong."

All apologies, attacking the person is wrong. I get upset occasionally and reply in a fallacious manner. I find it strange that that here you claim I don't know you when earlier you made comments that would only have validity if you did.

"If you want to engage in substantial discussion, tone down the self-righteous rhetoric, stop with the frivalous insults, and let's be honest for once."

Won't attack you in the future, I suggest you follow your own advice and would aslo add that to lie about someone is wrong. From here on out I would be more than happy to stick to the issue.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
A clarification; when I typed "email" I meant your post here on this site. It was just a careless mistake of words; Sorry, I never meant to intimate that I had email contact with you...

Anyway, I look forward to further topical discussions/debates on the issues as well.


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
"Finally, you have the sophomoric tendency to parrot leftist propaganda (half your email I've read in some form 100 times before), and in that same vein, spew insults to all those who have a different opinion. Let me say that this tactic more resembles fascism and autocracy than it does the true left."

"A clarification; when I typed "email" I meant your post here on this site. It was just a careless mistake of words; Sorry, I never meant to intimate that I had email contact with you..."

If you substitute "POST" with "E-MAIL" in your first qoute I have listed above your personal attack still holds no water because that was my first post to KCINDY MEDIA; Never done it before. It would be hard for me to "parrot the left" and "spew insults to those who have a different opinion" in light of this GLARING FACT. And that you would try to avert apologizing for outright lying is insulting at best. You made the mistake of assuming that I had posted here previously and that your gramatic contextual error would be suffeciently seen as such against the backdrop of this assumed "fact". This way I still do the things you accuse me of, you were just "mistaken" in some wording, while at the same time trying to make it appear as though you gave some consession which supports that you were telling the truth and are a reasonable person. I see through it and will call you on it. I don't like being lied to, lied about or people assuming that others are not perceptive to motives and psychological games.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Jesus Christ, please look at your first post. Note that it is above my post calling you a parrot. When I said, "...parrot leftist propaganda (half your email [post] I've read in some form 100 times before)", this does not mean I've read it from you before, but simply that you are "parroting leftist propaganda." This means you are repeating things that other people have said, time and again. A parrot doesn't learn words from himself.

I'm making honest criticisms, and instead of dealing with them, you are going off on some tangent and trying to discredit the criticism by saying I am lying. For a group that supposedly values tolerance, why can't the left stand to be criticized? Jeremy, your wounded pride is spinning you in circles of delirium, and it's keeping you from seeing people and things as they really are...


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
mpg says:

'Dean is your only chance, forget about Kucinich or Sharpton...."

"Dean is YOUR only chance, ..."
A rather revealing statement.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
as in, Dean is the only one who stands a chance at being elected...

I have choices of my own, but they aren't even running...so they have about as much chance at getting elected as kucinich and sharpton...


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
what makes you so sure Kucinich has no chance? he received 23% of the Moveon primary, more than Kerry, Gephart and Lieberman combined. Also, he mobalizes a lot of people (blue collar workers, disaffected greens) who otherwise would not be part of the decision at all.

I agree that whatever candidate we throw at Bush has a long shot at winning. But, what is the point of backing a smarter, gay-friendly http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16268">version of Bush?? might as well do nothing. As for Kucinich being an ideologue, maybe he comes off that way now, but watch him race to the center after primaries. He is a serious candidate who CAN win, if only we give him the chance.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
I believe what you've said is the case after re-reading your comment in the context you provided. It reads differently when you have in mind "e-mail". It wasn't my ego, I just don't like being lied to; especialy to my face- recently had a roommate that would do that as if he was playing the Jedi mind trick and I would gladly just repeat what he said and move on. I'm perhaps a little sensitive to percieved deception. I'm not "the left" and don't mind criticism, I will concede when wrong or mistaken. Sorry.

