Why the Kucinich bashing threads?

[mmonk]

Because some of us have been pointing out Obama seems to govern more to the center/right than we would want? Or did something happen? Just curious. Can't people make up their own minds or have independent thought on some issues?

[QC]

1. Lately there's more red-baiting here than at the John Birch Society July 4 Picnic.

Strange, isn't it, to find that on an ostensibly progressive site?

[mmonk]

5. Pretty much. Been away most of the day and log in tonight to see

meaningless irrelevant mean spirited threads. Must have been some day around here.

[QC]

15. No different than any other day, alas. n/t

[Le Taz Hot]

71. DU is actually VERY centrist

and always has been. NEVER have we been a progressive site. Having said that, there are maybe 20-25 RABID centrist cheerleaders on this board that bombard this site with "How dare you say anything bad about my god/hero Obama" that makes it seem that they are larger in number than they really are. I usually skip their posts as I already know what they're going to say -- they're like a broken record. Occasionally, when I'm bored, I'll poke at 'em just to light 'em up. It's fun to watch.

[AndrewP]

75. Well said

[inna]

89. Interestingly, one of the biggest red-baiters and Kucinich bashers on this site just got TSed.

What do you know. :shrug:

[QC]

101. Excellent.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=142935

[RetroLounge]

103. About fucking time

:woohoo:

RL

[QC]

107. That is a very gratifying pizza, is it not? n/t

[slipslidingaway]

104. Surprise, surprise :) n/t

[freddie mertz]

120. I am not going to crow and dance on the grave like "some" do, but...

THAT is very interesting.

[sendero]

119. Oh...

... happy fucking day. Won't have to argue with that tard any more.

[endless october]

2. no Kucinich bashing from me.

he's one of the good guys.

[phasma ex machina]

32. +1

:hide:

[Starry Messenger]

3. Evidently Shirley Maclaine said something about UFOs and Kucinich

and now we're all supposed to take the word of a woman (whom I love as an actress) who has also claimed many other things that are very dubious.

[Echo In Light]

78. RWers latched onto that bygone bit like white on rice

[Starry Messenger]

80. So have supposed "Dems" here of late.

Most curious, isn't it?

[Echo In Light]

82. Exactly what I was alluding to

You see, in my estimation, some of the worst RWers are those who prefer not to directly cast themselves as such.

[Starry Messenger]

83. Agreed.

One would think they would try to be less obvious however. Some of the things written here recently could have been line for line the same things written about Dennis on Free Republic.

[rudy23]

92. Free Republic/DLC "New Democrats" -- what's the difference?

They are pretty much on the same team.

[Starry Messenger]

100. Less obvious drool stains.

Serious answer: those with any pretensions to leftist positions usually take the position of "Of course, I'm on your side. But only up to a point. If you are too loud, too demanding, too _______" I will withhold my support." That's the difference I see. It's not outright the Party of No, it's the Kinder, Gentler Party of No.

[greennina]

4. Why isn't there more of it?

That's a better question.

[tekisui]

6. Thanks for your deep insight and contribution.

:eyes:

[mcablue]

7. I think most DU'ers simply have a lot in common with Kucinich

I remember taking one of those tests to see which candidate reflected my views best, and Kucinich came out on top.

[mmonk]

53. Same here. At the time, I was supporting someone else.

From then on, I sent him contributions when I could. Don't let the childish behavior of others get you down. Evidently they are feeling touchy about things lately.

[ima_sinnic]

51. wow, a real "democrat"

so nice of you to be hanging around here. Don't get mixed up now and get lost or anything.

[BlooInBloo]

8. It's just criticism. It's our JOB to criticize our elected officials. Remember?

Oh - right - that only applies to one person.

[mmonk]

10. There is a difference in criticism and personal attack. But I guess

in today's political climate, people can't tell the difference.

[KG]

9. coz Nader is sooo 2000?

:P

[mmonk]

69. Yep.

A new bogey man is needed.

