Dennis Kucinich said all these nice things about Ron Paul.

[LoZoccolo]

People are like "oh, why do you keep attacking Dennis Kucinich, you're supposed to be for the Democrats and he's a Democrat"; this is true but he engages in things which hurt Democrats in general, or lower his credibility when he criticizes other Democrats, like deliver ultimatums such as the one on the health care bill, or enter the Democratic primary and debates knowing that he's not going to win, while criticizing the other candidates for not doing the things he's not going to have to deliver because he's not going to win.

This thing about Ron Paul is one more of those things where it is hard to take him seriously; he later criticized the president for not putting enough in the health care bill after he himself talked about putting a libertarian in the VP slot.

[tawadi]

1. Old vid. From Dec 15, 2007.

Wonder if he still says 'nice things' about him.

[surfdog]

2. Ron Paul hasn't changed

So we can assume Dennis Kucinich's views haven't changed

Never did like Dennis that much, seems his ego got in the wAy all the time

[TheWraith]

32. If anything, Paul has whitewashed himself even more lately.

He was a lot less subtle in the past about his insanity.

[Gman]

6. Doesn't matter

It could be 1987. He hasn't changed one bit. Paul's views have been well known for many years.

[right on maude...]

50. LOL- they're friends!

I mean, deal with it. This bizarre campaign to make Ron Paul the most evil man in America is an epic fail and this is one huge reason why. There is no way Kucinich would have anything to do with Ronnie if he were as horrific as youse people claim he is. Give it a rest.

[grantcart]

58. Really? He's not talking about friendship he's talking about putting him on the ticket as

Vice President.

Bizzare is a charitable way to explain that friendship.

[right on maude...]

88. What does it tell you, though?

Does it suggest that perhaps Paul is more liberal (gasp!) than even he lets on? The point is that Kucinch knows how this man thinks. Kucinich isn't a racist, isn't a warmonger and seems to be comfortable calling Paul a friend.

[grantcart]

91. 'is more liberal than even he lets on' is dellusional beyond belief.

I respect Paulf for one thing; he is absolutely honest about exactly how far out he is. He would radically restructure the government starting with the Fed, and then stripping anything out of the government that isn't in the original 18th century version, including NASA, CDC, etc. He has said that in the first year alone he is going to take out one Trillion dollars;


9:29 p.m. | Updated LAS VEGAS — Representative Ron Paul on Monday unveiled an aggressive budget plan that would greatly shrink the federal government that he is seeking to run, eliminating the agency that oversees airport security, the Departments of Energy and Education and three others, while cutting all war financing.

Providing a stark vision of what a libertarian takeover of the White House would look like, the plan would slash the federal budget by $1 trillion in a single year and, Mr. Paul said, bring the budget into balance within three.

The federal work force would be cut by 10 percent across the board. Aid to foreign nations would stop flowing altogether. And, reflecting the way Mr. Paul would shrink the very job he seeks, the president’s annual salary would be reduced to $39,336 from $400,000.



What it tells us is that Kucinich is the flakey one and it is no accident that Kucinich is soon to be an ex member of congress because he doesn't have a very good grasp of the realities of the politics.

[earthside]

3. What's the problem?

I find nothing wrong with what Kucinich says here.

It is true ... Ron Paul and Walter Jones have been two House Republicans who have indeed gone across the aisle to work with progressives on anti-Iraq-War issues. Despite all of Paul's problems, he does show what we need more of from House and Senate Repuglicans: a willingness to not be so rabidly partisan that they cannot find common ground at least on specific issues.

For all of Ron Paul's ideological faults, in my opinion, he has struck me as a civil and congenial member of Congress; in other words a better man that Eric Cantor any day of the week.

[Ikonoklast]

5. You're right, he a Smiling Racist Homophobe.

Not a Frowny Racist Homophobe.

[BlueCaliDem]

41. Hah! Good one, Ikonoklast!

When will some people who call themselves progressives, wake up already?

[Fumesucker]

4. Ron Paul is wrong about absolutely everything..

Which is why we need more wars and we need to double down on the drug war and actually win the damn thing.