Now on to what's important (or is it?), I think the Democrats have good chance at winning if they play it right, I mean, not much is going to change either way so what does our electoral college care. As long as the Dems cater to business and other financial backers they can pass all the empty enviromental laws they want and probably still have enough time to throw around other menial issues and debates in order that the public, disgruntled with the "right", will fell as though things have changed. Ah democracy. I do agree with sara, folks should at least give the person they most agree with a chance. It matters not that dean may be more of a pragmatist than kucinich, they have people to mold their image and take care of that sort of thing; remember what an blubering idiot bush was, now he almost has a command of the english language. Anyway.....

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Article sara was directing others to, the link wouldnt work so I cut a paste the story.

SOLOMON: Tilting Democrats in the Presidential Race

By Norman Solomon, AlterNet
June 26, 2003

The corporate Democrats who greased Bill Clinton's path to the White House are now a bit worried. Their influence on the party's presidential nomination process has slipped. But the Democratic Leadership Council can count on plenty of assistance from mainstream news media.

For several years leading up to 1992, the DLC curried favor with high-profile political journalists as they repeated the mantra that the Democratic Party needed to be centrist. Co-founded by Clinton in the mid-1980s, the DLC emphasized catering to "middle class" Americans – while the organization filled its coffers with funding from such non-middle-class bastions as the top echelons of corporate outfits like Arco, Prudential-Bache, Dow Chemical, Georgia Pacific and Martin Marietta.

In a 1992 book, "Who Will Tell the People," political analyst William Greider noted that the Democratic Leadership Council's main objective was "an attack on the Democratic Party's core constituencies – labor, schoolteachers, women's rights groups, peace and disarmament activists, the racial minorities and supporters of affirmative action." During the eight years that followed, President Clinton "moderately" shafted many of those constituencies.

Clinton proved to be a political survivor. But his presidency led to the destruction of Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate.

Now, the Los Angeles Times reported in late June, "the centrist 'New Democrat' movement is struggling to maintain its influence in the party as the 2004 presidential race accelerates." DLC stalwart Sen. Joe Lieberman is getting nowhere. Other DLC-friendly candidates, such as Sens. John Kerry and John Edwards, are hardly catching fire.

A recent memo by a pair of DLC honchos, Al From and Bruce Reed, linked the party's progressive-leaning activists with "elitist, interest-group liberalism." The salvo is laughable. It would be difficult to find any organization of Democrats more deserving of the "elitist, interest-group" tag than the DLC, which has long been funded by oil, chemical, insurance and military-contracting corporations – and has served their interests.

One of the key "New Democrats" is DLC favorite John Breaux, a senator from Louisiana who distinguished himself by trying to protect deregulation measures approved in early June by the Federal Communications Commission. Breaux unsuccessfully proposed amendments to help TV networks to further consolidate media ownership. His efforts were even too flagrantly corporate for many Republicans on the Senate Commerce Committee.

Despite its setbacks, the Democratic Leadership Council need not despair. Most of the nation's political journalists, including pro-Democrat pundits, insist that the party should not nominate someone too far "left" – which usually means anybody who's appreciably more progressive than the DLC. That bias helps to account for the frequent mislabeling of Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor who has risen to the top tier of contenders for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination.

After seven years as governor, the Associated Press described Dean as "a moderate at best on social issues and a clear conservative on fiscal issues." The news service added: "This is, after all, the governor who has at times tried to cut benefits for the aged, blind and disabled, whose No. 1 priority is a balanced budget."

When Dean officially announced his presidential campaign on June 23, some news stories identified him with the left. It's a case of mistaken identity. "He's really a classic Rockefeller Republican – a fiscal conservative and social liberal," according to University of Vermont political scientist Garrison Nelson.

As a fiscal conservative, Dean is aligned with the status quo of extreme inequities. That alignment was on display during a pair of June 22 appearances.

In an interview on NBC's "Meet the Press," Dean delivered a one-two punch against economic justice. He advocated raising the retirement age for Social Security, and he called for slowing down the rate of increases for Medicare spending.

Later in the day, at a Rainbow/PUSH Coalition forum, Dean went out of his way to emphasize support for out-of-control military spending after a rival candidate, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, said that "the only way we're really going to close the (digital) divide in this country is to start cutting the Pentagon budget and put that money into education." Dean's response: "I don't agree with Dennis about cutting the Pentagon budget when we're in the middle of a difficulty with terror attacks."