[karynnj]

11. I suspect it is a combination of anger on his votes against legislation

that likely is the best that could pass the House on important issues and the fact that Kucinich fans have threads praising him as "America's Congressman" and other superlatives, while saying that everyone else is corrupt.

I suspect the combination leads to people making harsher statements against Kucinich than they otherwise would make or even think.

I do think that you might also have hit on something - it might be that this happens more when people are unhappy with either Obama or Congress. Internet discussion forumns have exploded over the last decade. For many, there entire experience has been under a Republican President. (I know there were Usenet groups way back - even before Clinton) Some have difficulty seeing that, unlike during the general election, supporting Obama is not the sole goal of this site.

[flvegan]

12. Whinybabies, mostly.

Obama has lost a bit of his sparkle lately, so attempting to tear down a true progressive is the best distraction they have.

[FrenchieCat]

14. So is it automatic that those dogging out Kucinich for his recent votes

are big supporters of Obama? Cause I support the President,
and I support Dennis Kucinich.

But I haven't seen many Kucinich flame threads but a like three (3) earlier this week.

Where are these threasd? And who started them.....Cause the three that I saw,
two (2)were started by Kucinich big time supporters mad at one (1) thread referencing
Kucinich in a negative way due to his votes.

Is there somewhere I'm not looking? :shrug:

[flvegan]

20. Rarely is something automatic.

We should instead call it a weeklong trend.

[slipslidingaway]

105. As soon as he came out against the Afghanistan escalation, people were...

asking 'Then why did he vote for the war'

Check out who was one of the first to post that line, you might be surprised, if you look in the mirror.

[thelordofhell]

13. They're just jealous......

Because he has a hot wife.

:spank:

[phasma ex machina]

33. +1

:hide:

[Dinger]

16. Haven't You Heard? Dennis Is A Right Winger

To some people. (NOT to me)

[sabrina 1]

49. Lol, yes, that's the latest talking point to come from the DLC

think tank. I love watching them come up with talking points when they cannot defea a real progressive on the issues. So, they try to be Rovian (someone they really admire btw, for his 'political strategy') and use the old method of throwing out something so outrageous that it will distract from the real issues.

As if that works. The truth is that Kucinich has been right about Health Care, he was right about Iraq and he was right about the bail-outs. And when someone is right on the issues, it, in the minds of the DLCers, makes their guys who have been wrong on the issues now for over a year, look bad. So all they know how to do at that point, is to personally attack him.

It doesn't work, as it doesn't change the fact that he is right and that they cannot come up with a logical explanation for why the Dems with control of all three branches of government, still claim the need 'bi-partisanship' to get anything done. Which no one believes. They could have gone for a Single Payer system last January, but they didn't because that was not the plan. The plan was to bail out the failing private Insurance Industry, just as they bailed out the failed banks. We were conned and Kucinich says so out loud, so they hate him for that.

[rudy23]

93. I agree 100%. Rahm Emanuel thinks he can be the Karl Rove of Democrats, and has similar disdain

for the idealistic majority of his own base. These people are reptiles.

[sabrina 1]

98. Couldn't agree more. They all want to be Karl Rove

It is disgusting. I was shocked a few years ago when I saw Democrats at a party with Karl Rove. It took a while to absorb the fact that we live in two different worlds from those who claim to represent the people. Their morals are very different. The people have lost control of this government.

[MellowDem]

17. Probably because...

Kucinich is generally unpragmatic and unrealistic in trying to get reform. Everyone here pretty much agrees with him on goals, it's just how to get there that people disagree with him on. Obama governs to the center because he has to to get things done in the government system he is in, to start moving it to the left. Kucinich can come across as an ideological blowhard who would rather cut off his nose to spite his face than get any meaningful reform passed.

[ZombieHorde]

116. He votes with the Dems over 90% of the time, that is pretty pragmatic. nt

[ROFF]

18. Because he acts like

a petulant spoiled brat. If he can't have everything that he wants, the way he wants, right now, he will vote against it.

