portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article announcements united states



Vote for the only true peace and justice Democratic candidate Dennis Kucinich in the MoveOn.org primary Tues 6/24 and Wed 6/25.
Dear fellow peace advocates,

We have a chance to make a major difference in the Democratic presidential campaign. MoveOn.org has become a powerful lobbying and fundraising force with about 2.5 million participating members. They have decided to endorse a pro-peace-and-justice presidential candidate if one gets more than 50% of the vote in a primary they are holding Tuesday 6/24 and Wednesday 6/25. This means significant funds could potentially be raised for this candidate by MoveOn.org perhaps putting him/her on equal standing with the better funded "front-runner" Democrats. Thus, this primary could be more significant than any other event in the Democratic presidential.

You can register for the MoveOn.org primary by going to www.moveon.org/pac/reg/. To look at what candidates have to say for themselves go to www.moveon.org/pac/cands/. In a straw poll by MoveOn, the top three vote-getters were Dean, Kerry, and Kucinich. Kucinich is the only true peace and justice candidate among these three. Dean has been courting the defense industry and has met with none other than the more-right-wing-than-Bush Israeli premier Ariel Sharon. Kerry voted for the Iraq war. The only thing Kucinich lacks is money because he hasn't kissed any corporate ass. But if he wins the moveon.org primary, he will be able to have access to the funds he needs.

If you want a candidate whose values are 100% Green and 100% pro-labor, pro-environment, and pro-peace on the Democratic ticket, then vote Kucinich in the MoveOn.org primary. Check out his website at www.kucinich.us.

homepage: homepage: http://www.kucinich.us

Yes!!! 23.Jun.2003 20:59

bkind2animals bkind2animals@mindspring.com

And spread the word. To get involved locally check out kucinich2004.meetup.com and/or sign up with the
Kucinich Network through his website.

Dennis Kucinich in 2004!

NEW REGISTRATION CLOSED... 23.Jun.2003 21:50


I went to the moveon.org site, but registration for voting in teh primary was closed it said. I would vote for the K man.

Dennis the Menace 23.Jun.2003 22:26


Reasons not to support Dennis 'I dont know how to pronounce his last name'

1. For many years he was anti-choice and only recently changed his views

The National Right To Life Committee (NRLC) Once Gave Kucinich High Marks, But Now Notes That His Abortion Position Has "Turned On A Dime." Kucinich earned a 90% and a 95% (with 100 being perfect) from the NRLC for his voting record in the 105th and 106th Congresses, respectively. The NRLC now notes, "Kucinich . . . turned on a dime when [he] decided holding a pro-life position would make it difficult, if not impossible, to win [his] party's nomination." (Vote Scorecard, National Right To Life Committee Webshite, www.capwiz.com/nrlc, Accessed 2/25/03; Dave Andrusko, Commentary, "What We Expect," Today's News And Views, National Right To Life Committee Website, www.nrlc.org, February 26, 2003)

2. While he was the Mayor of Cleveland he sent the city into a huge economic depression

With Kucinich At The Helm, Cleveland Fell Into "Largest Municipal Default Since The Great Depression." "The city was plunged into default when midnight struck . . . as Mayor Dennis Kucinich and the Cleveland city council failed to reach agreement on a plan to avert fiscal disaster. . . . Cleveland owed six local banks a total of $14 million, and the city treasury another $3.5 million, but could not come up with the cash. It was the largest municipal default since the Great Depression. 'There will be six months of chaos in the city to pay for this one night of shame,' Kucinich predicted . . . ." (Steven P. Rosenfeld, The Associated Press, 12/5/78)

3. He doesn't have a chance of winning

Seriously, Al Sharpton has a better chance of winning then Dennis

Andrew the Misleading 23.Jun.2003 23:48

the Archer

Come off the spin. Doesn't America have enough problems without deliberately distorting reality?

>>1. For many years he was anti-choice and only recently changed his views.
Are you saying that you don't respect it when a person matures and addresses the error in his beliefs? Or are you calling him a liar, or wishy-washy? I frankly don't think you have a leg to stand on, but prove me wrong.

>>2. While he was the Mayor of Cleveland he sent the city into a huge economic depression.
Funny thing, that. Another way to look at it is that he refused to cave in to the demands of the banks and the utility company, who were acting together to rape the people of Cleveland. Though his integrity cost him popularity in the short run, it eventually paid off. Oh yeah, and now the people of Cleveland don't have to pay PGE rates!

