Kucinich has the Democratic platform

[mac2]

Dennis Kucinich is the only Democrat with the message. If we want jobs, clean air, no war, rigths, etc. ...he's the only choice left. Just read his agenda and policies.

Dean/Kerry...Telling Americans that they should get out there and create new industry and jobs...is blaming them for bad government. Not the leaders who gave the jobs away for cheaper labor, etc.

The others left I would vote for but not like it.

If this next win is Dean, Kerry, or Edwards..and they don't do something about the World Unions/WTO and our freedoms, I'm going to vote Independent.

[Rhiannon12866]

1. I agree with you about Kucinich

He's my candidate, as well, and has been since the beginning. I first started listening to him when he continued to speak out against the Iraq war, despite criticism by Republicans. When I heard his whole message, I decided that this was one candidate that I could give my complete support. I am just so frustrated that he hasn't done better in the primaries. I guess most Americans just aren't listening.:-(

[Freddie Stubbs]

2. I hope that he will support the part of the platform about Isreal

In areas where conflict has raged, comprehensive peace agreements are the foundation for lasting security. Bill Clinton and Al Gore have actively pursued peaceful resolutions to conflicts across the world and have been prepared to go the extra mile on behalf of negotiators seeking peace. Al Gore and the Democratic Party are fundamentally committed to the security of our ally, Israel, and the creation of a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace between Israel and its neighbors. We helped broker the Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty, the Wye River accords, and the Sharm el-Sheik Memorandum, and will continue to work with all parties to make progress towards peace. Our special relationship with Israel is based on the unshakable foundation of shared values and a mutual commitment to democracy, and we will ensure that under all circumstances, Israel retains the qualitative military edge for its national security. Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths. In view of the government of Israel's courageous decision to withdraw from Lebanon, we believe special responsibility now resides with Syria to make a contribution toward peace. The recently-held Camp David summit, while failing to bridge all the gaps between Israel and the Palestinians, demonstrated President Clinton's resolve to do all the United States could do to bring an end to that long conflict. Al Gore, as president, will demonstrate the same resolve. We call on both parties to avoid unilateral actions, such as a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood, that will prejudge the outcome of negotiations, and we urge the parties to adhere to their joint pledge to resolve all differences only by good faith negotiations.

http://www.democrats.org/about/2000platform.html#peace

[IrateCitizen]

3. Please expand on your reasoning for this, Freddie

Our special relationship with Israel is based on the unshakable foundation of shared values and a mutual commitment to democracy, and we will ensure that under all circumstances, Israel retains the qualitative military edge for its national security.

First off, I fail to see how Israel can be held up as an example of a state with a "committment to democracy", considering the manner in which they have disenfranchised large portions of their population -- and those people are condemned to live in Bantustans, without the right to vote yet with the land surrounding their enclaves under strict control of the Israeli government.

Secondly, which do you think does more, in the long term, to provide security to Israel? Military strength, or a univeral committment to human rights and human dignity? Your tendency to fall back on the use of force and violence as an acceptable problem-solving method is indeed most alarming.

[Freddie Stubbs]

4. The problem is that Israel's enemy's don't want peace, human rights, or

dignity. They want Israel's destruction.

I'm sure that if Kucinich were a member of Congress back in 2000, he would have fought hard as a superdelegate to change this part of the platform.

[IrateCitizen]

6. I'm not so certain that's as universal as you think, anymore

You provide a pretty damning statement there without providing proof, Freddie. While I am quite aware of some rather radical elements of the Arab world who would like nothing more than to see the nation of Israel driven into the sea, there are also significant numbers of Arabs who are quite willing to live in peace with an Israel that respects human rights and dignity.

An excellent example of this would be the proposals floated by Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, calling for a complete recognition of Israel in exchange for their pulling out of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The very fact that Arab leaders are willing to float such a proposal is such a sea change from what they were saying 25 years ago, that it must be recognized as a positive change.