An adult would understand that with a major piece of legislation like Health Care, you first pass the basic bill, then over the next few years, you improve it a little at a time.

That is what happened with Medicare and other landmark legislation.

Act like an adult and you will be treated like one.

[951-Riverside]

21. @If he can't have everything that he wants, the way he wants, right now, he will vote against it.

So, voting against something that you disagree with is bad now?

I guess I should have voted for Mccain/Palin then.

[Davis_X_Machina]

31. The petulance isn't limited to the Senator. In 2004, his supporters kept the....

...Maine state Democratic convention tied up so long debating on the floor -- not in platform committee, where it belonged -- their proposal to add a plank endorsing the creation of a state -- not Federal -- Department of Peace, Why this was useful, when states don't conduct foreign policy, or who was going to staff it, or pay for it, or what its purview would be was never answered.

So we got two hours of floor debate, which they ultimately lost. By that time the plank calling on the state's congressional delegation to initiate an investigation whether Bush and Cheney had committed impeachable offenses came up -- the reason why most of us were actually there -- there was no longer a quorum on the floor.

[CTLawGuy]

58. What is the point of a Department of Peace

even at the Federal Level?

[G_j]

62. George Washington wanted a Dept of Peace

check it out sometime

[Davis_X_Machina]

86. Dennis lo vult. n/t

[ZombieHorde]

115. Does calling people names count as acting like an adult? nt

[nemo137]

19. Coordinated DLC attack, apparently.

Although very few people say it, preferring to hide being "we must speculate" and "strange, isn't it."

[FrenchieCat]

23. DLC is certainly lame as shit then......

cause I can't even find those threads we are discussing. :shrug:

[nemo137]

28. They're sneaky as all get out.

There has never been a group so devious, so utterly devoted to destroying the progressive cause, than the DLC. Their minions are everywhere. Not only do they hate Dennis Kucinich, they will stop at nothing to see his name slandered on the internet.

[rudy23]

46. Yes, I agree.

Check out my links in the post downscreen.

[nemo137]

87. No, just so we're clear, I don't think its coordinated.

I've looked at your links every time you've posted them, and I think that the poster who called this shadowboxing is right - people more towards the center use Kucinich to stand in for the whole left, and people on the left use DLC phantoms to stand in for the center. Or, you know, maybe people are frustrated by Kucinich because he's the loudest voice on the left of our party. It could be as simple as that.

[rudy23]

90. Look at the similarities in terminology. It's like they're going down a list.

That's what makes me think it's coordinated.

Why would a dozen DU posters all on the same day hit on the talking point that Dennis Kucinich is irrelevant because he only polls 4% in presidential primaries? That argument doesn't even make sense--yet you have gaggles of "DU'ers" repeating them verbatim.

I don't think it's as innocent as people just deciding they don't like him all of a sudden. The weirdly tone-deaf attacks started happening in July when single payer was being ripped off the table, and they ramp up every time Dennis gives a strong speech critical of the White House, or every time the White House has to make a controversial move to the right. Every time. I respect your disagreement, but I strongly believe they are a part of Rahm's Message Discipline team.

[nemo137]

94. So, the disagreements ramp up every time

Dennis is in the news, or people get disappointed in the administration and say something about it. That sounds to me like evidence for the idea that Kucinich is sort of the generic "left" target. Also, I'm guessing the similarities in the terminology come from people seeing something and copying it. The 4% thing especially makes sense, since one of the sort of standard pro-DK lines is that the poster voted for him in the primaries, or that DK was right about x.

It really doesn't take a conspiracy to explain why there are differences of opinions about a fairly polarizing Democrat on a Democratic message board.

[rudy23]

97. What's polarizing about Kucinich compared to any other Dem? The DK fans didn't start the attacks

I think it is a conspiracy when you see obvious talking points that stick out like a sore thumb on DU in a non-primary season against someone who should be a pretty marginal player in this whole debate.

