Why is Kucinich the only one grandstanding on the alleged conspiracy?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

Where are Dodd, Biden, Gravel, and even Richarson? They apparently see no conspiracy...either Kucinich is alone among the candidates in seeing a conspiracy or he is just grandstanding in order to get his 15 minutes of press coverage. This is, after all, what he did when he attacked Edwards, Obama, and Clinton for backing out of the Faux Noise debate in order to get some publicity.

Note: the last line of the press release is amusing because he did not show up for a debate with John Edwards (see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3376264&mesg_id=3376264 ). Using his own standard he is unfit to be president. :rofl:

==NEWS RELEASE
For Immediate Release
March 11, 2007

AUSTIN (TX) -- The cancellation in the past two days of two planned nationally televised debates because of candidates' "scheduling conflicts" and unwillingness to participate smacks of "manipulation by some candidates who would rather run and hide than defend their records and their positions on the war," Ohio Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich said today while campaigning in Texas.

Widely publicized Presidential debates in New Hampshire in April and in Nevada in August were cancelled after some candidates either backed out after agreeing to participate or declined invitations to attend.

"Whatever their excuses, some candidates are clearly trying to avoid any head-to-head public debate where they will have to answer tough questions -- questions about their votes in favor of the Iraq war, their votes in favor of trade policies that have wiped out millions of American jobs, their votes in favor of abridging Constitutional rights by approving the Patriot Act, and their collaboration with insurance companies and pharmaceutical corporations to deny Americans adequate health care protection."

Kucinich said, "It's an insult to the voters, and the height of cynicism, for candidates to refuse to take the public stage and subject themselves to public scrutiny."

The New Hampshire debate was announced on January 12. Only two days ago, Kucinich pointed out, did some candidates back out because of "scheduling conflicts."

"Is it possible that the real conflict was having to take the stage to defend their votes to fund the war?" Kucinich asked. Votes in the House and the Senate on a $100 billion supplemental appropriation are expected soon.

Other candidates were trying to sidestep the Nevada debate because they claimed that the sponsoring television network, Fox News Channel, was conservatively biased.

"If you want to be the President of the United States, you can’t be afraid to deal with people with whom you disagree politically," Kucinich said. "No one is further removed from Fox's political philosophy than I am, but fear should not dictate decisions that affect hundreds of millions of Americans and billions of others around the world who are starving for real leadership."

Kucinich said, "The public deserves honest, open, and fair public debate, and the media have a responsibility to demand that candidates come forward now, before the next war vote in Congress, to explain themselves."

"I'm prepared to discuss the war, health care, trade, or any other issue anytime, anywhere, with any audience, answering any question from any media. And any candidate who won't shouldn't be President of the United States." ==

http://kucinich.us/node/3532

[MADem]

1. Because he's desperate for a bounce he isn't going to get. NT

[Tellurian]

9. The only thing Kucinich will get is dyspepsia before self-implosion...

[MADem]

14. He's doing this to get more campaign contributions. Maybe he's low on those Federal Matching Funds.

[Loge23]

2. One ticket for the grandstand, please

If having a consistent position on the phony war, the impeachment (that will never be, btw), and what he will and will not accept in campaign money is grandstanding, or an act of desperation, then I'll take a seat in the grandstand with him.
I understand it's much more important to the party to back an electable hack, but I'll pass thank you.
Once the mainstreamers get rid of Kucinich, I'll expect them to go after the other "kook", Gravel.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

3. That is the point. Why is he the only one who thinks this is happening?

Both Gravel and Dodd are lower than him in the polls. Biden is equal to him. Richardson is within the MoE of Kucinich in the national polls. Yet they are silent on this. Why do you think this is so?

This is not a thread to debate his candidacy. I have not criticized him for anything prior to this week. I think he is a great addition to the field and says some things that need to be said. That said, he is wrong in attacking fellow Democratic candidates based on a myth just so he can get his 15 minutes.

[Tellurian]

11. And the OP states he's speaking in Texas...of all places..

lecturing..."It's an insult to the voters, and the height of cynicism, for candidates to refuse to take the public stage and subject themselves to public scrutiny."