>>3. He doesn't have a chance of winning .
I'd rather have a so-so chance at a good President than a good chance at a so-so President--even if the consequence of failure means another four years of Bush. But he DOES have a shot. The mass media, of course, will try their best to keep a corporate whore in the White House, but everywhere Kucinich speaks, he fires up the audience.

KUCINICH is the one 24.Jun.2003 00:08


I'll learn how to spell it.

Andrew, Is Your Last Name Card? 24.Jun.2003 00:19

G. Whiz

First, the "Turned On A Dime." quote regarding abortion rights is from Andrew's imagination, as it will not be found as a quote from Kucinich. I have heard his explanation for the shift in his position, and I am satisfied with it. I don't see what difference it makes anyway since he has clearly stated his intent to protect a woman's right to choose.

Secondly, the Cleveland financial problems cited came as a result of Kucinich resisting efforts to privatize the local electric utility. The banks had a financial stake in the takeover and threw a tantrum when they did not get their way, in the form of declaring Cleveland in default. Cleveland ratepayers have saved millions since as a result of Kucinich resisting the Enronizing of the utility. Therefore, that move has proven to be a victory rather than a failure.

As far as not having a chance of winning, I imagine that some folks said that prior to the last couple of times that he was elected to public office, but that of course, did not make it true. I would have never thought that someone could become a US President without actually winning an election, but Dubya has obviously demonstrated the flaw in that logic.

So Andrew, if you plan to vote for a Republican candidate like Lieberman or Dean in the primary, why not just focus your efforts towards Bush's election? He has a very good chance of actually winning against either of those fools since they offer no real alternative, and you could say that you were on the winning team.

Whiz, G 24.Jun.2003 00:44


"G Whiz" -

Firstly, I see that you have well-mastered the art of the four paragraph essay. This is indeed a good tool to utilize, and I am very glad you have employed it.

Secondly, I see your enumeration has taken the form of "First, Secondly, Thirdly..." This is, of course, the classical English purist-enumeration. Though some might find such elitist writing pleasing, I prefer the scandalous "Firstly" myself.

Thirdly, you have correctly brushed off any of the bigger questions which don't quite fit into the four-paragraph format. Anecdotal evidence and the spotlight will have to suffice for now. Also, you lead into the conclusion well, which follows this sentence.

In conclusion, you have brightly made use of sarcasm in the conclusive paragraph to lead the reader with a feeling of conlusion. Humor is often a good diversion from un-answered questions. Also, just in case your sarcasm does not quite convince the reader, it's often a good idea to employ two tactics. Thus, I was pleased when I saw you lead into the end with idealism, to leave the reader with a sense of hope. Truly touching.

Andrew's comments and some observations 24.Jun.2003 01:03

repost man

For all those that might wonder about Andrew's statements, go here:


and check out the post "audio segment" and listen to how Kucinich's politics during his time in Cleveland were progressive, and how the business interests created a fake crisis and gross media spin to smear him -- all while he fought the Enron of his day. Andrew, Kucinich's record in Cleveland is something all progressives should look at and be proud of, just as the citizens of Cleveland do today! They voted for him at a 95%+ rate for his congressional run and he went back into Ohio politics on a slogan "because he was right" (and he was right, and people who lived in Cleveland and had more experience with life there than a friggin business week headline or two knew as much).

Kucinich isn't perfect, but the post by Andrew above is selectively using what I consider to be the "standard line" bullet points for Kucinich attackers. Andrew, it's going to backfire because anyone that takes the time to listen to Kucinich in his own words and look at the history will see you're off base.

The real debate is among the progressives and others on the left, as to whether or not one should even bother supporting someone like Kucinich -- someone from the smelly and thoroughly compromised Democratic party. We all know that debate. I submit that it's a good idea to push hard for the most progressive Democratic candidate in the pre-primary stage -- and one can do that in some ways (like this MoveOn.Org thing) even if one is planning on voting for a green, a socialist, a write-in, not voting at all or whatever.

We should be pushing like all hell for the most progressive Democratic candidate so that when the primaries come around, all the candidates have to steer a bit more towards the progressive camp because the entire terms of the debate get pushed a bit more towards the progressive spectrum -- regardless of who starts locking in initial wins in the primary, and regardless of the fact that a more progressive slant to "platform talk" might not translate into anything material. Heck, even those among us that say to hell with all Democrats and politics in general because we have strong rooting in anarchist views or what have you can certainly see there's nothing wrong with seeing the national debate pushed around a bit to the left. This is the period when that can happen and when there really are no valid arguments for making the case that one shouldn't put some energy into that effort.

