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


Protest Kucinich's visit

The Democrats are no less evil than Republicans. They simply hide behind smiling faces.
Why should we support Kucinich? Because he is anti-war?
Bullshit. He may not have supported the war on Iraq, but he would still support the wars in Palestine, Colombia, and the economic warfare of global capitalism decimating the world's population.
He still supports the systematic racism in this country which keeps people of color oppressed every second of every day.
He is a capitalist.
He will not solve any of our problems.
Why waste your energy and resources supporting him when we can continue struggling for real solutions?
Is it because you re too scared to give up your white middle-class privelege?

Listen to what Kucinich has to say before you dismiss him 20.Jul.2003 13:32

Pink Panther

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.

As if 20.Jul.2003 13:39


"Why waste your energy and resources supporting him when we can continue struggling for real solutions?"

And what struggle would that be? Have you really blinded yourself into believing you're struggling for something? What have you done? When do you expect victory? What are your numbers? What successes have you had?

The reason the right was able to unseat the leftist Georgetown establishment in Washington is because of their ability to compromise. All the New Dealers and their Great Society friends have been replaced in the Washington Establishment with neoconservatives and religious-right zealots. It's because when the Republican party took onboard the religious right in the 80's -- the Christian Coalition, its predecessor the Moral Majority, etc -- their extremists were able to compromise. They didn't get hardly at all what they wanted, but they still voted Republican.

If you think the extreme rightwing is happy with the state of affairs today, you're sadly mistaken. They will not be happy until the Rutherford Institute's policies are in full force, until we're a nation ruled by the law of the Christian Bible.

Yet they continue to vote Republican in large numbers. Their issues are given a voice in government, while your's wallow in the street protests of 20 to 30 people.

You play it your way, and I'll play it my way, and we'll see who gets there first.

Do you have any idea what you're talking about? 20.Jul.2003 13:53


Just go ahead and protest everything because you're so angry with your own life. Don't listen to what anyone actually has to say or contribute to society. Just go ahead and write them off and and call them names. Uninformed, uneducated haters like yourself are just as responsible for holding back constructive change as those that you should actually be protesting. Next time take two minutes to research something before you make yourself look like a fool.
Kucinich spent a good amount of time today talking about Palestine and Israel and stopping the violence and injustice there. He spoke about helping create an autonomous Palestinian state, restoring their battered infastructure, re-establishing water rights, etc.
How does creating universal health care, kindergarten, day care, and college education promote systematic racism?
How does dismantling NAFTA and promoting human rights all across the world make him a capitalist?
At least you spelled his name right.

respect a diversity of tactics 20.Jul.2003 13:55

Anarchist for Kucinich

How do I put this?


The campaign will NOT save the world, stop imperialism, etc. But it will bring our issues to the forfrom, it will give more mainstream people a way to meet more radicals, organize and get involved.

On the offchange that the revolution takes some time, it would be nice to have a world to live in rather then a fucking nuclear crater.

In the autonomous village that my grandchildren will live free lives in, I don't want higher cancer rates, I don't want all of their seeds to be decended from GMOs.

Voting doesn do shit, but organized and working around issues DOES.

Reason why nothing is going change 20.Jul.2003 14:44

bsmith bsmith@logicallyrewired.com

Frankly, I find it annoying that people are now calling for protest without even having a good reason or researching the person/issue.
Personally I think Dennis Kucinich would be the best possible candidate to vote for. Because he actually has a chance at winning and his platform is pretty progressive. The other funny thing is that he is pretty much looked down upon by most Democrats for the stuff he says.

I would like to ask the person who made this post to suggest another candidate that actually has a chance of winning with a progressive platform. Otherwise we're just going to get stuck with Bush again and that's frightening.

A Heartfelt Thanks to James... 20.Jul.2003 14:58

Bu$h 4 Prison

...for making a solid point, and not including a mention of Dean. That was refreshing.

I just got back from today's Kucinich visit in Portland. He gave a rousing speech to several hundred people that showed up today on a whisper and on short notice. This guy can't be more than 5 feet tall, but he is truly a GIANT among men. It is beyond belief that some people think this guy represents the status quo.

To all the critics of Kucinich, please explain to me which of the Kucinich platform positions, as listed by the Pink Panther, you disagree with and why. Not only does he have an extremely strong political record for backing his public positions, but he was among the demonstrators in the streets Seattle at the WTO battle, which I view as the rebirth of the Sustainable World Movement.

Protest Dennis Kucinich? You must be out of your gord. This man is one of the strongest allies of the Social Justice Movement that there is. The revolution is happening NOW! Kucinich is our best chance for fundementally changing US policy. Anyone waiting for someone better than this guy to come around, is living a fantasy in my opinion.

Think the Corporate media sucks? Well it's hard to argue that. But if you turn your TV back on, you will find that many of the Corpy news services have done a 180, and are now dishing out a beating to the Bush Crime Team. Maybe they are feeling the pressure from critics, maybe they are trying to retain whatever shred of credibility they retain after marching the country to an illegal war behind a dolt!

The wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere are turing into colossal failures. At the same time, the Bush Crime Team has woven itself into such a web of lies, little short of magic is likely to save them. Tony Blair is hanging on to his leadership by a thread. Previously silenced Bush critics are finding a voice. The Corporate Press is starting to do their job, and the momentum is with US. Bush blunders have recently turned even the military against his idiocy.

This is a tremendous opportunity, and the momentum is with us. Keep pressure on the media. Indy can't reach the majority of the sheeple anytime soon. Show some support for the few people who are CURRENTLY in power as YOUR representatives, that are trying to do the right thing.

And lastly, consider changing your voter registration to Democrat for now, even though they reek one the whole, and vote for Dennis Kucinich for President in 2004!!!

Voting 20.Jul.2003 15:04


I'm an Anarchist and I vote. I vote on issues. Mostly "no". Because the bills are written by fat cats for fat cats. I do not compromise my ideals to make situations "at least a little better". In elections I vote for myself because absolutely no one has the right to vote for me and take my voice away. No matter how educated he claims to be. Fuck voting for those assholes, vote for yourself! But do not remain silent.

Funny I remember hearing all those claims that Clinton was gonna save the world. Then came the Salvage Logging Ryder, NAFTA, WTO, bombs and sanctions on Iraq, the U'wa struggle in Columbia, government surveilance of activists, and so on and so on.... Well I guess it just takes experience to figure some things out. Take my advice, let NO ONE be YOUR voice. There is no one who can say anything that will voice how you feel better than you. Don't hand over your freedom on a silver platter.

Peltier 20.Jul.2003 15:13

Free Leonard Now!

What is K's position on clemency for Leonard Peltier? Has he made any promises?