Substitute "government" for candidate and you have a home run!

Then this: "I'm prepared to discuss the war, health care, trade, or any other issue anytime, anywhere, with any audience, answering any question from any media. And any candidate who won't shouldn't be President of the United States."

So, where was he for the Cuomo sponsored Edwards and ..... debate?

[Adelante]

13. Dodd thinks this is happening

Dodd Assails Edwards-Clinton Remarks On Limiting Debates


SALT LAKE CITY (AP) _ Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd on Saturday criticized rivals John Edwards and Hillary Rodham Clinton, who were overheard discussing among themselves their hope of limiting the number of Democrats in presidential debates.

The private exchange was picked up by several broadcasters on an open microphone after an NAACP forum in Detroit on Thursday. All the Democratic contenders took part in the program, including Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich.

``I'd remind them that the mike is always on,'' Dodd told reporters on Saturday after addressing a state convention of Utah Democrats.

``Celebrity and money are not going to decide this race,'' he said. ``People take some offense at it in these early primary and caucus states.''

http://www.kotv.com/news/national/story/?id=131491

[draft_mario_cuomo]

19. He did not say there was a conspiracy in those comments

This is all we know he said (since he isn't grandstanding on the issue to get 15 minutes of fame. He simply was asked about it at an event.):
==``I'd remind them that the mike is always on,'' Dodd told reporters on Saturday after addressing a state convention of Utah Democrats.

``Celebrity and money are not going to decide this race,'' he said. ``People take some offense at it in these early primary and caucus states.''==

Nothing about a conspiracy. He stated the obvious and then the usual spiel about voters deciding who wins.

==Dodd blasted rivals for offering voters little more than ``bumper sticker answers'' to important issues.

``My problem is you're insulting me and the American public when you give 30 seconds to talk about Darfur and Iraq,'' he said. Sudan's vast western Darfur region has been torn by ethnic conflict for four years, with more than 200,000 people killed and millions displaced. ==

So where was Dodd for the Cuomo-sponsored Cooper Union Dialogue Series? http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3376264&mesg_id=3376264

[man4allcats]

7. Agreed!

I'll take a seat in the grandstand next to Dennis any day. The mainstream hacks make me sick. It is truly sad that this country has devolved to such a degree, has become so morally unprincipled, that we must take what we can get for leaders. RIP, America.

[MADem]

17. RIP, Dennis, you mean. America will go on, even if he doesn't. .

Your name doesn't match your philosophy, does it? At all.

But go throw money at him to keep him plugging along--he's looking for more federal money, and he can't get that unless he riles his one-percent base and shakes some more money out of them, so the feds can match those funds.

[man4allcats]

27. The name was chosen when I still believed Democrats

were Democrats and not Corporacrats. It's okay though. The monied elite do need their cheering section, don't they? You go right ahead with that. Personally, I was never big on attending football games and the like in high school. I march to my own drummer, now as then. And by the way, don't ever tell me what I mean. RIP, America.

[MADem]

33. The "monied elite" need their cheering section? Corporacrats? Did you just get back

from the Department of Dramatic Freshman College phrases or something? You might as well throw in a good old, home school "Fight the Powah!" too, while you're at it, whydoncha? Beats having to speak plainly and precisely, rather than generally and in Classic South Park Hippie sound bites.

You can whine all you want, but if everyone supporting the Obama/Edwards/Clinton primary troika is a 'moneyed elite' or a 'corporacrat,' well, then only three or four percent of the Democratic Party must be poor folk. In which case, wow, our agenda is totally hosed--we'd be more reflective of our group if we adopted GOP economic policies.

But that isn't our demographic, which is why your remarks appear dragged from some dark, fetid place where the truth doesn't flourish.

Who do you think I'll be cheering for, pray tell? You have no damned idea. You may have assumptions, but you'd probably be wrong. The only thing you know is that I don't like the stunts one marginal, fringe candidate pulled to gain himself some short term attention.