The reason he is more than a marginal player, is because he's showing us all what Democrats are supposed to act like. Obama and Rahm's strategy is to redefine the DLC as the "center" and brand the left as being as crazy as Sara Palin. In fact, I've seen several OP's comparing Dennis to Sara Palin. If more than one person is crazy enough to have that thought, I'm sorry, that smacks of orchestration. I don't know why it's a far fetched "conspiracy theory" to think Team Obama wants to coordinate to control their image. That's what politicians do. I'd be disappointed if he didn't do this--it's just a shame who their target is, and what that says about their ideology.

So you tell me--why did I see at least 20 posters all come up with "left wing teabagger" on here AND Kos in the same day describing Dennis? I know language is a virus and all that, but come on.

[nemo137]

106. Really? What's polarizing?

Ultra-pure, has fans that hold him up as a shining star of Democratic ideals, votes against major policy initiatives, and tends to rub people the wrong way. He's made himself more than a marginal figure in the debate by being one of the early and strong voices for single payer, and combining it with his already-established personality.

The crazy thing isn't that the White House wants to control it's image; what stretches credibility is believing that they'd pay for message board disruptors. That's not a terribly good return on investment. If they want to keep people from the left of the party from voting for them, then discrediting Dennis Kucinich is not going to do it.

[rudy23]

91. Also, I've seen no liberal voices frustrated with Kucinich being the voice of our party.

Maybe we understand that he doesn't have the most mainstream appeal, and that can be frustrating. But the critiques of Dennis are coming from people who do not represent progressives at all. There's a difference between moderate and corporate, and I haven't seen any real static coming from moderates other than to say they're not in love with Dennis's style. I'm not either.

[Overseas]

22. Pre-existing condition. Many of us were in love with him

before we even joined you guys years ago. We yearn for substantive change and feel the need is urgent.

We believe government can be a force for good.
We've wanted Medicare for All for years.
We've wanted a smarter, tougher, more nimble national security system for years. Not a vehicle for war profiteering but a means of maintaining peace.

Others would prefer we honor the Democratic tradition of compromise.

So when we get too idealistic, or he does and we salute him, we get kicked around a bit.

Probably by folks who are too young to remember compromising our principles to stand behind another Democratic president who was under merciless attack by the right wing. We compromised and stifled our complaints then and got No national health insurance, Yes NAFTA, Yes banking deregulation, Yes Old Greenspan economics, etc. Yes we had the DotCom bubble jobs, more job training, slightly more progressive taxation, much better FEMA and other govt agencies, and an articulate, passionate orator. But we also had the $40 million bimbo show going on to defame Democrats. And buckets of pontificating by the same kind of hypocritical Republicans having their own affairs.

So while we stand behind what we each perceive to be the remaining marvelous qualities of our beloved President Obama, and try hard to rationalize why he didn't leap into office and do FDR stuff because it was the quickest, most practical way to heal the country, we need the stress relief of the courageous Democrats who come right out and tell the truth.

We love having our "Let's Go FDR and Further" guys to speak the truth. We love it when Dennis and others speak out and expose the lies and perils in pursuing the same old policies that got us so far into war and debt around the world, and allowed millions of our fellow citizens to Die Quickly without insurance, and go bankrupt when they finally managed to obtain medical care.

We kept quiet and supported our last Democratic president, and may have told others to hush up then, too. What we got from that loyalty were too many New Democrat policies that were more like Republicant Lite, downsizing, privatizing and outsourcing.

[FrenchieCat]

24. We haven't had a Democratic President in 8 years......

and that one got impeached.....
so we most likely kept "quiet" only
cause we didn't have a way of having a voice.

[Overseas]

27. I remember being told to hush up and support President Clinton

because he was under such constant attack from the cruel amoral right wing.

And he did finally raise taxes a bit on the richest people and that helped the economy.

[FrenchieCat]

30. I was yelling at the TV Pundit heads to shut up about his blow job.......

cause then,
I didn't really understand the policy shit he was doing
till it was way too late.