To: Moss 20.Jul.2003 15:23

Bush 4 Prison

"Then came the Salvage Logging Ryder, NAFTA, WTO, bombs and sanctions on Iraq, the U'wa struggle in Columbia, government surveilance of activists"

The Kucinich platform is clearly on the side of those who feel that these issues are important. I am glad that you vote, and I agree that no is usually the best vote. If you sincerly believe that no candidate offers you any representation, then voting for yourself is an amusing statement. But the bottom line is, if most voters did that, we end up with exactly what we have now.

had to work---missed Kucinich 20.Jul.2003 16:02


Is there any word yet about a campaign office in Portland? We nned to get this man's name out and about. I talk about him every chance I get but too many people have not heard of him yet.
I know there is a meet up scheduled for August 7th place as yet unknown, but I work first Thursdays and want to be involved..
Any other reports on this morning's gathering that would be helpful or inspiring?

No to Corporate Slavery, Yes to Human Survival 20.Jul.2003 16:12

Momentum of the People (and Sheeple)

Ipsos-Reid/Cook Political Report Poll. July 8-10, 2003. N=1,000 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.1.

"Generally speaking, would you say things in this country are heading in the right direction, or are they off on the wrong track?"


Right Direction- 46

Wrong Track- 48

Not Sure- 6

hee hee 20.Jul.2003 16:55


I love these arguments between radicals and liberals. I tend to fall in the first category and doubt that I'll ever vote for a candidate again, unless Mr. T runs for office. I still vote on initiatives because even a mocking, token attempt at direct democracy is better than nothing. It seems that many liberals see radicals throwing the baby out with the bathwater and still believe in the notion of incremental progressive change. Such an approach is nothing more than a pressure valve serving to calm the masses to the point where they are no longer a threat to the status quo. Liberals try to act all "with it" but still slip occasionally.

Bush 4 Prison's remark that "This guy can't be more than 5 feet tall, but he is truly a GIANT among men." is a good example. Apparently B4P needs a strong man who will go to Washington and fight for "the little guy". This is precisely what is whong with liberals, they are cowards seeking a defender. Why not cut out the middle man, organize your community to provide for basic human needs and let the politicians rot.

That said, protesting Kucinich is a waste of time.

To mom 20.Jul.2003 17:16

Pink Panther

Yes, there will be a campaign office for DK coming soon. Stay tuned! Sign up on his website for email notices. The turnout today was phenomenal, considering the short notice, the warm weather, etc. He expected half a dozen volunteers to be there, there were at least a couple hundred supporters (maybe more, I couldn't even see into the main conference room).

Go Dennis!

sorry to keep kicking B4P, but his post is a goldmine of ignorance 20.Jul.2003 18:04


>>The revolution is happening NOW! Kucinich is our best chance for fundementally changing US policy.<<

I'm still laughing about this one. Either B4P has a very low threshold for "revolution" or lacks understanding of the word. Electing Kucinich, even if it were possible (which it isn't), would change nothing. Revolution doesn't occur through elections. I'm growing tired of liberals using the word, because I know that most of them would turn reactionary if they ever saw revolution. I agree that revolution is underway, and see the rift already widening between libs and radicals. All the libs out there can rest assured that they are the greatest roadblock to revolution. Please go ahead and work on your little campaigns and put the lawn signs out and pat yourselves on the back. When you have lost hope in your savior of the moment, radicals will probably welcome you back as they always do...just like AA.

Revolution Before Your Eyes 20.Jul.2003 19:25

Bush 4 Prison

Re: ""Bush 4 Prison's remark that "This guy can't be more than 5 feet tall, but he is truly a GIANT among men." is a good example. Apparently B4P needs a strong man who will go to Washington and fight for "the little guy". This is precisely what is wrong with liberals, they are cowards seeking a defender."

O.K. Rambo. That's pretty bleak, but if you and your supporters have a plan worked out to overthrow government, I hope that you are both happy with the results. I was attempting to point out that one's stature is based on their willingness to take a stand, and live by their convictions. By this standard, Kucinich has impressed me as an outstanding example.

Re: "Why not cut out the middle man, organize your community to provide for basic human needs and let the politicians rot."

Because that does not happen by magic, because my community contains more than one million people and it takes much more than autonimous organizing to asses and address the needs of a community of that size, because we have problems that are too formidable to handle at the community level, such as the Nuclear Waste site recovery at Hanford, and global warming, and because with autonimous communities, there is no protection against certain communities from enacting rules that violate human rights.

Re: "Either B4P has a very low threshold for "revolution" or lacks understanding of the word."

Educate me. What is your definition? Setting the streets on fire makes for a romantic revolutionary backdrop, I must admit, but that is only guaranteed in the movies. The Bush Crime Team attempted an Enron pyramid plan. If the war(s) would have gone "well" and the economy recovered a bit, the caper would have gone unchallenged. But with the economy on the brink of collapse, and the increasing obviousness of the military and diplomatic failures in Iraq and Aghanistan, the neo-cons are now on the defensive. All of the resistance of the last several years is culminating NOW. The press and members of Congress are stepping up NOW, to challenge the Crime Team on some of their crimes.

-Bush/Blair are being openly exposed for some of their crimes by the press and members of Congress

-Insiders are stepping forward to tell what they know about the Cabal's crimes and lies

-More than half of the American people (and sheeple), are not satisfied with the direction of the country

-Many Courts are hindering the Cabal's agenda

Restoring human rights, the rule of law, and slashing defense spending to pay for badly suffering social needs, and basing foreign policy on peaceful resolutions to problems, sounds pretty revolutionary to me. Those who seek to tear it all down and start over don't have much time left. If the extreme radical element is waiting for 280 million people to see it their way, they've got a very long wait. If they plan to force their ideals on everyone else, then they are promoting their own brand of tyranny. The change opportunity is HERE to choose a new direction, and it may well be our last. Try not to miss it.

Ps.- What the fuck is a liberal?

I'm inspired 20.Jul.2003 20:09


i haven't been as inspired about a candidate that could make a major move toward "revolution" for 35 years.
Yes, Nadar played a distinctive role, but I think perhaps he paved the way for someone like Kucinich. The issues that concern most people i know ( are they lefties? liberals? progressives? or just reasonable?) seem to be part of the Kucinich platform He is not a person that can be easily side stepped by the media, he is afterall a Representative.
I do believe that it is possible to make a difference moving forward inch by inch over time. Eventually critical mass is reached and change can happen quickly. That is revolution. And perhaps it is now.

congress shmongress 20.Jul.2003 21:29


I hate how liberals are getting excited because, "The press and members of Congress are stepping up NOW, to challenge the Crime Team on some of their crimes."

The only reason other politicians are challenging Bush, etc. is because they want more power. They see an oppurtunity, and they are taking it. Bush was too powerful before, he was able to effectively use 9/11 and the war on Iraq to gather support. It would have been politically harmful to challenge him. Now that he is weaker, other politicians are criticizing him because they want some of his power. They want a way to create attention around themselves. Politicians always want more power.