But hey, keep assuming, there! It's a real "progressive" (cough) attitude!

[man4allcats]

35. "Rah! Rah! Sis, Boom, Bah!"

I'm quite sure you'll make the squad.

[MADem]

36. ..... !!!!

Naw...I know when a cheerleading superior prances before me---I could NEVER top that!!! I wouldn't even TRY.

You musta gone to the Trent Lott School of Cheerleading! That's definitely the work of a real ... pro!!!

:rofl:

[man4allcats]

40. Just curious...

Do you rehearse your routines in front of the mirror before you post them on DU? They are so technically flawless. One might almost say they're narcissistic.

[MADem]

43. No. But what an odd thing for you to say.

You spend a lot of time in front of your mirror, do you?

I'd hardly call writing in complete sentences "technically flawless." It does seem to be a lost art, these days. And I can't see where you find narcissism in anything I've written. But then, that deliberately intended "unkind cut" came straight from you, didn't it?

I always find the "I'll bet you (fill in the blank)" sytle insults to be the most amusing. And overreaching.

Telling, certainly.

[man4allcats]

57. Oh Thrggghhhh!

Look that up in your Funk & Wagnalls.

[cyclezealot]

42. thanks, you encouraged me to increase my pledge.

of course the rich white woman would prefer not to discuss her past record. She is as much at fault for the Iraq war as is Judith Miller. Suckers born every day, or else she was just image spinning to be the hard azz to be the macho military senator. While others do their job as did Kucinich and can fortell lies as a Congressman , doing their job should. Lo and Behold, I think Dennis Kucinich was the only member of Congress to actually read the Patriot Act before he voted. Thank god, some members of Congress do the job they were elected to do. Know what it is they are voting on.

[MADem]

44. Well, gee, It worked, then, didn't it!

No one said DK was a fool. He knows how to rile his "base," minescule though it may be. Count on him going to the well at regular, quarterly intervals to try to boost his cash flow for as long as he can hang in there. I'm sure you'll oblige him!

What an interesting post. I find the most interesting attitudes on this putatively progressive site. The comparison of a Senator with a moderate to liberal voting record to Judith Miller is a riot. That must make Jack Murtha the equivalent of Rush Limbaugh, all things being equal.

[cyclezealot]

49. My point. Hillary was doing her job as a senator about as well

as Judith Miller did her's as a Journalist. Can't see how that statement as the least bit controversial. you are the one who is suckered in by not knowing a politican who is genuine from those who are a fake. I have heard Dennis Kucinich speak at great length. He was once a journalist and accredited as such. No wonder he is skeptical and knows how to do his job, instead of just twist with the wind.

[MADem]

55. Oh, sure.....

:eyes: :rofl:

That's why Judy was FIRED from her job, and Clinton reelected in a landslide.

But never mind what those NY (a fairly populous state, much more populated than an Ohio representative's district) voters think. Yeah, their senator is doing such a lousy job they return her to her seat in a walk. And of course, it was all those corporate goons holding guns to the voters' heads in the voting booths, forcing them to pull the lever for Clinton.

The only view that matters, apparently, is that of the aptly-named "cyclezealot."

The logic does amuse, though.

[cyclezealot]

52. I rest my case.

Not saying won't reluctantly vote for her, if I HAVE to. But, I rest my case. Expect more turn coat trangulation as Bill did.
From the current title page of DU.


John Mack, Morgan Stan­ley’s chief executive, is to invite senior staff to a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton on Monday, in a pointed endorse­ment of the Democratic presidential hopeful from an important backer of President George W. Bush in 2004.

Mrs Clinton, a New York senator, is scheduled to appear at the fundraiser on the 41st floor of Morgan Stanley’s headquarters in Times Square

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2918339

[MADem]

56. If DK could get that kind of swag, he'd eschew his public financing.

In a heartbeat.

He's desperate to get his numbers up, because if he doesn't, guess what? He won't be able to go to the public trough for public financing cash again in four years...and he barely squesked through from last time.