ETA: Perhaps we should be more like Singapore, execute anyone failing a drug test and we could be done with the drug war PDQ.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Because we all know compromise and crossing the aisle are verbotten

How's that working for the country lozo?

[Tarheel_Dem]

9. "Compromise" and "Crossing the aisle" are only "verbotten" when it's Pres. Obama.

It's only "caving", when it's Obama. It's only "Compromiser In Chief", when it's Obama. I think the o.p.'s point is that Kucinich gets a pass.

Some on the left have gone so far ideologically that they've blurred the lines between liberalism and libertarianism, and it ain't pretty.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. Thanks for making my point as to where the DLC stands

[Tarheel_Dem]

27. Not sure where the DLC stands, but moderates have an aversion to zealotry.

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. Moderates these days read as center right,

Emphasis on right.

[Tarheel_Dem]

31. "Moderates" these days, is where the actual work gets done, not on the extremes.

Emphasis on extreme.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. Of course as we can see in DC how well this is working.

Right?????

If you call a completely dysfunctional government working, you are welcomed to it. If you consider right wing policies mainstream when polling tells us otherwise, you are welcomed to that too.

There is a reason why people vote in such low numbers by any advanced economy standard. But it works for you, so have at it.

[Aerows]

42. Well said

It's working REALLY well in DC.

It's helping push the agenda as far to the right as they can get away with while profiting handsomely. The ONLY way a person would want to push the agenda further right is because of profit, because most of what they stand for is so detrimental to society, liberty and humanity.

[Tarheel_Dem]

46. Please point out to me where I stated that "dysfunctional government working" or....

Last edited Sun Jan 8, 2012, 12:26 AM - Edit history (1)

"right wing policies mainstream". I spoke out in favor of "reaching across the aisle", you didn't seem to think it was a bad thing when it was Kucinich. I was just pointing out the hypocrisy of some Kooch's most ardent supporters.

Kooch "reaching across the aisle" = Good

Obama, doing the same = Bad

We've seen where extremism has gotten us; total & complete gridlock. I'm surprised our current Congress can name a fucking post office. So, no you won't hear me jumping down anyone's throat for "reaching across the aisle" in furtherance of legislation that actually helps. But the president's critics can't have it both ways. Most in Washington are scared shitless that if they are seen working together, some blogger, opinion journalist, or radio shock jock will scream "Unclean", and the headlines go out that they "CAVED". The dysfunction has more to do with the so-called professionals who opine on politics, rather than actual legislation.

"Bring Back Moderation, and Screw The Overpaid Pundits" should be a bumpersticker.

:edited for typo

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. And I am telling you the "moderates" are center right, to right

They are no moderates. This is why we have no compromise.

I have no issues with it but when the negotiating position starts fairly close to the "left" of the Republican party and not where the country is...that's what annoys people.

This is not compromise, and in fact has encouraged worst behaviors from republicans and is a leading cause to the current dysfunction. The other leading cause is the hard core republican know nothing hard headeness. Who is ahead on this really does not matter... They are both responsible.

Sorry if I do not see this as sports and cannot reach for pom poms.

Now in the very recent past, now that far right aides have left, and real pressure from the streets is coming, we are seeing them pull left...question is if our center right so-called moderates will follow? Regardless, it is too late for compromise this session...hopefully next congress will get that lesson, and the POTUS gets a class on negotiating 101.

If not...well, let the dysfunction continue...it's not unusual in failing empires anyway. It's just regular folk who get to suffer. And on this department the problem is when both parties are coopted by business interests. But the R's still get the lions share. But both share in the dysfunction.

Look I despise Ron with the rest of them, but compromise should be encouraged...why a few of us take issue with the daily attack on dems by the op, and in this case for something that is essential. Boggles the mind.

[ronnie624]

79. *

[BlueCaliDem]

53. You're not going to convince a mind that's already made up, TD.

They're blind when it comes to the fact Ron Paul is THE most conservative Republican since 1937, based on his voting record - more to the right than even Dick Cheney and Dubya Bush, and that's scary.