The next day, at his official campaign kickoff, Dean gave a 26-minute speech and didn't mention Iraq at all. It was a remarkable performance from someone who has spent much of the last year pitching himself as some kind of anti-war candidate.

Dean is already sending a message to his announced supporters among peace and social-justice advocates: Thanks, suckers.

Usually, major-party candidates wait until they have a lock on the presidential nomination before diving to the center. Eager to avoid being hammered by the national press corps for supposed liberalism, Dean hasn't bothered to wait.

Norman Solomon is co-author of "Target Iraq: What the News Media Didn't Tell You."

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
aggh, silly html. here is that link again:

Jeremy, omg you can't be this dense. read your post (#2 from the top), then read his reply (#8 from the top). He almost addresses it point by point!

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
that works too, thanx :]

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Dean, the former Vermont governor and a physician, was peppered with questions that drew on his medical background. He succinctly spelled out plans for removing lead-based paint from homes and schools and spoke of his support for genetically modified crops.- excerpt from: "Democratic presidential hopefuls push environmental issues in Los Angeles" an article found at- http://www.envirolink.org

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Jeeezus, I am that dense sometimes! It happens, what are you going to do? I'm a gonna go smoke tobbacco now, that'll take care of it.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Yah, Dean is looking worse and worse. I was wrong to lump him in with Kucinich and Sharpton. He belongs with the Lieberman/Edwards crowd. Thanks for the link guys.

God presidential elections are so depressing...


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
I have an idea vis. elections. Perhaps we could start a boycott/strike against voting? ie. until the system is fixed (if ever) we refuse absolutely to be part of it; and make it public...

Already half the registered voters don't vote in pres. elections, so it would have a lot of potential support.
Also, the public effect would be much more prononced than playing along with a 2% nader or whatever kucinich gets...that only lends our support to the system...

on the other hand, rejecting it wholescale sends the message that voting, even if the ballots are assembled and counted right, is bullshit and fraud...

well, an idea anyway, for what it's worth...


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
There has been talk of this sort of thing in KC, I was asked a couple of days ago if I would like to be a part. Hmmm....could be fun, but would also be counter productive to effecting real change in my city. If it were possible to link with the majority of americans to go on a highly publicized vote strike it could really be good. We would have to launch a mixed media campain with fury, cool and skill that would make everyone want to get up and join the party. What would we advocate in place of the current system? -It would be an important part of it. What are the things that really hit home across the class, race and gender divide besides the understanding that something is terribly wrong? It would have to be incredibly hip and at the same time substantial in content. Vote none of the above. What about the pragmatist/liberal/democrat/progressive/libertarian/other party/apolitical/appathetic folks? How would you get them to put aside their determination and work they've already put in to a candidate/party/thier appathy. Might see this sort of thing as immature, childish, frivolous, fruitless etc. There I go, dreaming of the satirical fun to be had while those with less privledge would just like to eat or avoid getting hit with a stick by those authortarian storm troopers we call our "law enforcement".

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
An election boycott: quite possibly the most ridiculous idea I have yet to see on this website. Your biggest potential supporters: the right. They don't want you to vote. While anyone running against them is not going to consistently represent our ideals, why let them have everything? Is it so beneath you to vote while participating in consciousness raising in terms of future revolutionary activity?

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
"election boycott: quite possibly the most ridiculous idea I have yet to see on this website. Your biggest potential supporters: the right. They don't want you to vote. While anyone running against them is not going to consistently represent our ideals, why let them have everything? Is it so beneath you to vote while participating in consciousness raising in terms of future revolutionary activity?"