He knows unless he pulls some major attention-seeking stunts that he's not gonna be able to keep those numbers up. Even with stunts, it's iffy. His two issues aren't just his, and he hasn't expounded beyond them to a national audience (because he's too cheap and lazy to do any fundraising).

That's the way politics works.

[cyclezealot]

58. because he won't sell out and is too honest

to prostitute himself the way the Big THree so readily do. Go to his campaign web site. He has so many conditions on his fundraising. You never sat down and talked to the man. You do not know what you are talking about.You are only familiar with TV imagery. He will not follow the traditional financial pathway of the Big Three- because that path is so damned corrupt. That is why we got triangulation. And a major reason we are for Kucinich. Might as well have Bush, since the BIg Three did not know when they were being lied to in 2003. I knew it was all fabricated lies, those who read the foreign press all knew it. Kucinich knew it. Yet, the Big Three thought we look macho if we follow the Cheney line. No thanks. We don' t need anymore of that kind of lousy slackers making policy. And why are you so damned concerned about his/our issues. Kucinich backers do not 'publically' lambast Hillary for her money connections . The only way to have unity following the primaries is to let each candidate have their chance. Making the process skewed so the various wings of the party have not had their say is the best way to assure we bolt to a real life Candidate like Nader. I suspect you do not like to hear the truth about certain issues. The loyalty of the Kucinich backer is obvious from the last election. Kucinich released his delegates. Encouraged them to vote for Kerry. MOst did not.

[MADem]

59. He has conditions on his fundraising BECAUSE he is accepting Federal Matching Funds.

Not because he's a Saint.

:eyes:

Your last three sentences say, in essence, that Kucinich is a disruptive Naderesque character in Democrat's clothing, who attracts contrarian supporters who are of absolutely NO USE to the Democratic Party and don't vote for Democrats when the rubber meets the road. Frankly, we really don't need that childish, attention-seeking shit AGAIN.

The loyalty of the Kucinich backer is obvious from the last election. Kucinich released his delegates. Encouraged them to vote for Kerry. MOst did not.

[cyclezealot]

60. Kucinich worked for Kerry, Campaigned for kerry

As Did I also vote for Kerry, if my vote has any significance; as it doesn't. Kucinich is the only hope to bring Green oriented people into the party; of which I am not one. It is just if the Democrats have the wrong postion on trade , health care, and Iraq- they will get my vote and nothing more. Can't be enthusiatic when they subscribe to triangulation.
I am a Democrat, just issue first and not a Yellow Democrat hack as maybe you are.
I note you made assumptions about one's Nader affiliations which are incorrect. I admire Nader but have never voted for him. Bush was too much a risk. However, I note you ignore the question. Why are you so eager to not let a significant opinion in the Democratic party be heard. Hitting a nerve there are we? The way to unifiy the party is the end is let everyone speak without stifflying debate. Then unity is possible. Shut up a part of the party and resentment will be the end result.

[MADem]

61. Wow, way to back track!!

You said MOST Kucinich supporters didn't vote for KERRY.

That tells me that MOST Kucinich supporters, if they can't support the Democrat in the GENERAL, will have to start thinking about a new place to fling their shit once Dennis loses every single primary, as this isn't Third Party Spoilers Underground. The DU rules are pretty clear in that regard, thank heavens.

Hey, YOUR words. You were the one who said that "MOst" of DK's supporters were worthless, from a Democratic Party perspective.

Those words. You typed 'em, you live by 'em.

[cyclezealot]

62. you are not paying attention

I said most Kucinich supporters at the Democratic Convention did not switch to a Kerry Vote AT the nominating convention. A big difference. Once they got home, who knows. I voted for Kerry. A party that railroads a part of the party is not very Democratic.

[MADem]

63. Oh, yes I am. I paid close attention,

That's NOT what you said. I saw what you wrote, I NOTED what you wrote, and that bothered you enough that you changed the sense of the words.

Don't try to BS your way out of that 'inconvenient truth.' Moving goalposts, while unsurprising, isn't the way to make your point credibly--it just doesn't cut it. You told a little too much truth, there, and now you're regretting it.