They're blind that he not only signed the Aghanistan AUMF, he also drafted and presented the 2001 Marque and Reprisal Act that gave Bush UNprecedented war powers to assassinate all those dark skinned Muslims, but they say he's had a change of heart and mind and he's anti-war. They're blind to the fact that he's a John Birch Society fanatic and that he continues to side with the Republicans on all the votes that matter, but he's more liberal than Obama. They're blind to his racist newsletters, and believe him on his word he didn't write them (right), and are appalled if you call him a racist and homophobe.

But on the other hand . . .

Obama is dragged over the coals for a helluva lot less by not making ACA progressive enough. That he's signed the NDAA into law - that does NOT expand powers since that already happened under the AUMF and Paul's Marque and Reprisal act, and I've come to believe, just like that black community and what's being discussed by the Nation, that the white progressives are all anti-Obama not for his policies (being that he's been the most progressive Democratic President since LBJ) but because of his skin color. And each day I see how they excoriate the president while turning a blind eye to Ron Pauls overt racism, anti-womanism, anti-Americanism, pro-States Rights, and pro-Big Businessism, and it only solidifies that ugly picture.

[nadinbrzezinski]

60. Tell me exactly where I have supported Paul

I think I will wait until the cows come home.

So to make it clear to you...Paul is building a proto fascist movement...is that supporting him?

Otoh these attacks on dems, or on compromise, our daily five minutes of hate, do boggle the mind. And as to compromise even the lion of the Senate had nice things to say about Paul...I stand with Ted Kennedy and Denis Kucinich in that. After all, we know compromise is bad... Just ask Mitch, and John and Eric. They will agree with you.

[BlueCaliDem]

61. Likewise, where do I claim I'm against compromise? I support Obama for chrissakes!

And whenever he has to compromise to get anything through, I read endless headlines and threads that "he's caved again!", or "he's a closeted RepubliCON", or "Capitulator in Chief", or other crap like that.

Your comparison between what Ted Kennedy and DK has said has already been negated by LZ because it's already been pointed out Ted never rose (or fell) to that level in his praise for Paul. DK has gone so far as to want Paul as his VP running mate while *knowing* first hand about Paul's status as the most conservative RepubliCON U.S. Representative since 1937 - even MORE conservative than Bush or Cheney ( http://www.voteview.com/is_john_kerry_a_liberal.htm ).

But thank you for clearing up for me you understand where Paul is trying to take this country.

[nadinbrzezinski]

62. You may want to read what I wrote about the negotiating skills

in DC. To be honest, it is not Obama... it is systemic.

But when you start a negotiation close to what the other side wants, that is bad negotiating practice. Any B average business student, at a State College no less, knows that.

So tell me, why did they not start negotiating on Health Care from where MOST AMERICANS want it to be? And that is one of many examples. Don't give me the it is not politically feasible... it is something that FDR and LBJ would have done... even Clinton... it is negotiating 101.

And that my dear is the problem some of us have.

When he gets reelected he needs to take two weeks off and go to camp david and get a graduate seminar on negotiating techniques. I am sure a few people in the top colleges in the nation would love to teach him that.

[Tarheel_Dem]

63. Your post is awesome. And this gets right to the nub of the issue.......

"that the white progressives are all anti-Obama not for his policies (being that he's been the most progressive Democratic President since LBJ) but because of his skin color. And each day I see how they excoriate the president while turning a blind eye to Ron Pauls overt racism, anti-womanism, anti-Americanism, pro-States Rights, and pro-Big Businessism, and it only solidifies that ugly picture."

Whether they'll wittingly admit it or not, some white liberals liked the idea of Obama until he actually became POTUS. I'm convinced that some of them will never forgive him for actually getting elected, and would feel much more comfortable with a white man in the Oval Office. ANY WHITE MAN. EVEN RON PAUL'S CRAZY RACIST ASS. I think all will be right in their world as soon as that happens.

Who couldn't see this coming? What has really amazed me is how this new liberal/libertarian hybrid has been able to diminish any of this president's accomplishments, while exaggerating any "perceived" shortcomings. They get to have it both ways.

[nadinbrzezinski]

67. So you are accusing people of racism

AWESOME!

I love you too.

I mean this is idiotic, but fits with the OP.

I will add, this makes ignoring any criticism easy. I mean they are just a bunch of LIBERAL, UNINFORMED RACISTS.