Back to Kucinich, I don't understand the argument of liberals and green party members who say that running a candidate for office helps educate people about the issues. There are so many other ways to empower community education, and they are so much cheaper. Trying to educate people by advocating voting for Kucinich, or Nader, or any other white capitalist, only makes people have more trust in the entire corporate government system. It perpetuates the brainwashing that we can't learn or do things for ourselves, that we have to have specific leaders (white men) in control of our decisions at all times. In that way, most work inside the governmental system (except maybe direct ballot measures and small, community-based positions like school board) is quite counterrevolutionary.

Also, I find it interesting that not one person who trashed the original post said anything about racism or privilege.
Maybe it is because even white liberals know deep down inside that a white capitalist man can't do anything about racism as president.
The issue remains.
Kucinich will not stop gentrification in Portland. Kucinich will not stop, or even slow down the complex system of racism in this country that is perpetuated by our colonisation of the rest of the world.

vt shoots and scores 20.Jul.2003 22:49


vt has made my point with more eloquence than I did, but I was in a hurry. B4P has missed my point entirely. I never advocated overthrowing the government, but rather making the government obsolete through self organization. Reliance on "strongmen" saps the confidence from individuals thereby preventing them from asserting their right to self determination. Certainly, I wouldn't cry if Kucinich were elected. I feel more sympathetic to his position than Bush's. But I won't vote for him, because that would simply perpetuate a corrupt system that I disagree with.

If all the money and time which is spent on elections were instead devoted to building community gardens, worker controled food production and power coops and all the other essentials for human life we would have reformed the world in one election cycle far more than could be accomplished in a hundred years by politicians. This is what I meant by cutting out the middleman. If you have doubts that the dirty uneducated masses are incapable of running their affairs for themselves then you are in fact NOT REVOLUTIONARY. So stop throwing the word around, cheapening it by your abuse.

and another thing... 21.Jul.2003 00:18


quoting B4P - "because we have problems that are too formidable to handle at the community level, such as the Nuclear Waste site recovery at Hanford, and global warming, and because with autonimous communities, there is no protection against certain communities from enacting rules that violate human rights."

What the fuck? You cite problems which YOUR flawed system is unable to tackle as evidence that MY position is wrong? Where is the logic?

Maybe your heart's in the right place but your head's up your ass. <---(I'm totally in love with this and will be using it frequently in the upcoming election season.)

Every four years, otherwise good people become starstruck by a candidate they think will save the world. They go to meetings, put out lawn signs, go door to door with a glazed look in their eye and in the end wind up with nothing more that a hard dick and hurt feelings because IT NEVER WORKS! Things just get shittier and shittier whether their candidate gets elected or not. Do you remember Dukakis and Mondale? Hahahaha, people felt as much confidence in them as you do today with Kucinich. Even when they get elected, like Clinton, the downward spiral continues. Give up, good people have put confidence in the American system of governance for a few hundred years now and we've turned into the most powerful center of evil the world has known and yes, human culture as we know it is nearing collapse. Just as Milli Vanilli and the New Kids on the Block are punchlines today, so will be your candidate with a few years hindsight. Wise up! Your mama and your daddy and your greasy, greasy granny might have been suckers and bought the lie that politicians were looking out for them but as we now see, they were fooled. You need not make the same mistakes, leaving an even greater mess for your children to wrestle with. Fuck the politicians, they are professional liars interested only in their own egos. Look out for yourself and your neighbors and the folks you've never met. If you do honest work at the grassroots level building a democratic community and the infrastructure for people to provide for their own needs YOU WILL NOT BE WASTING YOUR TIME.

Or you could just put a bumper sticker on your car and get back to watching TV.

I could almost respect the radicals... 21.Jul.2003 01:12


...For shunning the voting system and taking a stand, if that were their conviction and they backed it up with meaningful action. But what's so truly laughable is that nearly every last radical here who desires revolution has never done a thing in their lives towards those ends. And they never will. They goto the occasional protest, which gets a 30-second blurb on the evening news. They organize groups which occasionally have meetings, wherein the members discuss tactics and strategy which will never see the light of day. And they sure do post a lot to Indymedia.

Some become frustrated and move to communes in upstate Pennsylvania. Some join the Peace Corps and move abroad. Occasionally one sets fire to an SUV at a Ford dealership, landing himself in prison. But revolution? Please.

The Seattle WTO demonstrations showed the radicals and mainstream can come together on key issues and show their numbers. But it ended a couple of days later. The last remnants are long, boring, drawn-out lawsuits, decrying pepper spray and other jackbooted abuses of the 'popo.'

If you want to continue kidding yourself that the revolution will come and you'll be at the forefront, go right ahead. It's fine by me. But just know I get a chuckle out of it everytime.

If you hold progressive convictions, I don't understand why you wouldn't vote for Kucinich. I mean, what's the harm? Clearly he'll bring you closer to your goal. He might not score the winning shot, but if he puts you on the scoreboard, can that be anything but good? Can't you just hedge your bets? Will the 15 minutes it takes to vote really put such a damper on your revolutionary plans?

Anywho, don't get me wrong. Go right ahead and stay home. It'll just tick-up the percentage which votes Dean, which helps my hopes in whatever small way. (Sorry B4P. Had to mention Dean just this once.)

why can't you do both? 21.Jul.2003 01:29


it is possible to work locally and to support a strong move in national politics
Some of us have been working on grass roots organizing and community gardens and collectives for years and years and still --- yes, still - some things are the same.... Both avenues need to be approached at the same time...
If major change is to occur a right wing homeland security big brother white guy can't be in the white house --- they have much more control/fire power than the rest of us... a liberal progressive left leaning candidate/president might create enough open space in the public arena that communities can actually flourish into sustainable entities...
i know i'm a dreamer... have been for many years --- and I work to organize and continue to vote....

James 21.Jul.2003 01:34


I'll be the first to admit that radicals tend to bluster...humans tend to bluster. I wont post my resume, but I think I'm pulling my weight. I wish I could do more.

Funny, some memories are way askew 21.Jul.2003 03:18


These comments from Moss that, "Funny I remember hearing all those claims that Clinton was gonna save the world" and from zdfbcgblkseirh, " Do you remember Dukakis and Mondale? Hahahaha, people felt as much confidence in them as you do today with Kucinich," are goofy.

I've been voting since 1970. Mondale was the establishment Democratic Party candidate throughout the 1984 primaries. It could be argued that the party was more of a contrast to the Republicans than it is today, and most of that Democratic Party "establishment" was big labor unions (especially the bloated and self-satisfied ones), but Gary Hart was probably the leading "challenger" to the candidacy of Mondale and Jesse Jackson was the radic-lib alternative. Mondale and Dukakis were the opportunities for those of us fed up with 4 or 8 years of Reagan to vote for mainstream Democrats. Clinton was the opportunity to vote for a DLC alternative to continuing the 12 years of Republican administrations.