:eyes:

[nolabels]

64. I once read where honey attracted more flies than vinegar.

I will just be glad when this primary is over because the monotony of smelling old pickles kind of makes me nauseous :puke:

[cyclezealot]

66. said I'd vote for Hillary

even if I expect triangulation. What more do you want. What you want is a controlled debate, so we can ignore the fact all Democrats are not always perfect.

[MADem]

67. "what YOU want is....."

Really, that's what I want?

No, it isn't. It's amazing how people somehow know what others want, without even asking. That's a cousin to the "I'll bet you" childish meme I see here way too much (e.g.; I'll bet you are a Republican/child hater/smoker/Bush Enabler/ad nauseum).

I'd like small groups and themes. And frankly, I'd like the primetime airtime to go to the people with the most supporters. That seems somehow FAIR to me. I'd like to see the leaders go head-to-head first, but I have no objection to mixing it up subsequently.

I really think you disrespect and insult the electorate when you treat candidates who have vigorously campaigned, garnered real people who support them, worked fifteen hour days over a period of a year or more, who are polling in double digits, in the same way that you treat someone running a 'vanity' campaign, making an appearance or two per WEEK, gand polling between zero and two percent. And get irritated when the obvious unfairness is noted.

If you have made up your mind to vote for Hillary when (not if) your first choice isn't selected, well, you assume she makes it to the show. She's strong now, like Dean was, but I don't think she's sewn it up yet.

See, I am still an undecided voter--save Kucinich and Gravel, I will not vote for either one of them; and I lean away from Richardson and Dodd, simply because they aren't pushing for it, they seem to be running for cabinet posts--but I have NOT made up my mind and chosen one of the front runners to support in the primary.

Unless Gore gets in, then I have a candidate.

Of course, Fox news, as they do, got this party started. Kucinich just brought an appetizer.

I always consider the source.

[cyclezealot]

69. sure got that wrong.

I am more of a McGovernite Democrat who votes for issues over personalities. Proudest moment was when McGovern won the nomination, the candidate I worked for in the Indiana primary. And history has shown that loss to Nixon to be a disaster.
Unlike you listening to candidates' platitudes and thinking they mean something, I know what I want and accept only those who will work to improve the lot of the American people. Instead of compromise with their corporate backers.

[MADem]

16. Ah, much better to back an UNELECTABLE grandstander!

:rofl:

Good grief.

Maybe if we could actually hear from those "hacks" in real conversations, we'd find out they aren't "hacks" at all, but experienced and thinking people with well-formulated ideas who have managed to convince large numbers of real, regular voters--you know, supporters--that their ideas should be heard.

One percent is one percent. Enjoy your "uniqueness."

[penguin7]

70. So Kucinich shouldn't call attention to the fact that the campaign is rigged?

Kucinich was handled this golden opportunity to show that the campaign is rigged.

He took it.

[Alexander]

4. Why are Clinton and Edwards hacks making excuses for their candidates?

Spin, spin, spin away. :eyes:

[pnwmom]

5. I favor Obama but I think Kucinich is grandstanding.

The debates ARE ridiculous, with so many people participating in each one. It's impossible to cover anything in any depth. If we had twenty candidates, would all twenty expect to debate?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

6. I asked a simple question. What is your answer about the silence of Gravel, Dodd and co.?

Thanks in advance.

[Alexander]

8. Perhaps they don't think it applies to them?

I'm sure Biden, Dodd and Richardson have all reached the point where they'd expect to be included in any presidential debate.

That leaves Mike Gravel. Does anything more need to be said?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

20. Even though they are on par with Kucinich in the polls?

Biden was one point ahead of Kucinich, Richardson tied Kucinich in the latest Gallup poll while both Gravel and Dodd trailed him. Dodd was at 0% in that poll.

Perhaps it is because they have looked at the facts and see no conspiracy and no point in attacking fellow Democrats with a baseless smear in order to get 15 minutes of fame during this long campaign.