AWESOME.

Yup some of us still vote democratic IN SPITE of your best efforts to drive people away.

[Tarheel_Dem]

69. Hey, accusations of some sort of "ism" or "phobia" are flung around this place on a daily basis.

Last edited Sun Jan 8, 2012, 02:15 AM - Edit history (1)

Take a look in Help & Meta. Or better yet, think back to the primaries of '08. To my shock & horror, a lot of longtime "liberal" posters let their true colors (no pun intended) rise to the surface, and some were shown the door. So yes, Virginia, there are racists among us. Quelle Surprise!


How the hell could I "drive people away"? Oh, the drama! I'm not campaigning or canvassing at DU. DU has two camps, and neither is going to move the other. If people care enough to spend as much time as we do on sites like this, then I think our minds are pretty much made up. I'm not here to convince you of anything, and you'll certainly never convince me, so why the drama?

And ignoring even the possibility of racism is what would make you "a bunch of LIBERAL, UNIIFORMED RACISTS". Your words not mine.

[nadinbrzezinski]

72. No that is your opinion

you see this as some sort of sport. It is not sport, and yes Presidents, even THIS PRESIDENT, can be criticized without people being racists.

Have a good day.

Oh and here...



We are done.

[Tarheel_Dem]

73. You were "done" before you ever got started. But, don't go away mad!

[LoZoccolo]

71. I would say that there's at least some white priviledge involved.

White, upper-middle-class people in this "progressive" chattering class don't have as much at stake in the issues tackled by the Obama presidency and can thus disregard them as trivial.

[nadinbrzezinski]

74. So tell me, what is my income?

because that is some fascinating piece of fiction you are spouting there pal.

By the way, here is more, you think OWS is happening because the rich are happy with DC? On the bright side this is not just the President, it is systemic.

I have one word for you at this point... ostrich.

Upper Middle class... now that is fascinating piece of fantasy there pal... really fascinating.

[Rex]

84. It is funny actually.

The last signs of a desperate mind imo.

[Tarheel_Dem]

75. Exactly. They don't seem to mind hurting the very people they "claim" to be fighting for.

Like you say, there's a certain "privelege" involved.

[Bluenorthwest]

40. Except in surrogates such as McClurkin, or in their language on 'Sanctity' and all of

that zealous ardor for faith and defense of Sacraments and all. I mean, face it, the President and Ron Paul oppose marriage equality for religious reasons. Zealous moderates in agreement with Paul!

[LoZoccolo]

11. Way better than the Nader ultimatum did.

The one that most of its proponents didn't care to repeat in 2004.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. Truly I do not want any of what you are smoking

If you think this lack of compromise in dc is good for the country. That is some strong drugs there buddy, and it puts you in bed with Mitch and john and Eric. I really don't think you truly mean it, but if you do, that company you keep is really strange.

[TheWraith]

33. You're complaining about lack of compromise in DC?

Compromise of any kind, on anything is the entire thing the angry left is screaming at Obama about.

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. Compromise and consensus are essential

Starting any negotiations from right of center is stupid, like conveniently never talk of single payer when there is supermajority support among the population. We are not talking of he same thing exactly. But I guess compromise and consensus does not mean the same thing to you as it does to me. But then again I don't look at politics as sport either

[Aerows]

44. Precisely

Starting right of center only results in a hard shift to the right. If people in the true middle and the left are upset about that, it shouldn't come as a huge surprise. One whiff of being called "left" and many in Washington fall all over themselves to go to the right.

It's political cowardice.

[beardown]

8. Correction, he's a real democrat

DLC and vote for the lessor of evils, but against your own interests democracts don't like him.

Better to attack a true democrat than admit you've been snookered once again into voting for more corporate power and a more powerful military industrial complex and a longer war on some drugs, but hey, at least you voted for a 'democrat'.

The 'democrats' hurt themselves 100 times worse than anything Kucinich has ever done by turning their backs on the progressive voters that put them into office to clean up the corporate power mess and then found they were merely kinder, gentler corporate enablers and puppets.

[Tarheel_Dem]

26. ?