Furthermore, against whom as Israel's military been used most over the past five years?
a) Egypt
b) Syria
c) Palestinians in refugee camps

So, the question then arises -- for what reason have we been arming Israel to the teeth over the past decade? Has it been to repel the hoardes of Arab invaders storming the gates of Jerusalem? Or has it been to enforce the internal policy of keeping the Palestinians in Bantustans within the occupied territories?

Lastly, Dennis Kucinich WAS a member of Congress in 2000 (he was elected to the House in 1996), so you should probably be able to look it up whether your allegation is true or not. Until you can prove it as such, it is completely unfounded.

[no name no slogan]

14. That's bullshit, Freddy

The Palestinians have wanted a two-state solution based on the pre-1967 boundaries since the 1980s. The PLO has recognized Israel's right to exist, as have most of its Arab neighbors.

Unfortunately, Israel has ignored UN resolutions to withdraw from the territories and continues to build settlements there, too.

And, you need to go look at DK's positions on the middle east, too before you make such outlandish accusations as you just did. From the link (emphasis mine):

(Rep. Kucinich's statement on House Resolution 392, expressing "solidarity with Israel" as it battles "the terrorist infrastructure in the Palestinian areas" -- May 2002)

I declare my support for the State of Israel and for the security of the Israeli people. I also declare my support for a Palestinian state and for the security of the Palestinian people. So I will vote present today because I believe the security of Israel requires the security of the Palestinians.

I will vote present because I believe the United States can do better through honest brokering, and a principled commitment to peaceful coexistence.

....

The same humanity that requires us to acknowledge with profound concerns the pain and suffering of the people of Israel requires a similar expression for the pain and suffering of the Palestinians. When our brothers and sisters are fighting to the death, instead of declaring solidarity with one against the other, should we not declare solidarity with both for peace, so that both may live in security and freedom?

If we seek to require the Palestinians, who do not have their own state, to adhere to a higher standard of conduct, should we not also ask Israel, with over a half century experience with statehood, to adhere to the basic standard of conduct, including meeting the requirements of international law?

....

When this Congress enters into the conflict and takes sides between Israel and Palestine we do not help to achieve peace, but the opposite. Similarly, the Administration should consider that when it conducts a war against terrorism without limits the principle of war is quickened everywhere in the world, including the Middle East. When it talks incessantly about invading Iraq, the tempo of war is picked up everywhere.

If we truly want peace in the Middle East, this resolution is counter-productive. I will vote present because I do not believe that this resolution dignifies the role towards creating peace, which this Congress can and must fulfill.

Dennis Kucinich supports Israel, that is quite clear. Your attempts at "Israel-baiting" are not only deceptive, but mean-spirited and half-arsed as well. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[lcordero]

5. Sorry dude

The "human rights and dignity" thing does not cut it. If an aggressor against me gained 92% of the land they are occupying by force(since 1948) I would want to rub them the fuck out.
No policies or aid and total withdrawal from the problems over there are the only answer.

[IrateCitizen]

8. So, revenge is your game then, lcordero?

If an aggressor against me gained 92% of the land they are occupying by force(since 1948) I would want to rub them the fuck out.

And you're expecting your response of violence to injustice to be what? Are you expecting to stop the violence through the employment of violence?

Sorry, dude. That's a no-win scenario. For a true peace, somebody has to be willing to take the first step. And the second step is forgiveness for past injustice with the goal being the cessation of such injustice in the present a future.

You can have your cold dish of vengance if you wish, but that's not a meal that I've ever found to be very fulfilling.

[lcordero]

9. Yup, you are right

"Justice" is bought and sold on a daily basis. "Justice", like anything else, is a piece of merchandise with a price tag on it.
Accountability and Responsibility will be exercised at all costs.
Lack of accountability and responsibility is the reason why we are in the fix that we are in today.
I'll extract my pound of flesh anyway that I can get it.

on edit: Vengeance is poor man's "do it yourself" justice.