==The current numbers for the rest of the Democrats included in the survey: Sen. Joseph Biden, 3%; Rep. Dennis Kucinich, 2%; Gov. Bill Richardson, 2%; former senator Mike Gravel, 1%. Sen. Christopher Dodd drew no support.==

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/07/usatgallup-poll.html

[Alexander]

24. Well Dodd is no longer silent. So now there's 2.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

28. As far as we know, Dodd does not believe in the conspiracy

The CMSM and others at DU are spinning his remarks.

[cyclezealot]

65. its because we really don't have an exchange of ideas

it's because its a money race. Latest Hillary took tons of cash from Murdock. I see no difference from Murdock and Fox news, myself. Some are interested in the horse race others think the primaries are about determining national policy. That means the likes of MaDem is probably only interested in a pretty face rather than issues.

[Alamom]

12. Excuses for what?

[Alexander]

18. Trying to exclude candidates. Dodd and Kucinich don't like that, apparently.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

21. Kucinich likes camera time and campaign contributions

He has presented zero evidence that there was an attempt to exclude him--or any of the current anointed 8 candidates. Kucinich has been silent on the exclusion of 11 other Democratic presidential candidates, though...

[Alexander]

25. And Edwards and Clinton like to exclude candidates.

Why can't their supporters just admit it? :shrug:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

29. What evidence do you have to prove that claim?

How about sharing it in this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3377729

[draft_mario_cuomo]

46. Anyone? Any evidence? Thanks in advance nt

[Alamom]

10. It's a non issue. The real story may be yet to come.

[Hollow Shells]

15. A better question is...

Why is Kucinich the only one grandstanding our values? Why is he the only candidate that hits every issue square on the head?

[Big Pappa]

22. Why was DK the only one calling for

no war in Iraq back in 2003? Where was Biden, Kerry, Dodd, Edwards, Clinton. Looking back Mr. Kucinich had it right. What automatically makes him wrong now.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

30. What makes him wrong now? A lack of evidence for his baseless smearing of other Dem candidates nt

[cyclezealot]

51. Your confused. It's Gravel who smears the other Dems.

Kucinch has never, ever taken his campaign on a personal attack basis .That is counter to his ethics as a mediator. He sticks to issues.

[IndianaGreen]

23. Chris Dodd: Edwards, Clinton Chided for Exchange

Edwards, Clinton Chided for Exchange
By BROCK VERGAKIS, Associated Press Writer
1 hour ago

SALT LAKE CITY - Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd on Saturday criticized rivals John Edwards and Hillary Rodham Clinton, who were overheard discussing among themselves their hope of limiting the number of Democrats in presidential debates.

The private exchange was picked up by several broadcasters on an open microphone after an NAACP forum in Detroit on Thursday. All the Democratic contenders took part in the program, including Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich.

"I'd remind them that the mike is always on," Dodd told reporters on Saturday after addressing a state convention of Utah Democrats.

"Celebrity and money are not going to decide this race," he said. "People take some offense at it in these early primary and caucus states."

http://www.comcast.net/news/index.jsp?cat=GENERAL&fn=/2007/07/14/714567.html&cvqh=itn_edwards

[Alexander]

26. There you go

The forgotten 5 are going to see this as an opening to attack two front-runners.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

32. Which will not do anything for their aleady low poll numbers... nt

[draft_mario_cuomo]

31. Where did he criticize the alleged conspiracy in those comments?

He stated the obvious truth in the post-macaca era and then made the usual statement about voters deciding the race, not money or celebrity. There is nothing in those comments about a conspiracy.

It should be noted Dodd was apparently asked about this. He did not immediately opt to grandstand on this for 15 minutes of fame.

[MADem]

34. Ah yes. The "private exchange" on a stage with more than a dozen people milling about, shaking

hands, slapping backs and chit chatting. Yeah, a real "private exchange." So private that you can hear others talking through THEIR mikes, that Faux so kindly isolated to get that conversation.

I always do my conspiring while surrounded by my opposition, too--makes it much more exciting, kinda like Secret Agent Man!

Dodd is right though--it's not "celebrity and money" that will ultimately decide the race--it will be the one with the most supporters who get out and vote on Election Day that will win.