None (alright, maybe a statiscally insignificant few) of the radicals, liberals, and progressives I hung out with in those days referred to those party nominees as hope for any meaningful change other than change from the Reagan/Bush years of Republicanism that was more right-wing than anything we'd had under Nixon. Comparing Kucinich to Mondale, Dukakis, or Clinton, is as accurate as comparing Frederick Douglass or Teddy Roosevelt to a Bush.

None 21.Jul.2003 04:17


Dance I think it is safe for you to say "none" saw those Democratic candidates as offering a meaningful change... they were just an escape from Reagan/Bush.

A lot of arguments on this thread are based on strange assumptions falsely attributed to individuals here who are unfortunately being labled. If we stop referring to one another as "liberals" and "radicals," and stop basing our arguments on stereotypes of those groups, there might be some productive discussion. Address what people write, and not what you assume them to think, believe, be, etc.

I'm not accusing all of this, just noting that it reduces these discussions to meaningless crap.

And Dance, it's possible that memories are not just askew, but that they don't exist. Some people here were not politically aware when some of the candidates you mention were running. So thanks for your first hand memories and knowledge. I wouldn't have bothered, but I'm glad you did.

Mom is right! 21.Jul.2003 04:27


Mom is right on. Local action, community organizing - these are the avenues for revolution. Keep on keepin' on! But we need to continue being involved at the national level as well. To dismiss the national political situation in favor of holding out for some fabulous radical revolution of the entire national sociopolitical structure is simply asinine. Name one national revolution, wherein the entire sociopolitical system is changed, that directly resulted in advancement for social justice and humanity. All too often the reality of radicalism is not very different from that of the right wing - i.e. attempting to enforce a given social belief system, which necessarily results in the "collateral damage" (i.e. death and/or imprisonment) for those who do not conform to that system.

On the other hand, we may be in for it anyway. I tend to agree with the radicals that if things continue as they have been, massive social upheaval in U.S. is likely. But I don't think that it will help the cause of social justice one little bit. It would only justify the use of corporate and right-wing paramilitaries, and further destabilize the world as a whole. On the other hand, if massive voter participation results in a left-wing president it would at the least scare the hell out of the corporate power mongers, probably encourage a nationwide shift back toward the left, and perhaps help reverse our current reputation among the citizens of the world as a nation of overworked dupes. Even if Congress were to remain controlled by the right wing, a president like Kucinich would be a boon to all concerned.

Kucinich is not perfect. Neither were Nader or even Winona LaDuke. But the comparisons with Clinton and Mondale are misleading. Clinton was emblematic of the "strategy" to get a Democrat, *any* Democrat, into the presidency. Clinton wasn't all bad - he was a lot better than Bush Senior or W!! But Clinton comes of the same political elite that the Bush family holds great sway over. The Mondale analogy is closer, but even there, Mondale was tired and uninspiring, and he came from a background of old family wealth. Mondale was never someone the general American population could identify with, certainly not someone most people would get excited about. Kucinich is dynamic, charismatic. He can argue the points of social progressivism eloquently and movingly without going into ridiculous theatrics. The guy was mayor of one of the most "middle of the road" cities in the US - and one of his claims to fame is disallowing corporate control of a public utility, with sucessful long term results for the people of Cleveland (is this being friendly to corporate colonizers?). But perhaps most importantly, Kucinich represents an opportunity for the Democrats to re-differentiate themselves from the Republicans. As I am sure both "liberals" and "radicals" would agree, the Democrats as a party have become so dilute and weak that no-one gives a flying f*ck which party wins the presidency. Kucinich could change that, and help put some life back into the mainstream political environment. Even after reading all the above posts, I am at a loss as to how Kucinich as president would represent a mere reaffirmation of the status quo.

Hey I'm a cynic too - I doubt Kucinich will get past the primaries. But maybe if enough of us insipid liberals can get off our middle-class asses and get our neighbors and communities fired up about Kucinich we can put him against the Great Criminal. It's certainly much better odds than the advent --much less successful conclusion-- of a nationwide sociopolitical revolution.

Speaking of which, the original thread posting had these joint allegations, over which I am puzzled:
>>He may not have supported the war on Iraq, but he would still support the wars in Palestine, Colombia, and the economic warfare of global capitalism decimating the world's population.
>>He still supports the systematic racism in this country which keeps people of color oppressed every second of every day.

Would some one of the radical contingent care to back up these statements?

to zdfb 21.Jul.2003 07:21

from bfdz

you say
Every four years, otherwise good people become starstruck by a candidate they think will save the world. They go to meetings, put out lawn signs, go door to door with a glazed look in their eye and in the end wind up with nothing more that a hard dick and hurt feelings because IT NEVER WORKS

i say
how many times have you been starstruck by an action you think will save the world
you go to protests
you put out handbills and leaflets
you talk to people with a glazed look in your eye about an issue
did these things work - is your dick now soft?

there is no single way to embrace change

enough CW 21.Jul.2003 10:43


For fucks sake could we all agree to a fucking moratorium on Radical Conventional Wisdom® please. We ALL KNOW about the evils of white males and their nasty game of capitalism. We ALL KNOW about electoral politics and reformism being "counter-revolutionary" (although I think you need a revolution before anything can counter it). Sometimes the "lefter-than-thou" rhetoric makes you people sound like hipster Born Again Christians who can do NOTHING but preach from the Gospel according to St. Chomsky. From now on when discussing people running in elections for national office, please, let's all just agree to the fact that there's this corrupted system which we're working with and the people who are "wasting their time" talking about electoral politics are not being helped by wannabe revos yelling at them about how they're propagating racism and exploitation. Back the FUCK OFF DUUUDE! Go comment on some other post about GMO's or chemtrails. Meanwhile, the rest of us will blissfully discuss the pros and cons of the Great American Political Puppet Show, without your constant and truly boooooooooring heckling. Thanks.

ignorance is bliss ain't it Jumbo 21.Jul.2003 11:07


I told you I love these arguments. There's nothing guite like kicking liberals in the head while listening to them attempt to defend their lack if analysis and lack of spine. Like I said, your heart might be in the right place, but your head's up your ass.

Responding to bfdz:

Nope, I don't think any single action will save the world and haven't yet found any theory which doesn't have significant holes. I'm most sympathetic to anarcho-syndicalism, council communism or whatever you want to call it, but recognize that the theory doesn't adequately address environmental concerns much less issues of spirituality which are both extremely important if humans plan to stay around for any length of time. I wouldn't call that starstruck.

I don't go to protests any more, because I'm normally back at the "undisclosed location" wating by the jail support phone. Protests are usually pretty boring, even though I heard the Ashcroft visit was fun and empowering.