"Despite Republican and progressive talking points that Obama is losing his base, his approval is highest among 18-29 year olds, at 52%. He maintains the support of 80% of Democrats, 73% of liberals, 88% of African-Americans, and 60% of Hispanics."

Poll shows Washington state voters don't want Dennis Kucinich to run there

"The survey of 1,098 Washington voters taken from May 12 to 15 found that just 12 percent of voters think Kucinich should seek office there, while 39 percent think he should not. More than 50 percent of those surveyed were not familiar with him, despite his presidential campaigns."

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2011/05/poll_shows_washington_state_vo.html

Ohio voters not happy with Reps. Dennis Kucinich or John Boehner, poll finds

"Kucinich, who won 53 percent of the 2010 vote in his western Cuyahoga County district, has a 27 percent favorability rating statewide, and is viewed unfavorably by 40 percent of voters, the pollsters found. In 2012, Kucinich will likely face voters outside his home base because of redistricting."

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2011/03/ohio_voters_not_happy_with_rep.html

New congressional district map looks like the route to Kucinich's exit: Brent Larkin

"Outwitting opponents used to be a Kucinich strength -- but only if the math made sense.
And in the new 9th, the numbers just don't add up for him.

So, how is it that, in the span of just three months, the legislature dragged Kucinich from the political penthouse to the outhouse?

Kaptur will raise and spend more money than Kucinich. And her record of delivering for her district is one no Democratic incumbent in the state can come close to matching.

A ninth term now looks pretty elusive. Kucinich no longer spends enough time here. He seems more interested in saving the world than in saving Cleveland. And, frankly, I suspect that what was once a world-class political instinct has lost its edge."

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2012/01/map_shows_the_route_to_kucinic.html

The media will be much more interested in Kucinich once he's out of office than they ever were while he was in it. He'll form a PAC, and buy a bus (ala Sarah Palin & Herman Cain), and continue to make a living. Kucinich, like Ron Paul, has very limited appeal, but very devoted followers.

[rhett o rick]

12. The New-Democrats are looking forward to a one big party system.

The New-Democrats plus the Moderate Republicons will make up the New-Democratic Party. The Republicon Party will be a small group of wacko clowns. And the left, of course will be out in the cold again.

[BlueCaliDem]

54. There are moderate RepubliCONS?

That's news to me. They're all rightwing neocons. I don't see a Nixon among them. Not one.

[rhett o rick]

59. Of course you are looking at politicians. The moderate politicans are hiding, not wanting

to be associated with the rightwing clowns. But there are many grassroots republicans that will vote for Obama over one of the crazy clowns. Some of them even have switched parties and are now helping move the Democratic party to the right.
and there are a number of Democrats in Congress that walk, talk and vote like republicans.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. Why are you attacking a Democrat on a Democratic board?

Huh?

Isn't that against your rules?

[Warren Stupidity]

18. Make up your mind.

"People are like "oh, why do you keep attacking Dennis Kucinich, you're supposed to be for the Democrats and he's a Democrat"; this is true but he engages in things which hurt Democrats".

You are attacking a Democrat on a Democratic board, and according to your rules that puts you into some sort of stealth troll category. Your rules Loz. Not this boards.

Oh and since when is it wrong to run in the primaries if you can't win? What sort of idiocy is that?

[Rex]

86. Really? He has his own rules?

Are they posted somewhere?

[Warren Stupidity]

87. Are you familiar at all with the op's many utterances here?

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. Animal Farm comes to mind

[Major Nikon]

25. If that were against the rules, the Obama haters would have been gone long ago

I believe the rules simply state that you can't be a wingnut and you must vote for Democrats. Attacking Kucinich for advocating someone for the executive branch that is a bigot who wants to tear down every single social safety net seems to be well within the rules.

[Tarheel_Dem]

28. +1000.

[Warren Stupidity]

29. It is against the op's rules.

Also the op tosses in the weird attack that it was wrong for Kucinich to run in 2008. 'plain that one.

[Warren Stupidity]

39. How does it make you feel knowing that I have a copy of your rulez?

[PA Democrat]

17. Ted Kennedy said nice things about Ron Paul as well.

Seriously, What is your point?