Agreed. More important projects to be undertaken when at the same time we could be voting for a little reform that might make common further goals more within reach. Like I said earlier, "....could be fun, but would also be counter productive to effecting real change in my city." and "There I go, dreaming of the satirical fun to be had while those with less privledge would just like to eat or avoid getting hit with a stick by those authortarian storm troopers we call our "law enforcement". "..... Anyway there are more pressing things going on such as disposing of Bush and working towards a society in which we would like to live.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
In that spirit here is the Kucinich presidential platform:

Dennis Kucinich: The Progressive Vision
view pdf

It’s time for America to resume its glorious journey. Time to reject shrinking jobs and wages, disappearing savings and rights. Time to reject the detour towards fear and greed. Time to look out upon the world for friends, not enemies. Time to counter the control of corporations over our politics, our economy, our resources, and mass media. Time for those who have much to help those who have little by maintaining a progressive tax structure. Time to tell the world that we wish to be their partner in peace, not their leader in war. Most of all, it is time for America to again be the land where dreams come true because the government is on the side of its people.

Unfortunately, America now leads the world in categories we should not be proud of. America is now the world’s leading jailer with an incarceration rate higher than China. We lead the industrialized world in poverty and in the growing gap between rich and poor. And we are the only industrial nation not to provide national health care.

This is what a Kucinich administration would work to deliver for America:

[1] Universal Health Care with a Single Payer Plan
Over 40 million Americans have no health care and 30 million more have only minimal coverage. Those with coverage often pay exorbitant amounts. The current profit-driven system, dominated by private insurance firms and their bureaucracies, has failed.

A Kucinich administration would establish streamlined national health insurance, Medicare for All. It would be publicly-financed health care, privately delivered. It would provide affordable prescription drugs, thanks to bulk purchasing. The General Accounting Office of Congress has concluded:

"If the U.S. were to shift to a system of universal coverage and a single payer, as in Canada, the savings in administrative costs would be more than enough to offset the cost."

[2] Full Social Security Benefits at Age 65
Social security is the basic covenant our society has with workers who have built our economy. At a time when CEOs earn 240 times the pay of the average worker, it is unconscionable not to return full retirement benefits to age 65.

A Kucinich administration would make that possible through a progressive tax structure and reordered national priorities. Social Security must not be privatized. Retirement years cannot be dependent on the rise and fall of the stock market.

[3] Withdrawal from NAFTA and WTO
The global trade regime of NAFTA and WTO has enriched multinational corporations. But for workers, family farmers, and the environment, it has meant a global race to the bottom. Companies leave the U.S. in search of low wages, low commodity prices, anti-union climates, and lax environmental laws. NAFTA has been used to whipsaw workers at the negotiation table, forcing wages and benefit concessions under threat of moving jobs overseas. Trade treaties must be conditioned on workers’ rights, human rights, and environmental principles.

Among the first actions of a Kucinich Administration will be withdrawal from NAFTA and the WTO—to be replaced by fair trade agreements.

[4] Repeal of the "Patriot Act"
The "Patriot Act" is not what American patriots have fought and died for. To allow our Bill of Rights to be nullified without judicial supervision invites tyranny. The Attorney General has been handed unfettered power to wiretap, search, jail, and invade our most sacred right to privacy. The government must not be allowed, without probable cause or warrant, to snoop on our communications, medical records, library records, and student records.

[5] Right-to-Choose, Privacy, and Civil Rights
In a Kucinich administration, a woman’s right-to-choose will be protected as essential to personal privacy and gender equality. Only those who agree to uphold Roe v. Wade will be nominated for the Supreme Court. Civil rights (and voting rights) enforcement will be intensified. Lesbians and gays will be afforded complete equality throughout society. Affirmative action will be maintained as a tool for racial and gender equality. Drug policy will emphasize treatment over criminalization, and not a rampaging war that erodes Constitutional freedoms, privacy, and law enforcement resources. An end to capital punishment will be sought.