Sorry, no handbills or leaflets or glazed look in my eye. In case you haven't picked up on it yet, I'm not a very slick salesman and prefer to mock people rather than temporarily convince them through manipulation. Does my approach work? I see liberals, when they've become disgusted in their attempts to seek reformist change by proxy, drift in a more radical direction as they feel more strength as individuals. Liberals, however, draw both from the ranks of moderates and swing voters (yech!) and burned out, disillusioned radicals. This seems like a good trade to me. We get the cream of the crop, you get the chaf. Hows my tally wacker? Just fine.

I want to clarify what I mean when I use the word revolution, I'm not talking about bloodshed nor a simple property transaction from owners to workers but a continual process expanding liberty and justice for all people and hopefully all life on the planet. This is not utopian because strife will always exist but those challenges can be handled in a much more healthy manner than humans tend to today. Revolution starts when people tire of seeking compromise and start building the world the want to see for themselves. Personally I don't want to see any more rich white men (or anyone else for that matter) making decisions for the rest of us so I don't vote. I prefer to use my energy seeking concrete improvement in legal justice (jail support), and economic justice (worker ownership) and just those two keep me busy.

I used the examples of Dukakis and Mondale, because they were recent enough to remember directly. How about FDR? Radicals gained strength throughout the early part of the last century. This was manifested most clearly in the labor movement where workers were demanding REAL change and grew to be a threat to capitalism itself. Communities organized to provide for their own survival and some concrete improvements were made. FDR comes along, as liberals always do, and offered to solve everyone's problems and a lot of suckers fell for it. Young unemployed men were moved from the city to work camps in the forest or gigantic public works projects which were intended from the outset to be nothing more than a labor sink. People again became complacent when the liberal pressure valve was opened. Now that most of FDR's reformist measures have been removed, the economy is again in shambles, capitalists have consolidated control to a greater extent than ever before, public services are being cut (schools and libraries were never closed during the depression), unemployment is growing and liberals are again wringing their hands for more crumbs. Sure, ingoring history liberalism looks pretty good. But falling into the reformist trap of state socialism (again) will do nothing more than provide today's generation with temporary respite and force our grandchildren to address exact same problems we face today and our grandparents faced sixty years ago.

I would like to think... 21.Jul.2003 12:15


Perhaps the best way to solve most of America's (and the world's) problems is through gradual political and economic change in the direction of a more community-based, egalitarian system. The only problem is that complacency can start to develop during the process so that the long-term goals may never be met. But Fabian-style socialism (or at least a move in the direction of socialism) nevertheless worked remarkably well for Western Europe from 1945 onwards. Recently the EU has pushed free market reforms on Europe, but its welfare systems are still pretty sound and the poverty rate is much, much lower than in the US. There are fewer cars and a cleaner energy market. Social life is much better especially for the youth since Europe's moralists don't have the same power as America's Religious Right.

That being said, I ultimately think America's neoconservative political status quo of militarism, public service cuts, deunionization, stubborn drug prohibition, and fundamentalist dogma is living on borrowed time, and the neocons know it. That's why they are so desperate to consolidate as much power NOW so they can at least punch a few buttons before they are ousted. Support for Bush is dwindling rapidly, down to about 50/50 now, and I truly hope (and have quite a bit of confidence) that the Iraq war investigations will help to bring the ratings down even further. Today the Democrats released a plan to run anti-Bush ads dealing with the uranium debacle. Of course, GOP neocons are desperately trying to stop this ad from airing since it could have a pretty strong impact on public opinion.

It was sheer luck that Bush and Gore got so close in 2000, close enough for Bush to tinker with the election and get in the White House. I think there's a very good chance that Bush's approval will drop so low by next summer that it will be easy to get him out. I don't think the GOP will be able to steal the next election unless the results are VERY VERY close like they were last time.

As for me, I'm going to give Kucinich a chance. I saw him speak yesterday and was impressed by his aspirations and principles, not to mention his eloquent means of speech! He's no Upton Sinclair or Eugene Debs or Clement Attlee, but maybe we can at least get clean energy, industrial hemp, fair trade, universal health care, free college tuition, the Department of Peace, civil rights and liberties, and other progressive agendas back within a realistic grasp. Kucinich is a good speaker who can get the message out, and he looks to be not too far behind Dean in popularity, so let's see what happens.

Poverty lines and purchasing power parity 21.Jul.2003 13:07



Just wanted to quickly point out the fallacy of comparing national poverty lines. International poverty is usually defined as making less than $2/day in purchasing power parity. Obviously, all developed nations are well above that. Thus, each nation has it's own poverty line defined, so you cannot accurately compare countries with those statistics. A pretty accurate method of describing poverty is to take the share of national income and consumption of the poorest quintile, and then adjust that for purchasing power parity.

So, for example, here is the poorest quintile's share in national income in a few developed countries:

Japan: 10.6
Finland : 10.0
Norway: 9.7
UK: 6.1
Canada: 7.5
France: 7.2
USA: 5.2

Now those numbers need to be adjusted for purchasing power parity. For a purchasing power parity index, where USA = 100, here are where the other countries stand:

Japan: 79.4
Finland: 72.1
Norway: 86.1
UK: 69.1
Canada: 79.7
France: 71.6
USA: 100

So then we multiple the income share by the PPP index / 100, to get the new income share of the poorest quntile, indexed for purchasing power parity.

Japan: 8.4
Norway: 8.3
Finland: 7.2
Canada: 5.97
USA: 5.2
France: 5.1
UK: 4.2

Whereas the US was at the bottom of the pack before, it's now not so bad. Japan, Finland and Norway are well ahead, but other countries are fairly close.

REVOLUTION 21.Jul.2003 13:56

Working Mom

to xfdnghxzd, you are so right on! I have a funny feeling that I know you from somewhere.

to everyone else:
according to the American College Dictionary:

1. A COMPLETE overthrow of an established government or political system. 2. A COMPLETE change in something.

1. Pertaining to or characterized by a revolution. 2. SUBVERSIVE to established procedure and principles.

1. To bring about a revolution; to effect a radical change. 2. Subject to a political revolution.

As you can all plainly see, revolution and related terms are OFTEN used in flagrantly loose manners. This is one of my biggest pet peeves. Many reformist groups call themselves revolutionary and seem to have never bothered to look up the meaning of the term. It's gotten so out of hand that "revolutionary" is even being used to describe consumer products that haven't even undergone a fundemental change! Please, do not use this term so lightly. You only serve to devalue it's meaning and make an ass of yourself.

thanks Working Mom 21.Jul.2003 15:25


While we're on definitions, I'd like to clarify the term "radical"

1. Arising from or going to a root or source; basic: proposed a radical solution to the problem.
2. Departing markedly from the usual or customary; extreme: radical opinions on education.
3. Favoring or effecting fundamental or revolutionary changes in current practices, conditions, or institutions: radical political views.