[LoZoccolo]

20. Did he say that he should be the vice president and then maybe the president?

No.

[PA Democrat]

24. Ever hear the phrase "tilting at windmills?"

Poor Don Quixote wasted his life fighting imaginary giants when there were real dangers to fear.

[BlueCaliDem]

55. Checkmate. Good one, LoZoccolo. eom

[PA Democrat]

56. LOL. You defeated that windmill, I mean giant.

Dennis Kucnich, the biggest threat to America. Any videos of Kucinich campaigning for Paul? How about something more recent than, when was that video done, 2007?

Have at it guys. I guess windmills look frightening to some people.

[Puregonzo1188]

19. So did the head of his local NAACP. So did Cynthia McKinney. So did the ACLU.

All only in reference to certain issues, of course, but nice things nonetheless in those regards.


What is your point?

[LoZoccolo]

23. Cynthia McKinney?

I might have to rethink this.



(Was it before or after she joined the Green Party?)

[Puregonzo1188]

36. You I included her in that list just to see you if you would pounce on her and ignore all the others

Apparently my predictions your intellectual dishonesty were fairly apt.

[Robb]

21. I'm certain Kucinich's opinion on this has evolved. Like his abortion stance.

People change, etc.

[Union Scribe]

52. Some people do.

Some never will.

[REP]

82. If it helps his reelection chances, expect "evolution"

[ClassWarrior]

22. I think Bush** wore nice suits.

Does that make me a criminal warmonger?

NGU.

[surfdog]

35. I might be mistaken

But wasn't Dennis Kucinich against a nationwide amber alert system ?

Dennis is good and crazy himself

[Boojatta]

43. I could understand Kucinich appointing Ron Paul as Secretary of State

However, if Kucinich were actually elected as President Kucinich, and President Kucinich suffered a medical emergency, then wouldn't fate be elevating Vice President Ron Paul to President Ron Paul, and why should fate be given such power when Kucinich and Ron Paul have -- as Kucinich acknowledges -- such big differences of opinion on domestic issues?

Why should fate be given the power to make such a major bait and switch trick on the voters? Does Kucinich consider himself to be a world leader who pays more attention to the rest of the world than to the USA? Maybe Kucinich should consider looking for a job at the UN if he really feels that way, and I mean that seriously, not as an insult to Kucinich or his supporters.

[Bluenorthwest]

45. Ron Paul and the President are opposed to marriage equality. They both speak of

religion and State's Rights when they speak of their mutual opposition. Kucinich supports equal rights for all, unlike Paul, the President and the entire GOP field of potential nominees.

[Eliminator]

47. I might comment on this thread...

...But the video has no audio. And it's not a problem on my end.

[PeaceNikki]

48. This was the event that pushed me from sorta being annoyed by DK to...

knowing he cannot be taken seriously. I personally asked DK about this ridiculous notion of picking Paul as a running mate. He was on At Issue with Ben Merens on Wisconsin Public Radio in December of 2007.
He said

"Of course that's not gonna happen" and then said "his position on international matters, particularly with respect to avoiding war as an instrument of policy has been identical to mine and we salute him for that. Imagine that, Ron Paul, if he was the nominee of the party and if we nominated anyone other than myself, it would be Ron Paul that would stand out there as the one who wanted to get us out of Iraq and not a democratic nominee. So we made the point about Ron Paul's real singular opposition to the war inside the Republican party. but, of course if I was to pick a running mate, it would NOT be Ron Paul. It would have to be someone who is a member of the Democratic party and it would be someone who is very close to the way I look at the world."

Uh, no, Mr. Kucinich. Or at least I hope not. Paul's position on international matters is fucking terrifying.

[BlueCaliDem]

57. If DK is speaking the truth

how does he explain Ron Paul not appearing to vote on a time table to withdraw from Iraq back in 7/2007?

[right on maude...]

51. So lemme get this straight:

When he talks about churches paying for people's operations (which made me cringe), Paul is heartless and out of touch with reality. When he wants MORE MONEY put into healthcare, he's inconsistent?

Paul accepted earmarks for his constituents and was called out on it by a conservative host (Hannity, I believe). He simply replied that while he didn't ask for those funds, he felt an obligation to accept them on behalf of those he serves. Contrast that with Rick Scott, the penis tip governor of Flori-DUH, who REFUSED funds for high-speed rail in his state!