[6] Balance Between Workers and Corporations
American workers are working longer and harder for less pay than 20 years ago. What’s needed is a resurgence of organized labor, and a Kucinich administration will tenaciously defend the rights of workers to organize and bargain collectively. Since the purchasing power of the minimum wage has dropped 21% in two decades, it’s time for living wages, not minimum wages. And it’s time to reverse tax cuts that benefit the already well-to-do, and retain an estate tax. Investing $500 billion to rebuild schools, roads, bridges, ports, and sewage, water and environmental systems will do more to stimulate our economy than tax breaks for the wealthy.
[7] Guaranteed Quality Education, Pre-K through College
Since education is the only proven way to reduce poverty, it is unacceptable that a child’s education be dependent on where they are born or the financial status of their family. The federal government spends only 2.9% of its budget on education. That will change under a Kucinich administration, because quality education is a core American right and value.

Education must emphasize creative and critical thinking, not just test-taking. Schools need money to decrease class size, increase teachers’ salaries, renovate decaying facilities, and include hands-on job training for those not going to college. Pre-K and after-school programs will get increased funding, and the soaring costs of college will be reversed.

[8] A Renewed Commitment to Peace and Diplomacy
America will return to its role as the most admired—not hated—nation. The doctrine of "pre-emption" will be retired, as will an aggressive, unilateralist foreign policy that makes our homeland less secure, not more. Our security will be enhanced by working with other nations and the U.N. instead of acting like an Empire, arrogantly undermining international agreements such as the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the Biological and Chemical Weapons Conventions, the Small Arms Treaty, the International Criminal Court, and the Kyoto Climate Treaty. As President, Kucinich will work to implement two measures he sponsored in Congress: the Space Preservation Treaty, which bans space-based weapons, and a cabinet-level Department of Peace, to establish non-violence as an organizing principle in both domestic and international affairs.

A Kucinich administration will cut bloated and unneeded weaponry from a military budget that now almost equals the military spending of all other countries combined. The Kucinich peace dividend will be invested in education, health care, environmental clean-up, urban infrastructure, Social Security, veterans’ benefits, and other pressing domestic needs.

[9] Restored Rural Communities and Family Farms
Agriculture, trade, and economic policies that favor agribusiness conglomerates have devastated family farmers, rural communities, and the environment. While the number of family farmers has plummeted, profits have soared for a handful of agribusiness giants that increas-ingly control everything from seed to shelf.

A Kucinich administration will break up agricultural monopolies and restore a strong, independent family farm system with fair prices for farmers and healthy food for consumers. A Kucinich Administration will monitor and reduce contamination of our air, water, and food from factory farms, with strong USDA enforcement of tough new food safety laws.

[10] Environmental Renewal and Clean Energy
Clean air and water, as well as an intact ozone layer, are not luxuries, but necessities for our children’s future.

A Kucinich administration will toughen environmental enforcement, support the Kyoto Treaty on global climate change, reduce oil dependence, and spur investment in alternative energy sources, including hydrogen, solar, wind, and ocean. Clean energy technologies will produce new jobs. Tax and other incentives will favor sustainable businesses that conserve energy, retrofit pollution prevention technologies, and redesign toxins out of their manufacturing processes. The right to know (for example, when food is genetically engineered) will supercede corporate secrecy. Globally, the U.S. will become a leader in sustainable energy production and a partner with developing nations in providing inexpensive, local, renewable energy technologies.

Who is Dennis Kucinich?

Congressman Kucinich of Ohio is a modern "Profile in Courage." In the late 1970s, as the youngest mayor ever of a major city, Dennis bravely said "NO" to an Enron-like takeover of Cleveland’s city-owned power company, Muny Light. In retaliation, major banks—which were interlocked with the private utility that would have become a monopoly by seizing Muny—drove the city into default. Dennis’s political career was derailed ... until 15 years later, when he was vindicated for resisting a corporate power grab and saving Cleveland residents hundreds of millions of dollars on their electric bills. In five consecutive winning elections since 1994, his campaign symbol has been a light bulb.

Elected to Congress in 1996, Dennis has continued to wage courageous battles for workers, consumers, the environment, and civil rights. He is the only presidential candidate who voted against the civil libertiesshredding "Patriot Act." He rallied opposition to the illegal and destabilizing Iraq war—from a small group of Congressional dissenters to the nearly 2/3 of House Democrats who ultimately voted against the war resolution. He co-chairs the Progressive Caucus, the largest caucus of Democrats in Congress. Dennis Kucinich is a heartland politician who can win elections. When he became mayor, state senator, and then Congress member, he defeated a Republican incumbent each time. In 2004, he hopes to defeat another one: George W. Bush.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Sometimes the ridiculous ideas are the ones that work, partly because the outrage attracts attention.