And Dodd is no fan of the existing soundbite format either:

"My problem is you're insulting me and the American public when you give 30 seconds to talk about Darfur and Iraq," he said.

And there's a curious correction at the bottom of that article:

(This version CORRECTS that Dodd blasted debate organizers, not other Democratic candidates, for providing little time for more than "bumper sticker answers" on important issues.)

AP seems awfully good lately at starting dustups and then backing away from them with little corrections that obviate the original focus....hmmm. Be interesting to see the uncorrected article.

[IndianaGreen]

37. And the rich white woman, and the rich white guy, ignoring the upstart black man

rather than including him in the conversation.

It was collusion!

Obama is a threat to Hillary, and Edwards cannot compete with Hillary while Obama is in the race, so the two of them have an interest in making a deal with the corporate media as to debate format and debate participants.

[MADem]

38. Hahahahahaha!!

Now THAT's funny.

These two nefarious conspirators were hatching an evil plot surrounded by dozens of people. You can HEAR the others babbling away on the mikes of the two that Faux so kindly left on and honed in on.

The DK crowd think it's HIM they want out of the herd, and your thesis is it's Obama the damn near front runner the two 'crackers' were conspiring about...and with ALL THAT...

NOT ONE NAME was mentioned by either "conspirator!!"

Assumptions! Aren't they a hoot!

[IndianaGreen]

39. but aren't we having a good time talking about it?

:-)

[draft_mario_cuomo]

45. Obama is a millionaire as well

Regarding collusion, what evidence do you have to prove that? Thanks in advance.

[Evergreen Emerald]

41. I am disappointed in Dennis K. he is spinning and exaggerating

in an attempt to again attention. I had always thought I could trust him as a straight talker.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

47. This is exactly what he did after the big 3 backed out of the Faux debate

He went to bat for Faux and attacked them just to get some publicity.

[IndianaGreen]

48. I see that Hillary's spin machine has the same knack for mendacity as Karl Rove's

Nice trick there accusing Dennis of "grandstanding," another play on the "attention whore" smear that was used against another antiwar progressive.

Then we have Hillary herself saying that it was all Edwards' doing. Wow, just what we need in the White House, another President that will not take responsibility for his or her actions.

Now, back to the issue at hand. Why in the hell were Hillary and Edwards talking about tailoring the debates to their campaigns' needs, at the voters expense?

[ncabot22]

50. You always make great points, IG n/t

[Radical Activist]

53. Like his spin about Obama and Iran.

That was total crap.

[ProudDad]

54. Even though Kucinich didn't use the word

YOU put it into his mouth with YOUR title of this thread:

"The cancellation in the past two days of two planned nationally televised debates because of candidates' "scheduling conflicts" and unwillingness to participate smacks of "manipulation by some candidates who would rather run and hide than defend their records and their positions on the war," Ohio Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich said today while campaigning in Texas.

Widely publicized Presidential debates in New Hampshire in April and in Nevada in August were cancelled after some candidates either backed out after agreeing to participate or declined invitations to attend.

"Whatever their excuses, some candidates are clearly trying to avoid any head-to-head public debate where they will have to answer tough questions -- questions about their votes in favor of the Iraq war, their votes in favor of trade policies that have wiped out millions of American jobs, their votes in favor of abridging Constitutional rights by approving the Patriot Act, and their collaboration with insurance companies and pharmaceutical corporations to deny Americans adequate health care protection."

Kucinich said, "It's an insult to the voters, and the height of cynicism, for candidates to refuse to take the public stage and subject themselves to public scrutiny."

This sure as FUCK sounds like a conspiracy to me.

At best, it appears to be an attack of cowardice among the alleged "top tier".

[rinsd]

68. Kucinich is being very hypocritical in that instance.

"Kucinich said, "It's an insult to the voters, and the height of cynicism, for candidates to refuse to take the public stage and subject themselves to public scrutiny."

This from a guy who has missed quite a few debates with challengers to his Congressional seat both in the primaries and general election.