Note: This is NOT a defense, endorsement or otherwise fan boi post for Ron Paul but just me pointing out the facts.

[MadHound]

64. And Obama said all these nice things about Reagan

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-01-23-ronald-reagan-president-obama_N.htm
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/01/obama_praises_ronald_reagan_as.html

Do you condemn Obama for his praise? Then why are you condemning Kucinich? Hypocrisy much?

[LoZoccolo]

65. Probably because he said that Ron Paul should be the vice president.

Right?

[MadHound]

66. No, actually Kucinich said that he would consider Paul for VP

He also said there are a number of Democrats he would consider as well.

Please try to keep your attempted smears straight.

Meanwhile we had an admirer of Reagan running a center-right WH in office right now. Not some phantom menace strawman that you built just so you could knock it down.

[LoZoccolo]

70. That sounds better. n/t

[G_j]

68. Paul is for a number of things I believe in

but, apparently for all the wrong reasons. He has not at all convinced me that his world view is rooted in compassion. Kucinich, however is a genuine peace maker.

[nadinbrzezinski]

76. Well this is a first

you changed the OP to adress the criticism. WHO'D THUNK!

Still, here

[LoZoccolo]

77. My opponents are very aggressive.

I had to make sure that they wouldn't use the thread as an in to say I was promoting Ron Paul.

[nadinbrzezinski]

81. Agressive, in this place?

Try the streets... that is agressive.

Now those people are committed. Here... it's not really nice.

As to you supporting Ron Paul... not likely... I mean you only support one type of democrat. That is the pro-corporate agenda dem, the third way dem, the DLC dem... all the same.

[Zorra]

78. Heck, that's nothin'! Obama appointed POS Bush War Criminal and PNAC author Philip Zelikow

to his Intelligence Advisory Board. Zelikow is a total fascist.

Zelikow Appointed to Obama's Intelligence Advisory Board

http://www.virginia.edu/uvatoday/newsRelease.php?id=15988

Best to let this pointless flamebait thread just sink like a stone now, don't you think, LZ?

[Douglas Carpenter]

80. it just goes to show that even someone who is right on almost every issue can still be wrong on

something so important. To be fair, Mr. Kucinich actually said that he would consider Ron Paul along with a number of others as a possible running mate. Still I think it was a very silly thing to even suggest as a possibility. I'll still give him credit though for being right on almost everything else - almost all the time. Nobody is perfect - as they say.

[bvar22]

83. Knock yourself out, Loco.

Not very many of us are THAT shallow, THAT constipated, and THAT logically "challenged".
To many of us, ISSUES MATTER.




Many of us have concluded that IF we want a government that is NOT owned by the 1%,
we must elect representatives who are NOT owned by the 1%.
DUH!




[font color=firebrick][center]”Unlike the other candidates, I am not funded by those corporate interests.
I owe them no loyalty, and they have no influence over me or my policies.”
---Dennis Kucinich, 2008 [/font]
[/center]

[whatchamacallit]

90. Some people blame congress for perceived shortcomings of the president

They admonish "if you're not satisfied with the rate or quality of change, work to elect more liberals to congress!". Those same people trash every politician, left of center-right.

[bvar22]

85. President Obama says "nice things" about Reagan and Republicans and "their good ideas" all the time.

He even worked WITH Bush-the-Lesser & The Republicans from 2004 to 2008 to help implement much of the Republican agenda,
including Telecom Immunity and the Great Bailout.

Should we be worried?



[font size=5 color=green][center]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[loyalsister]

89. They may have different opinions

But their goals are similar. They are true believers who want to shake things up. I can see how they may have a mutual respect.

[Marr]

92. "People are like "oh, why do you keep attacking (him), you're supposed to be for the Democrat..."

Amazing how you can see that point when the subject is someone like Kucinich, but change it to Obama or some other "moderate" Democrat and you just can't wrap the old bean around it.

[mmonk]

93. I believe you have your ultimatums backwards.

I decide to come back and peruse what was going on here. About time to skip out again.