Whether it would be effective is open to consideration, but I don't really see how it could be counterproductive. It is essentially the same thing as voting for a Nader or a Kucinich (ie. no real chance for a victory) but it makes a louder and more profound impression. That's why I think these people would be the most eager to join such a movement.

Another idea in the same vein would to nominate a candidate who has legally changed his name to "No", "None of these", or "None of the Above", etc. Getting on the ballot wouldn't be so difficult, and it would get a hell of a lot of press. Hell, people would select that option because it is the most reflective of their mind, and it's a novelty.

What we want in place of the system is fairly clear, I would think. Get the $$ out of politics, make federal election day a national holiday, eliminate the electoral college, and eliminate the majority-take-all system. It's asking a lot, but a lot is at stake, and there is much wrong with this system.

To Jeremy, yah the more people we get, the better, but even if we get a couple million who stand up and refuse to vote, that will make a large splash. A majority would be nice of course, but that's probably asking too much, even though we already have a "silent majority", ie. those who don't vote anyway. If such a group gained national attention, it would also make glaringly obvious these 50% of registered voters who don't vote in presidential elections (~ 65% in congressional off year elections).

Publicity we will need, but news media loves a shocking story (unless they conspire to just ignore us, which is a possibility). And we're young, we've got energy :)

I think it could work.


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Sorry mpg, I am not buying what you are selling.

I agree with Anthony that a voting boycott is the MOST ludicrous idea ever to grace this board.

On one side of the mouth, mpg states that the far left "only knows how to fuck things up" and that "YOUR only chance is Dean". In another thread (Protest the Dole Institute) mpg essentially states that all protesters are ineffectial clowns, and announces his own dubious and questionable intentions.

Now he is encouraging a voting boycott from the left?
Were we born yesterday?

Please carefully read mpg's entire posting history here before granting him any credibility.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
God, this is ludicrous.

All my comments are consistent if you assess them for honesty.

But you are not interested in honesty!

Everyone is a fucking undercover cop. I stand by my statement, it seems the only thing the left knows how to do is fuck things up. Even if I were a cop, you wouldn't need me anyway, because everyone you see is a cop!!!!!!!

fey you and people like you justify the self hate on the left and my misanthropy.

fucking insane bullshit.


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
As for consistency, let me summarize what I've written;

1. Protesting (ie chanting and holding signs) is generally ineffectual. Therefore, one should be willing to invest more of oneself or stop pretending.

2. Voting is what is ridiculous.. If you are going to pretend that it actually accomplishes something, then at least select a candidate that has a chance at being elected (ie. Dean). But you prefer double delusion, not only that voting is a real means of progress, but that your candidate (kucinich) has any chance at being elected (which he does not. but history will prove me right, you can just hope).

3. In that light, it makes more sense to boycott voting than to participate. I see nothing more duplicitous than saying on the one hand that this electoral system is corrupt and broken, and on the other hand, insisting on being a part of it!! Not only is that absurd, as you accomplish nothing, but you are just lending legitimacy to the system.


Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Published on Friday, July 11, 2003 by the Cleveland Plain Dealer
Nader Urging Democrats to Back Kucinich in '04 Primaries
by Tom Diemer

WASHINGTON - Consumer activist Ralph Nader, still undecided about running again as a third-party candidate, said yesterday that he is urging Democrats to vote for Rep. Dennis Kucinich in the presidential primaries next year.

Nader, stopping short of an endorsement of the long-shot Democrat, said he will decide before the end of the year whether to run again for president.

Excepting Cleveland's Kucinich, and at times former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, he faulted the Democratic field for not attacking President Bush with gusto on the Iraqi war and corporate scandals, such as the Enron bankruptcy. Unlike some of his rivals, Kucinich "says publicly what he believes privately," Nader said at a breakfast meeting with reporters. "At this point, I am urging Democrats to vote for him in the primary."