Thanks James 24.Jun.2003 01:04

G. Whiz

For more un-answered questions, try this site:  http://www.unansweredquestions.net/



Go to the following link for an excellent (and scathing) discussion on the Demo-crap Party in general, and many of their candidates--including Dennis Kucinich-- in particular.

oboy, another careerist reformist public leech 24.Jun.2003 01:27


Why should any tax money go towards paying the salary of yet another careerist public leech, aligned with arguably the most evil political party in history? There are plenty of excellent activists I know who have done far more for the world than hustle for votes. And they are not paid for their work - indeed, they often fund their own actions at times. How is Dennis any different than every single other pathological liar before him? Why should we believe someone who is, in essence, a mere mercenary. He does it for money. How fucking touching.

I would like to know WHY he changed his mind on reproductive rights. I highly suspect that it is a sterile vote-gaining flipswitch. Am I just an asshole for thinking that? (don't answer that last question, on second thought)

How did he vote on the Afghanistan Invasion? I heard only ONE congressperson voted against that, and it was a female name.

Is he a capitalist? Who is contributing to his campaign? Has he gotten as far as he has in the political game by ignoring his campaign contributors, or has he done everything his patrons (contributors) have asked him?

There is a saying; "If it's too good to be true, it's not."

Kucinich Site on Women's Right to Choose 24.Jun.2003 01:49

G. Whiz

"I support Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose, and will select Supreme Court justices who affirm this Constitutional right.

I've had a journey on this issue that a year ago, before I became a candidate for President, caused me to break from a voting record that had not been pro-choice. After hearing from many women in my own life, and from women and men in my community and across the country, I began a more intensive dialogue on the issue. A lot of women opened their hearts to me. That dialogue led me to wholeheartedly support a woman's right to choose.

I have come to believe that it's not simply about the right to choose, but about a woman's role in society as being free and having agency and having the ability to make her own decisions. That a woman can't be free unless she has this right."

don't vote for losers 24.Jun.2003 02:11

doesn't stand a chance

"Reasons not to support Dennis 'I dont know how to pronounce his last name'...
3. He doesn't have a chance of winning"

Well, sure, if enough people can get talked out of supporting him, he probably doesn't... so?

Right, don't vote for guys who don't stand a chance. Vote for winners. Vote for guys who don't need your vote. Vote for guys who can buy votes. Vote for guys who can win. Like Nixon... Bush... Hitler... wahoo! Vote for winners, not losers. Thanks. Don't know where I got this kooky idea from that I should vote for guys who I thought were most deserving. I'll pull my head right out and start voting for the guys who get the most $$$ thrown at them instead. For sure. Got my "Vote for Bush, He'll Just Rig the Election Anyway" sign pictured clearly now... (Did your sarcasm meter explode yet? Nothing personal but I hope so...) :-)

P.S. That's Kucinich. I can't think of any flattering mnemonic devices offhand (rhymes with "spinach") but how hard can it be? -- "Coup," like Bush pulled to get in, "Sin," as in Bush's favorite pastime, and "Itch," as the Bush admin's palms do profusely, just thinking about Middle Eastern oil, correct? Let it remind you if it must of exactly what we could use a break from... and I think that's really the point:

Is there anyone I really trust half as much as Dennis Kucinich not to milk the glistening teat of the terrorism ticket, or carry on half of the Bush admin's dirty deeds in progress, by popular patriotic demand, if it comes to that? it's that simple.

Just call him Dennis, and don't worry-- you'll surely recognize the name if you see it on a ballot.

tried to vote, it did not work! 24.Jun.2003 08:37


I went through the steps to get to vote in this online ballot. The link did not work..."proxy server failed to connect". Then I tried again and it said I already voted and threw me off the page. Very much like the last presidential election. A feeling of frustration....

Probably so many people trying to vote at once the server is screwed up. However, there is no way for me to communicate to MOVEON that I could not vote...because their email does not work either.

Enough. Tried to vote for K

do it again -- it will work 24.Jun.2003 11:52

repost man

I just voted and it's about noon, pacific time. It worked fine so whatever technical issue you saw due to the rush of people is not present now.

However, I didn't get my primary vote email (the original one). I had to go to the website and request a second one. They had to mail more than one million of those things last night and it's clear their server didn't do well processing it. But it's easy to get a re-send and it's easy to vote.

gringo stars - the abortion issue and more 24.Jun.2003 12:06

repost man

Nah Gringo, you're not an ass hole for thinking that. It's a legit question/thought. It was one of the things that made me question if Kucinich was for real too. But after I listened to what the guy had to say in explanation of the change in mind (in two or three speeches), and after I checked his voting record, it did make sense that he has been going through an evolution of thought on this subject over the last three years, due to the women in his life, as he says. How much of it was a fast political flip for presentation and how much of it was an honest change of mind which presumably anyone can have now and then? Who knows. But one thing is clear: He's been EXTREMELY consistent on VERY progressive positions throughout his entire career -- more so than ANY other candidate in the race. He also left politics after serving as mayor and had no intentions to return at all. He returned only when people recruited him because there was a widespread understanding that "Kucinich was right" about fighting the privatization of the power company.