It comes from the latin word for root, as does radish.

Herein lies the fundamental difference between liberals and revolutionaries. While liberals see all the pain and injustice in the world and seek to mitigate them in the easiest possible fashion (understandable), revolutionaries take aim at the underlying cause of the injustice; the root. This is why revolutionaries tend to describe liberals as shortsighted, they see liberals focusing only on the symptoms rather than the disease. And as with a chronic disease, treating the symptoms while providing temporary relief does not address the cause of the symptoms which will continue coming back.

Currently, I see the two most troubling diseases being capitalism and national government. Along with the church, which used to be more of a player but has lost some of its power in the last few centuries, these forces share one common feature--hierarchy. Ultimately, hierarchy (which manifests itself as racism, sexism and a dozen other divisive "isms") is the root of humanity's suffering. The natural solution is the conscious reorganization of human culture to provide for the necessities of life structured in the flatest possible manner. This is not rocket science, and if humans are incapable of accomplishing it, then we deserve to become extinct and the sooner the better for the sake of the planet. Thinking that electing another white guy to the position of supreme world ruler will address the ultimate problem of hierarchy is like fighting for peace or fucking for virginity.

Hierarchy, Race, Class, the Church, the State, the Capitalists, or just maybe... 21.Jul.2003 15:52


...the root of humanity's suffering is life itself. (Study: Living inevitably leads to death). Maybe people have always suffered. And maybe that suffering is what makes not-suffering feel good. Maybe without suffering we'd have no benchmark by which to judge happiness. Maybe happiness does not make sense on a logarithmic scale.

The idea that you can just fix any one thing ("Hierarchy") and suffering will be eradicated is truly ridiculous.

"This is not rocket science, and if humans are incapable of accomplishing it, then we deserve to become extinct and the sooner the better for the sake of the planet. Thinking that electing another white guy to the position of supreme world ruler will address the ultimate problem of hierarchy is like fighting for peace or fucking for virginity."

And maybe misantropy is the root of your particular anarchistic views.

Pardon me James 21.Jul.2003 16:18


I suppose I should have clarified that I was refering to unnecessary suffering. I stated earlier in this thread that I was not refering to any utopian vision and that strife will always exist as a part of the human condition. I should have known that I'd need to re start my argument from zero each time I post so the slow ones can keep up.

Not quite that simple 21.Jul.2003 18:49


Actually, I knew you didn't mean to say that all human suffering was the result of social hierarchies. I was just using the strawman to illustrate the point. (The point being that trying to identify any single thing as the "root cause" of human suffering is pointless. Human suffering is the result of numerous, unquantifiable intangibles. (With hierarchy being but a symptom of those intangibles)).

Further, you were arguing a utopian vision. You can't just argue a utopian vision, then deflect criticism that it's merely utopian by saying "This is not utopian." I mean, it it utopian!

Anyway, I enjoyed your posts. Don't want to start a flame war :)

liberals/radicals 21.Jul.2003 20:24


if liberals are those who seek to mitigate pain and suffering in the easiest possible manner
and radicals are those who aim for the root problems
why isn't it obvious that both are needed?
a dead hungry man no longer needs to be part of a workers cooperative --
by the way the ground work for a complete change of the system (revolution) happens over time,
quick change often leads to the installation of another oppressive system because the masses of the people are not involved/ on board etc.
all the work we do now counts, just as the work that has gone on before us counts,

Mom 22.Jul.2003 04:30


You just don't fit in here. You make so much sense.

To: zdfbcgblkseirh 22.Jul.2003 10:38

Bush 4 Prison

You said: "quoting B4P - "because we have problems that are too formidable to handle at the community level, such as the Nuclear Waste site recovery at Hanford, and global warming, and because with autonimous communities, there is no protection against certain communities from enacting rules that violate human rights.""

"What the fuck? You cite problems which YOUR flawed system is unable to tackle as evidence that MY position is wrong? Where is the logic?"

I'm not sure how you determined that the current system belongs to ME. I certainly don't take credit for the disaster that we call Hanford and I had absolutely nothing to do with its coming into existance, or its subsequent mismanagement. I HAVE been part of making sure it gets dealt with. How about you? What are your community groups doing about it. Asign the blame wherever you like, but since I live downwind and downstream from Hanford, it is in my interest to make sure that the situation there gets better and not worse.

You said: "Or you could just put a bumper sticker on your car and get back to watching TV."

That was an amusing jab, but I don't actually own a car or a TV. My primary transportation is my bike, my feet, mass transit, etc.. I rarely drive anymore, and that is one of the things I am doing to reduce global warming effects. How about you?

Your chances of bringing about the kind of community based government are right around zero without public support. If you force this model on the population, as I said before, that makes you a tyrant, and you can count on a backlash.

If you spent as much effort coming up with a detailed, workable plan, instead of spending so much energy doling out empty criticisms to others, you might have something. Instead, you offer only pessimism and ridicule.

You have failed to explain how community based rule might address huge institutionally based problems. You have failed to explain how community based rule will prevent some communities from enacting rules that violate human rights. You have failed to define "revolution" for me, and you have failed to define "liberal", yet you are certain that I am one. You have failed to explain how you think the "revolution" is going to be implemented, how we will recover from the aftermath, or present any backup plan if the effort fails or takes longer to come about than the short time remaining to act.

Will Kucinich be able to affect all of the elements of his platform. I doubt it, since there will certainly be resistance. But I predict that he will have strong suppot for much of it, since it appears to be based on common sense, and not simply "left" or "right" ideology. Placing someone like Kucinich as President would almost certainly buy the human race a bit more time to figure out a way to survive into the next century. If his ideas are accepted, that would almost certainly leave people more open to consider the model that you propose. If you don't see the tactical advantage of this, then you have failed to impress me as a strategist.

Progress? 23.Jul.2003 12:05


Anybody who won't abandon the quick-sand pit of historical bullshit that comes with the term "Progress/progressive" (without at least a good discussion about why they insist on using the term) stirs deep suspicion in me. Kucinich is totally pro-USA (see his corndog speech on his website where he opens and closes by singing "God Bless America" barf). Can't we accept responisiblity for what horrific scams/failures Progress and the USA have been? Or do y'all just want a piece of it?

seriously, let's work towards something new and radically different.

DENNIS IS NUTS!!!!! 26.Aug.2003 11:09


The following post was submitted to Radio Left the week of August 18, 2003, by a REAL American Indian.
This and the posts of several other people of color were removed and the web site was re-done slightly after this and several other posts critical of Kucinich for his whacky New Age beliefs were posted. It appears that most of the censorship in this country is coming from the New Age wing of the Green party and not from the right.

You can state Congressman Moonbeam's platform until you are blue in the face.
He is not electable.
He is not trusted by the vast brown majoirity which will decide the 2004 presidential election.