Nader, who attracted nearly 3 million votes as the liberal Green candidate in 2000, said "there would be less reason" for him to declare his candidacy if Kucinich captured the Democratic nomination. But he said he could not wait for voters to sort out the nine Democratic candidates next year before making a decision.

"The congressman and Ralph have been friends for over 30 years," said Kucinich spokesman Doug Gordon. "He appreciates the nice words. From the beginning, he has said his campaign is about bringing people who feel alienated or left out of the Democratic Party back into the party."

Nader still gets the cold shoulder from many Democrats who blame him for siphoning liberal votes from Al Gore in the close 2000 contest against Bush. But he said Kucinich and Sens. John Edwards of North Carolina and John Kerry of Massachusetts have sought his support in the developing 2004 race.

Asked how President Nader would have handled the Sept. 11 attacks, Nader said he would not have put the nation on a war footing but would have pursued the terrorist masterminds with commando units.

Nader said he thought Bush could be subject to impeachment for exaggerating the threat posed by Iraq, asserting a connection with the al-Qaida terrorist organization and claiming that Saddam Hussein ordered his army to use chemical or biological weapons against American troops.

© 2003 The Plain Dealer


This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
I think that a quick study of the facts will show that Rev. Al Sharpton is by far the most progressive person in the field.

Support Missouri for Sharpton email me

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
Umar, you have said that on the STLIMC page a number of times. Would you like to provide some information about Sharpton distinguishing him from Kucinich which would support your statement?

Commentary: Elections & Legislation
In a 1997 Vt News Bureau interview, Dean admitted his desire to appoint judges willing to subvert the bill of rights. Now the fallout from Dean's appointments are before the US 2nd Circuit at Foley Square, NYC in two outrageous cases. Docket #s 03-7036, 02-6150, 02-6199, 02-6201 One case is being prosecuted by Washington, DC first amendment attorney Robert Corn-Revere against two of Dean's judges for their banishment of a Vermont "citizen-reporter" for life from all state courthouses because he criticized one of Dean's judicial appointees. The other case features Dean's judges violating Double Jeopardy, First Amendment, State law and the State constitution. See Docket No. 99-445 (Vt. Dec. 13, 2000), aff’g, Docket No. 167-1-99 WmCr (Windham D. Ct. Aug. 30, 1999) Both cases have been briefed before the Manhattan Court awaiting oral argument. Also filing a brief in federal court against Dean's appointees is the Thomas Jefferson Center For The Protection of Freedom of Expression.

Below are links regarding Dean's voicing his problem with the Bill of Rights. He constantly complains about "legal technicalities" (i.e. the Bill of Rights) as he did in the June 22 meet the press interview.



A link to a story regarding the courthouse banishment case.


A commentary on Dean's subversion of the public defender system.


Dean's statement on "re-evaluation" of our "civil liberties".


Criminal sentences doubled during Dean's tenure as a result of his appointments. I wonder how many of those serving these inflated sentences were also subjugated to constitutional deprivations at the hands of Dean's Judicial appointees leading to their convictions? How many of those serving inflated sentences were prejudiced by Deans' subversion of the public defender system mandated by the 6th amendment?

In the Meet the Press interview with Dean while discussing the death penalty he stated,

"So I just—life without parole, which we have which I actually got passed when I was lieutenant governor— the problem with life without parole is that people get out for reasons that have nothing to do with justice. We had a case where a guy who was a rapist, a serial sex offender, was convicted, then was let out on what I would think and believe was a technicality, a new trial was ordered and the victim wouldn’t come back and go through the second trial. "


Now, according to Dean, the Bill of Rights (ie. legal technicalities) has "nothing to do with justice". In the above quote, is he saying that if someone was unconstitutionally convicted it is better that the government kill them before they can point out the constitutional problems with their conviction?

A further commentary on Dean's death penalty stand.


and, noting the anit-constitution Dean message,


Scott Huminski