Comrade, you do much research on many subjects. I've seen your posts that prove it. Don't get lazy here. It's time to subject your views to an acid test. Kucinich isn't perfect -- far from it. But he's not "another careerist reformist public leach." You really need to listen to at least 2 of his speeches and read a bit more.

 http://www.radio4all.net/search.php (type in his last name)

There are 14 there, all in chron order, newest upload at the top (and the one at the top is actually a speech from 2000 that is noted in my earlier post above -- a talk where he explains what happened in Cleveland)

Better Yet... 24.Jun.2003 12:39

MoveOn Sucks

DUMP MoveOn.org for some PACs with more backbone. MoveOn keeps sucking back up to the Democrats after their spineless grovelling under the bush regime. The Dems don't deserve your vote, after backing all of Bush's wars and lies, and rolling over for the September 11 coup. They didn't even have the cojones to fight for Gore (who won the Florida recount directed by the Florida Supreme Court). The Dems won't fight for your vote. Give it to someone who will! Moveon Sucks.

PS: Message for MoveOn:
Stop hitting yourself!
Stop hitting yourself!
Stop hitting yourself!

more "either-or" off-the-mark analysis 24.Jun.2003 13:29

repost man

To "MoveOn Sucks"

You totally miss the point. Who gives a fuck what MoveOn.Org has as it's political orientation? There's no point in even arguing about it. But what is A FACT is that many people in the media will be looking at the results of today's poll and if the results show Kucinich as the winner, it will lead to a discussion as to "why" -- and a discussion about progressive issues. This will happen in many news articles and formats. It already has happened and will continue to happen, regardless of MoveOn (because there's a growing strain of real populism/progressive views in America)

The MoveOn "primary" has no direct meaning. It's all indirect -- how it can set in motion discussions and other news coverage and similar chain reactions. So, are you the type that says "fuck it, don't vote in elections because they're all rigged"? Are you the type that says "don't ever support a democrat"?

Fine. Be that person. But you should still support things like this MoveOn primary because it's no skin off your back and it can only lead to a shift to the left. This argument stands all the way until the primaries, where it's totally in the interest of anyone on the left to support Kucinich even if they honestly support someone else (socialist, green or whatever), or if they support no one. Again, we're in the pre-primary season. Now is the time to get the debate more into the left camp by any and all means necessary.

In politics, the manifestation of either-or thinking is profound and often present. Don't play that game. You're smarter than that.

More MoveOn Spinelessness 25.Jun.2003 09:51

MoveOn STILL Sucks

MoveOn doesn't even have the courage to call Bush on his lies. After hundreds of dead U.S. soldiers, tens of thousands of dead Iraqis, and tons of depleted uranium poisoning Iraq, MoveOn wimps out again with its weak call to investigate the "distortion of evidence."

Time to MoveOn from MoveOn...

Fair enough, repost man 25.Jun.2003 13:49


I've been busy instead of lazy (for once) recently, but I will find time to research Kucinich's voting record. Listening to his speeches would be less than useless since politicians' speeches are merely rhetoric to gain votes.

Reformism is like providing nickles to people instead of the dollars they are due. Within-the-system politics is a sham. It is intended to suck all activism and energy into an impotent void, protecting the status quo. The entire system is what is the problem. Pretending that the system is acting on behest of this or that personality is missing the point of government entirely. That said, I admit I would rather have Kucinich as President instead of George The Second. I am impressed by some of the boasts that Kucinich makes on his own website.

I don't expect some professional to come save us all. A decent human at the head of a heartless machine usually makes the decent human heartless. No one has ever changed the system "from within" to my knowledge (if anyone knows any different, do tell) but rather the system changes the person.

If pigs do begin flying over a frosty hellscape and Kucinich gets elected, he will be killed by some fascist who doesn't want his botom line$ messed with. Then again, they said that Carter had no chance of winning and he ended up offering visitors Georgian peanuts from a jar in the Oval Office. Hope is necessary, but false hope is a killer.
Will Pigs Fly Over a Frosty Hellscape?
Will Pigs Fly Over a Frosty Hellscape?