Just because someone may come up with a conclusion I might support, does not mean that I reliquish to right to question the thought process that brought him to that conclusion.

Kucinich is a scientif illiterate. He has a shady background of racist and opportunistic politics in Ohio.

Those who try to paint him as the candidate with integrity should be extremely suspect.
The same Kucinich fanatics are suppressing the rights of true progressives to question this candidate.

Read this post, follow the links and decide for yourself.
Do you want this man with his finger on the button?


You conveniently forgot something --- Dennis is NUTS!!!!!

He's a New Age Wacko and totally unelectable.
Are you gonna blame Dubya for his kooky beliefs too? Where was Dennis the Menace when he disappeared from public life? Well getting spitchul with a bunch of neo-nazi white supremacist New Age FRAUDS!!!!

I'm sure there are still fanatic Green fluff bunnies out there who will always insist on treating Dennis's shameful past are merely youthful racism, but most of mainstream Democratic America can see though all that poo-poo-pee-doo-doo!

There are numerous sites in Canada that make fun of the silly Yankees for supporting Kucinich without fully researching where his "deep spiritual beliefs" come from. It's very difficult to get accurate information about Kucinich in the States. This has nothing to do with the Bush administration. It comes from the extreme censorship that one always finds from the plastic left. Look up the origins of the Green movement why don't ya? They are not very far removed from the Nazi occult. New Age Wacko, Racist Opportunist - it all fits together. There's been no drastic change here. Dennis's racism has just evolved to a more marketable form that can be sold to spoiled rich white people's children. The jaded, cynical unplugged yuppie, who needs to rationalize his greedy lifestyle by deluding himself into believing that Kucinich is a man of integrity. Every piece of information comes from the Kucinich camp is as untruthful as every piece of information that comes from the Bush camp. They are too sides of the same coin.
Skull and bones or New Age gurus ... it's all the same con came.

Check out these sites:
Many Kucinich supporters are way out there<BR>

Kucinich describes Chris Griscom as a close friend and adviser. Griscom is a well-known spiritual huckster and whacky New Age Loon. He's got a web site which talks about all the looney stuff described in this post. Griscom is pushing all this crap about washing your heart and washing your brain and she talks a lot about "multi-incarnational exploration." This is Kucinich's spiritual advisor. He spent lots of time with her in New Mexico (New Age whack-job capital of the world) when he was UNEMPLOYED.

Type in "Chris Griscom" and what do you find?
Let's see if you can make any sense out of Dennis's looney advisor:

If you've got real player you can listen to this nut ball. I laughed so hard I almost wet myself. She teaches you how to taste and probe the energies in the room you're in.
Click on washing your heart

Did Dubya make Dennis associate with this loon?

"Imagine that you can look inside your pericardium and actually see any residues that might stress your heart. If you find any dark spots or heavy areas, you can clear away the debris of physical or emotional blockage with the result of feeling lighter and more open again. It is a quite palpable sensation of lifting in the whole chest area as you wash away negativity.
Visualize that you are flooding the pericardium with the most pristine, crystalline water that washes away all the cloudy particles and leaves it absolutely clear and rejuvenated. Let yourself experience your pericardium being filled only with the purest of light energy, inspirational feelings, ecstasy and joy"

Oh yeah. This guy is presidential material, all right. Maybe Dennis could appoint Griscom Surgeon General.

Then of course there's the whole chemtrials fiasco which you completely ignored
Oops, the Greens don't like me to say the C-word!

HR2977, introduced last October by Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, this bill called for the Peaceful uses of space, and a ban on 'exotic weapons'. Section 7 of the 'Space
Preservation Act of 2001' sought specifically to prohibit 'chemtrails' . The sane-i-tized version HR3616 was re-introduced later because Dennis couldn't get any serious scientists to go along with his lunacy. Talk about the dignity of the presidential office! Can you imagine what it would be like if this man ever became president? He already had the contempt of the skeptical and scientific communities. The original bill is part of the congressional record. Look it up - if you dare! Did radio left ever interview a scientist? Maybe it would be a good time to get one on the show to talk about the chemtrails hoax. Should a man who fell for this hoax and lied about it later be president? What other New Age nonsense will he swallow?

Kucinich is very good friends with, you guessed it, Shirley MacLaine. Shirley McLaine is also the godmother of Kucinich's daughter. She's the one who recommended that Dennis visit Griscom, and he did it! Think of the advice she could give him if he ever became president. Ronald Reagan is starting to look good next to this WuWu.

Kucinich is also cozy with another New Age lunatic; John Hagelin He was the Natural Law Party's presidential candidate in 2000.
He follows the teachings of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, the leader of the transcendental meditation movement, and well documented fraud. He's also written a pretty disturbing manual for a Perfect Government. In it he advocates the grand unification of modern science and ancient Vedic Science to create an ideal administration. It's basically lifted directly from occult beliefs of the Third Reich, but a lot of pseudo-scientific language is thrown in to appeal to the mentality of a typical Kucinich supporter. The New Age is full of closet Nazis. Just because you don't want it to be true, doesn't change reality.

Hagelin proposes using a "Vedic Defense Shield" over India to prevent nuclear war.

"Recent discoveries in the domain of quantum physics and human consciousness, according to General Singh, reveal that the field of consciousness is far more basic and powerful than the nuclear field. "This field of consciousness—termed the unified field in the language of quantum physics—is millions of times more fundamental and powerful than the nuclear force"

Dennis gives the right a lot of ammunition here! Check it out for yourself:



Now there's a defense policy we can all rally around!
Do you really want theses idiots deciding foreign policy. (On earth, I mean)

There's lots more evidence about Dennis and his flakey past. The good things Kucinich says are not the result of sound thinking. They're an accident at best. Sometimes the ultra-right wing Christian fundamentalists say things I agree with. I'm not going to entrust them with the duties of public office!

I'm sure it will all come out eventually on some right-wing hate radio show. If Radio Left isn't interested in dealing with the Moonbeam congressman honestly, I 'm sure Rush Limbaugh will be happy to have the information.

Kucinich: Way, Way Out There

Green Party Roots

Amazing Disappearing Language in HR2977



Repentant Nadar Voter: Dennis is NO Ralph Nader!<BR>

Find out what the chemtrails nuts really believe (If you dare)
Chemtrails video
(Although they have no scientific proof, they'd like to believe ... . Where oh where have I heard this before?)

(Caution! It's best not to consume beverages while watching this -- I'm still trying to clean the Coca-Cola off of my computer)

re-printed with permission from the original author.
Please copy and distribute this information widely

Dennis the Menace has a RACIST past 26.Aug.2003 11:20

Kucinich Must Step Down NOW!

Kucinich is hardly the man of integrity he has been painted to be by the fanatic "Light Greens"

He has a reputation for being a political opportunist and a racist.

Do a google search for "Kucinich" + "Racist" and see what you come up with.