[Le Taz Hot]

73. And repealed Glass-Stegal

and enacted NAFTA. What he did back then is DIRECTLY related to the banking industry failures today. Funny how you guys always leave that shit out.

[bvar22]

35. We haven't had a "Democratic" President....

...since LBJ.

[RaleighNCDUer]

38. Carter. nt

[Dragonfli]

26. +1000

[Overseas]

110. Thank you. And many thanks to our Dear Dennis.

We love him and somehow still love our dream of an American wake up.

I for one hoped hard that we'd have a 21st Century FDR in the White House. Practical success from our core ideals--

re-balancing our economy from the Top Ten back to the rest of us for a change. It works. And is better for the planet.

And a lot more fun.

[BzaDem]

25. Because he deserves it?

I have a name for someone who votes against the main pillars of the Democratic agenda. That name is a Republican.

Why do statements that don't suit your fancy make it so you can't "have independent thought on some issues?"

[dreamnightwind]

108. There are 2 kinds of people in the world, eh?

Those that support "the main pillars of the Democratic agenda", and Republicans.

I read a lot of dumb posts on this board. Yours is near the top of the list.

There is indeed a growing disaffected left, that believes in actual Democratic Party principles but that questions whether our party leaders do, or whether they just pay lip service to Democratic ideals while they sell out our interests to corporate profits.

Interestingly, there is a similar phenomenon happening on the right. I fear that they will be sucked off by some false choice supplied to them by their corporate masters, such as the new Tea Party, rather than figuring it out for real and rejecting corporate control.

However, confusing someone on the left who break from his own party's corporate sellout with a Republican is about as far from sound logic as you can get.

[GreenArrow]

29. He's a scapegoat

since the Healthcare bill is a piece of shit. Or insert corporate friendly POS bill of your choice.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

40. Yes, the both the House and Senate health care bills are

overly complex, booby-trapped, non-universal, expensive, passive-aggressive pieces of corporate welfare, a way to bail out the insurance companies by ensuring them a captive clientele.

The noive of Dennis to oppose them!

[CTLawGuy]

59. banning exclusions for preexisting conditions

including being a victim of domestic violence(!) is corporate welfare?

[bvar22]

74. YES!

These "regulations" are not worth the paper when there are no price controls or any effective enforcement mechanisms.

The Health Insurance Profit Enhancement Bill, written primarily by the Health Insurance Cartels, is a 2000 page labyrinth of back doors, ambiguities, secret passages, trap doors and trojan horses.

It may even be possible to argue that since the Public Option must accept Pre-Existing Conditions, then all the For Profits participating in the mysterious "Exchange" are exempt from offering coverage since no one is technically "denied coverage" because the Public Plan must pick them up.

[CTLawGuy]

118. isn't that good?

don't you want the public plan to cover lots of people.

And if this bill is gravy for the insurance companies then they must be pissed at the Republicans and Joe Lieberman right now, boy howdy.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

34. Because he's a threat to the "Politics as usual", "not as bad", right wing of the party.

[bvar22]

36. Because...

DK makes the corporate tit-sucking "Centrists" look so bad by comparison.

”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

[Swamp Rat]

37. He was my choice for 2008, and probably 2012 if he runs again.

[madrchsod]

39. oh no ...they are picking on dennis again?

i guess i was on facebook and missed it....

they have to pick on someone so it`s dennis. i voted for him and looks like i might have to do it again.

[rudy23]

95. Delete--dupe.

[Iggo]

41. We're eating our own, just like the Republicans.

Not as entertaining, but still...

[berni_mccoy]

42. Why the Kucinich Cheerleading threads?

[mmonk]

54. I saw irrelevant attacks on Kucinich (having nothing to do with policy)

when I logged in. Deflection or projection doesn't answer the question. I was wondering what was up.

[berni_mccoy]

85. I've seen irrelevant praises for Kucinich (having nothing to do with policy).

His wife is so beautiful you know? I've wondered, what was up.