[IrateCitizen]

10. In the words of Lennon/McCartney in "Revolution"...

You say you got a real solution
Well you know
We'd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well you know
We're doing what we can
But when you want money for people with minds that hate
All I can tell you is brother you have to wait

Let me know when you extract that pound of flesh, and how much satisfaction or "justice" you gain from it. I'd be willing to wager that your answers will be "none" or "very little", and "none", respectively.

But hey, have fun with it anyways. Hate is a great motivator, steeped in the tradition of luminaries like Gandhi and Martin Luther King, right?

[lcordero]

11. I like MLK and Ghandi as much as anybody but

Tell me how they have changed the world. Have they? No they haven't.

I'm still all for completely withdrawing from the Middle East.

If they want to keep fighting then they could do it by all means...just without taxpayer money and resources.

[IrateCitizen]

13. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see...

:sigh:

Tell me how they have changed the world. Have they? No they haven't.

They most certainly have changed the world, and for the better. Not by changing everything for us, but by showing us the way by which WE can change the world.

Prior to Gandhi, nonviolent civil disobedience was pretty much an unknown concept. Gandhi showed us how powerful of a tool it could be. But he also realized that it was not powerful in the hands of just one person -- but it was a way of life that had to be adopted by masses of people in order to REALLY change things.

MLK was much the same in this regard. His movement was not about him -- it was about the WAY by which we could affect real change. And real change was brought about during his time -- change that could have been much bloodier and tumultuous had those seeking it instead adopted the "pound of flesh" attitude that you are espousing.

King spells this all out quite clearly in his book, "Strength to Love." In speaking of the death of segregation, he says that it is imperative for those who have suffered under segregation to make the first step in forgiving those who have wreaked injustice upon them. Only by doing so will the cycle of hatred be broken, and true healing be allowed to commence.

You say you "like" Gandhi and MLK, but I don't think you understand them much at all.

WRT the Middle East, I am all for placing serious conditions on Israel for their foreign aid. But that placing of conditions is quite different from the exacting of revenge that you supported earlier.

[lcordero]

16. Segregation is NOT OVER by any means

Go to the different parts of NYC and you'll see what I'm talking about. Just like there are two Americas, there are two public school systems here.

[no name no slogan]

15. Here's something you may find interesting

Did you know that SIX countries have had non-violent revolutions in the last 25 years, which led to greater freedom and Democracy?

That's right, SIX. I got that number from Coleman McCarthy, a respected ex-WaPo columnist who now leads a non-profit peace organization in D.C.

So, I guess you're right. Non-violence as passive resistance don't work. Just ask Nelson Mandela, or Lech Valesa, or Vaclav Havel for example.

[blindpig]

12. that won't work

look, I think you & I agree that the founding of the modern state of Israel was a great crime against the Palestinian people. That said, pushing Israel into the sea would be as great a crime! Two wrongs don't make a right. History cannot be undone. True justice would have given the surviving Jews of europe a chunk of Germany, perhaps the Rhineland. That's water under the bridge now. I think if Isreal would make some real concessions like redrawing the borders to connect Gaza & the West Bank then true peace might be had. That and making Jerusalem an international city run by the UN. But what do I know?
By your logic white folks should be expelled from North America due to the horrible history that put us here. Just in some sense maybe, but causing more injustice in execution.

[Catholic Sensation]

7. ....

Dean/Kerry...Telling Americans that they should get out there and create new industry and jobs...is blaming them for bad government. Not the leaders who gave the jobs away for cheaper labor, etc.

So when Dean and Kerry criticize Bush's record on jobs, they're blaming Americans?

When Kerry refers to corporations who move their shit out of the country as Benidict Arnold corporations, he's blaming other Americans?

When Kerry says he has a plan in place to create 500 thousand new jobs, he's going to make Americans do the legwork?

I love the use of alogic (non-logic if you prefer) in your post. Kucinich, or any other Democrat, would be a strong improvement over Bush.