The racist campaign literature that Kucinich circulated in the past is bound to surface any day now - He will probably be exposed by the ultra rightwing - nothing ever stars hidden on the internet.

Kucinich MUST exentually step down for the good of the Progressive movement.

There is NO ROOM for his brand of racism in the Democratic party.
His New Age beliefs are just an extension of his old racism.

They guy painted himself as the "Great White Hope" in order to get elected.

He will never represent the Democratic party.

Check out the Cleveland Plain Dealer and this article:

Kucinich used divisive politics in early years, politicians say
Sabrina Eaton and Stephen Koff
Plain Dealer Bureau

Kucinich maintains race never played a role in his campaigns. "They were always about issues, they were always about principles," he says.
Joseph Tegreene, a Cleveland lawyer and former Kucinich finance director at City Hall, says it is unfair to "zero in on Kucinich because he was ethnic and he lived on the near West Side, and not focus on other people as well who were operating in that environment."
Kucinich, however, says he accepts scrutiny because he is running for president. Cleveland magazine's recent republication on the Internet of a 31-year-old story on Kucinich has brought his past back into view, with out-of-town online journalists and commentators generally unfamiliar with his Cleveland years picking up on the racial component.

"The truth," says Tegreene, "is that anyone who is familiar with the politics of the time . . . knows that racial issues permeated politics. And while that's unfortunate, and it's something we look back on with a bit of shame, the fact is racial aspects permeated urban politics throughout America. And Cleveland was no exception."

City of political giants
Throughout its history, Cleveland has been a city with larger-than-life political figures, and, starting in the 1960s with Mayor Carl Stokes, some of them were black. George Forbes, the former city council president and head of the local NAACP chapter, also was a major black icon - and, for a time in a city still heavily segregated by race, "sort of anathema to the white community," says Joseph Rice, a political and public-relations consultant.
"There is no question that I used race to get my point across," Forbes acknowledges. "And he did the same thing."
"He," of course, is Kucinich, whom Forbes accused of racism when Kucinich ran for mayor in 1977.
During that campaign, Forbes claimed Kucinich rose to prominence by attacking black politicians like former Mayor Stokes; opposed issues that blacks favored like public housing and busing; and circulated campaign literature that attempted to play on racial fears.
Forbes at the time called Kucinich "a racist, a man who lacks compassion and a political opportunist who has split the city and will do anything to further his career," according to newspaper accounts.

In an interview last week, Forbes explained why he made those charges. He cited a piece of Kucinich literature from an unsuccessful 1974 bid for Congress. In it, Kucinich criticized rival candidate Ron Mottl for voting to commemorate Martin Luther King Jr. with a legal holiday when Mottl served in the Statehouse.

Kucinich said last week he didn't recall that literature. But he told reporters in the 1970s that it was an effort to demonstrate political hypocrisy by Mottl, who was leading local crusades against school busing for desegregation. Mottl was trying to appeal to West Side voters as a conservative Democrat. But his support for the King holiday, as well as his sponsorship of a bill to teach black history in schools, showed he was not that conservative, Kucinich said during the fight to capture the same voters.

Mottl says he does not remember the issue or race playing a role in the campaign.
As a city councilman, Kucinich, too, voted to establish a King holiday. But Kucinich opposed busing.
"They could have put the money into quality schools in the neighborhood schools and not into transportation," he says. "That's what I said then, and as you look at how it turned out, I may very well have been absolutely right.
"But it was never about race. I acknowledged inequities that existed in the educational system and understood that alternatives had to be developed so we could solve the problems of everyone who was underprivileged - which included children of all races."

Politics in the '70s
But busing and Martin Luther King day were not the only race-related matters dogging Kucinich in the 1970s. During Kucinich's 1977 campaign for mayor, Forbes cited literature that Kucinich circulated several years earlier in white wards against then-council candidate Mary Rose Oakar, who later was elected to Congress.
It showed a lascivious-looking picture of Forbes gazing at a picture of Oakar, who is white. According to accounts in The Plain Dealer, it said Oakar was a pawn of Forbes and elements "east of the river," a reference to blacks and the racial dividing line of the Cuyahoga River.
The headline on the literature: "What's Going on Here?"
Kucinich says he doesn't remember that literature. After he was criticized for it in 1977, Kucinich told reporters it was merely an effort to attack the political machine that the powerful Forbes headed. But Forbes says he thought the innuendo was shocking - "that Mary Rose and I were lovers."
Oakar also recalled the piece, but she would not discuss it. "I admire his stance on peace," was all she would say about Kucinich.
Rice, the political consultant, was The Plain Dealer's politics writer and remembers the literature. "Whether or not he intended it, it was perceived as having racial overtones," he says. He says Kucinich "wanted to win, and he would do whatever he had to do to win."
In a 1977 column, Rice wrote, "If you believe Kucinich's claim that the literature didn't have racial overtones, you might as well believe in the tooth fairy."

Apparently, Dennis's ads made the Willy Horton ads look like they were written by Sharpton.

They've been removed from the net temporarily, but I'm sure someone will find them and post them soon.


Reproduces under Fair Use

Kerry / Kucinich in '04 04.Sep.2003 06:17

Wal Cooper waldo.c@bigpond.com.au

America is in the best position it has been in for years to make a decision - whether to be a democracy, or a fascist state. Go with Bush, and you know what's going to happen. Personally, this will be the saddest time for me, because even though I'm as Australian as roo poo, I've always loved America. And believe me, that hasn't been easy. I've watched your country do things in the name of Democracy that I wouldn't have believed possible. Bush is the culmination of all of those dreadful things. I'm praying to God (no definition) that you choose honourable men to lead your country out of the dreadful State that you have allowed yourself to become, and forward to the destiny that I always believed you would fulfil - the guiding light of a truly Democratic Country that promotes equality not only for It's own citizens, but all humanity.
I believe Dennis Kucinich and John Kerry to be honourable men, who will lead America to that bright future.

why protest? 09.Nov.2003 14:57

charles avutilizer@yahoo.com

why spend energy protesting a anti war president, with the worlds problems right now, anti war would always be good. Spend the energy thinking of new innovative helpful ideas that would raise human conciousness. Help our new president wake up, don't give out thousands of excusses on why we shouldn't go with something that is at least twice as better off than we all are now. Stop being so selfish! ACTION = REACTION, CAUSE= EFFECT, we as humans are destroting this planet, as americans we can help demonstrate new effective way of caring for the planet for generations to come. Stop the greed,, no more oil,weapons,or drug trades,or GMO food proceesing. We need to make the switch in our head, that we have been destroying this planet, and we need to know that we are and did, inorder to move on and grow to a peaceful world that would be completely sustainable with out the use of all these disgusting attributes. Let's use our knowledge and collaborate together (what a concept) it would start a whole new higher level of human conciousness that would benifit EVERYONE.