[LooseWilly]

43. Because Kucinich serves as a handy "metaphor" for all "left" thinking...

DU rules won't allow the "centrists" to directly attack/ "call out" any poster who argues for "left" policy, or criticizes Obama for "centrist" policy. Attacking Kucinich allows those who would like to criticize the "left" critics of Obama to caricature the positions of those they'd like to criticize, by caricaturing Kucinich (who, let's face it, is so "textbook" liberal that he becomes eminently caricaturable)... knowing that those who have sympathies for "left" policy of Kucinich will take the insults hurled at Kucinich personally, as attacks upon their own perspectives regarding policy.

But it's a DU legal avenue for personal attacks... so "it's all good". :)

[rudy23]

47. Perfectly explained.

I hope you can take the time to see my links downthread. I think you are 100% on the money.

[mmonk]

55. Sounds like a reasonable and sound explanation.

[rudy23]

44. Please take a look at my links--I'm sure you'll find them VERY interesting.

I've been talking about this since July. Then again, in October. The attacks are orchestrated by Rahm's Message Discipline Team, IMO.

That's right, as soon as we worked our asses off to get them elected, they attacked us. Never forget that.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6022082
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6706609&mesg_id=6706670
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6706609&mesg_id=6706676

[mmonk]

56. Thanks. Dangerous strategy if it is coordinated.

[HamdenRice]

61. Oh.My.God! We've been discovered! Well, I confess, they sent me here in 2004

to wait for you to show up and for us to get our secret Muslim socialist elected.

I confess, and here's my life story. I was born in a Philippine brothel ...

http://www.democraticunderground.org/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x13057

[rudy23]

84. Haha--nice try. nt

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

45. Because he sucks. n/t

[BeHereNow]

48. Because there is a swarm of dumb asses infiltrating DU lately?

That's my observation of late.
Hope there is no limit to the number of posters I
can add to my ignore list.

BHN

[JVS]

67. +1

[AnOhioan]

50. Because he reminds folks of what a Democrat should be...

and they realize that they themselves fall far short of that goal.

[ima_sinnic]

52. because REAL "change" is too scarey and threatening--they prefer superficial "change"

like the name and race of the president and his (or even her!) Cabinet and agency picks. For convenience, some change was even easier: the letter after the name changed from an R to a D.

Now Kucinich represents something that no good widdle pocket-picking DLCer wants: representation by, of, and for The People, without war profiteering fake "democrats" robbing us blind to invest in blood and guts and bodies stacked like cordwood to heat their mcmansions.

[AllentownJake]

57. Because angry cheerleaders would rather attack a congressman from Ohio

than listen to criticism or realize they are enabling bad policy.

[QC]

Yes, that's pretty much the shape of things. n/t

[HamdenRice]

60. Because despite what he says, his voting record is awful for progressive change

So people bash him for the same reason they bash Lieberman.

One other thing in Kooch's case though. He so weird that it's entertaining to point out the bizarre aspects of his personality. Also his fans are so hypnotized and fanatical that their reactions are amusing. He's light entertainment in the world of serious politics, so don't take the criticism so seriously.

[Red Knight]

65. How about posting those votes

that fly against the progressive agenda.

He explains all his votes very well. My guess is that you're either a center/right Dem(read Republican) or just so infatuated with Obama that you can't see reality.

By the way--I found your response "amusing".

[AllentownJake]

66. I've yet to see that poster post a liberal thought

In fact most of his posts are taunting liberals.

[QC]

68. He used to one of DU's most outspoken 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

He also thought Kucinish was the bee's knees.

It's funny how having a very flawed idol to defend can cause such a turnaround in a person's thinking.

[HamdenRice]

70. Don't you see the evil genius? That was just my cover!

Drat! Four years pretending to be primarily interested in inconsistencies in the 9/11 official story, waiting for the secret DLC muslim socialist to get elected so that I could spring my "real" identity!

So, I confess ... I was born in a Philippine brothel and grew tomatoes for Tipper and the girls ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x13057

Btw, it's not really a conspiracy theory when it's in Le Monde and the mods allow it to be on the top of the Greatest Page.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x678886

[Starry Messenger]

88. Say hi back at the mothership, amigo!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=142935

One less Kucinich basher today.