MoveOn's Real Agenda.... 26.Jun.2003 00:20


From the NYC Indymedia's discussion of MOveOn. It seems that MoveON's real agenda is to collect names of "progressives" in order to create a database for use by the Demo-rats:


Repost man - a little reality testing.
by precinct worker 1:42am Thu Jun 26 '03

Sorry Repost man, but whatever skewed and often superficial corporate news coverage of the anti-war movement developed was in fact generated by the hundreds of thousands worldwide who were willing to take to the streets, and disrupt business as usual to protest Bush's war...and not by paid ads in the major dailies.

That MoveOn.org seeks to capitialize on this grass roots anti-war momentum is not surprising, but one entirely consistent with the business origins and accumen of Joan Blades and Wes Boyd, the two Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, who orginally founded the group in 1998 to build opposition to the Republican drive to impeach Bill Clinton, and bolster support for the embattled Democratic administration.
( Clinton/Gore as you may recall, were the darlings of many asipiring dot.com capitalists)

As for the data base, it remains highly likely that the end of the electronic 'primary' MoveOn will have the single largest database of progressive and liberal voters in the country. This is no mean feat, and a fact not lost on the Democratic Presidential candidates who responded to MoveOn' position survey.

And as for Wes Boyd and MoveOn.org's real electoral agenda, consider this quote from today's Washington Post story on the MoveOn.org primary..

"We're having to grow thick skins," the software entrepreneur said in a telephone interview. "We're playing with the big boys now." He said the main purpose of the primary is to build grass-roots support for all the Democrats. The primary ballot includes exhortations to volunteer time and donate money and asks for a pledge to support the eventual nominee. Every candidate will receive a list of e-mail addresses of willing supporters who voted in the primary, Boyd said.

I stand by my assessment. Old wine, new bottle.

massive debate at NYC Indymedia 26.Jun.2003 01:31

the burningman

I followed the link here from the debate in New York. Repost Man seems to be "minding" the issue on more than one local site.

Anyway, anyone interested in whether or not we should shack up with the Democratic Party might want to check out the sparks in the Big Apple.


A Dennis win? 26.Jun.2003 22:48


Guys, I am hoping for a Peace and Freedom candidate to win as much as anyone, but Kucinich has NO CHANCE and Dean, who gets a mere A- for his values in my book (which is FAR better than our other prospects) could actually win the national Dem nomination.

My reasoning is simple. The moveon poll will give a single-source, and possibly one-time source of funding to the winner, but every pundit and politco knows full well just how limited this funding is, similar to winning the lottery, and it really says nothing about a candidate's ability to raise cash in the real world from a variety of sources. If Kucinich has 100,00 in the bank and wins the Moveon vote, he'll be back at square one in a matter of months, lacking momentum and cash. What if he, by some miracle, GETS the nomination? A guy who is totally on the left and has 100,000 in the bank will be publicly executed by Bush with his 200-400 million in cash mun.

I love the guy, but he's this year's Nader, and has no chance to win. Dean is the best balance between liberal values and electability that we have, so in my view he is the best choice. Remember, we are trying to unseat the Angry Monkey here, not just trying to send a message. As it is said in the film industry, if you want to send a message call Western Union...

Self distruction 27.Jun.2003 09:56

Red Head

God, I love to hear & see Liberals cannabalize each other. Makes my day.

Sharpton, Mosley-Braun or Kucinich would be great. 28.Jun.2003 11:05

Bill Hammar

I'm excited about having Dennis Kucinich nominated to face George W. Also I would be pleased if Al Sharpton or Carol Mosely-Braun got the nod. Anyone of these 3 would be great for the country. Republicans could save a lot of money running against any one of these losers. My prediction is that Gep Dickhardt wins the nomination in the end. He supported the war and actually stands a small chance of winning.

Kucinich the dream candidate 28.Jun.2003 11:08

Louisville Democrat

The first time I heard Dennis K speak in Louisville, I was overwhelmed with joy and the realization that such a person didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning the Presidency. But what a lovely dream! To think that people are still out there who think the way he does, and I do. I don't know the answer for the Dems, but I know if they don't unite under One and One only candidate, they won't pull it off. Sadly, the 25 percent who vote are influenced by 2 minute sound-bytes ala TV, and read little. (Look at the "compassionate conservatives" who have chosen to put in their two cents on this site. Can't they ever get away from name-calling and carry on a logical argument?) My next choice would be Dean, then Kerry. But the National Democratic Party had better get its act together. And what Dems are left had better hammer EVERY day from now until the election about the Bush "intelligence"(oxymoron) on WMDs, Nook-u-lear bad guys, etc. And let's not forget Cheney's chicanery.