[LWolf]

63. He makes the centrists look bad. nt

[Orsino]

72. +1 n/t

[western mass]

64. Corporate Dems are worried....

It's dawning on them that the Democratic base is getting fed up with their con game.

They hate the left more than the far right. The corporate Dem right and the GOP extremist right are partners. They work together to stay in power and look after the interests of the people who write their paychecks. The left is always threatening to upset that cozy balance.

[Sebastian Doyle]

76. Marching orders from Rahm Emanuel's "message discipline" stormtroopers

They have always bashed Dennis, but it clearly picked up when he opposed the escalation in Afghanistan.

[nemo137]

122. I thought it picked up when he voted against the HCR bill

or when they took single-payer off the table, or when he voted against the climate bill, or...

[WI_DEM]

77. I suppose on the other side could be asked, "Why all the Obama bashing threads?"

[Le Taz Hot]

79. Because he's President?

(Was that a trick question?)

[slipslidingaway]

102. Because as President he sets the policy, silencing not for profit advocates...

and having the state SP amendment removed from the HC discussion are a few things that people disagree with ... not to mention the economic team.

:shrug:

[mmonk]

124. So there are threads about his marriage and UFO's?

Personal or policy difference? There is the dividing line of the relevant and the irrelevantly gratuitous.

[Renew Deal]

81. Why not?

[rudy23]

96. Because Rahm Emanuel has a little man complex, and has to take it out on someone shorter.

I really would love to have heard Trumka give him a good chewing out when Rahm was trying to con/intimidate the unions out of the public option.

[Cleita]

99. Many people can't stand the uncomfortable truth that Dennis delivers. n/t

[David Zephyr]

109. Not from me, mmonk.

He's a friggin' patriot and a great American in my eyes.

[earth mom]

111. Kucinich is a beacon of light in what's becoming a very dark time.

Sure, he could disappoint me and all of us too, just like all the other disgusting politicians who love to kiss that corporate ass.

But until that happens, I will cling to the bit of hope I have in Kucinich.

[WonderGrunion]

112. Because Democrats that go on Faux News to bash other Democrats

only serve to get Rethugs elected. Dennis' behavior since President Obama has been elected has been little better than Lieberman's. Search my post history. Before this year I've been very complimentary towards Kucinich. I even seriously thought about caucusing for him after my first choice (Richardson) had dropped out. If Dennis has a problem with the President and his administration, he can air them privately to the President. His numerous appearances on a right wing sounding board (Faux) combined with his numerous votes against major goals of this administration lead me to believe that Dennis no longer is working for the good of the Democratic party or the American people. Dennis is working for the best interests of Dennis' career.

That's what is most disappointing to me about Dennis' actions of late. He has proven himself to be nothing more than a typical politician.

[LWolf]

121. Democrats that go on Faux News to bash Dems?

You must be talking about Obama, who went on FOX news and told them that Republicans are better on Education than Democrats are...

which he stands by, as he sends his hand-picked privatizer, union-buster, and corporate stooge to launch the latest attack on public education.

[Norrin Radd]

113. Nothing new. During the primaries, we were being browbeaten

into supporting Edwards over Kucinich, as Edwards was "electable."

[Umbral]

114. Because he's the conscience of the Democratic Party. nt

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

117. Because of his attitude.

Going around calling yourself "America's bravest congressman" or whatever is over the top. Especially with a record of legislative accomplishments as thin as his.

[Ukonkivi]

123. The plague that is currently consuming the democratic party?

I wasn't aware this was true. I certainly hope this place doesn't reach a point where looking too left and Kucinich is frowned upon heavily. I was ousted from RevLeft forums for looks too petite bourgeois and primmie ethno-fascist. Basically, too right looking for them. Not too right mind you, but too right looking. So being ostracized on a site like this for being too left and not centrist enough like the average democrat, would be rather disheartening.