Dennis Kucinich for President

This is a call to arms for Democrats, those of you who know our country is headed down the toilet and who hope to see a pulse in their party’s Presidential hopefuls. Hillary Clinton has unquestionably shown that she has the balls, Barrack Obama the charisma, and John Edwards the heart, but the only candidate in the race for President in 2008 that is right on the important issues of the day is Dennis Kucinich. I heartily endorse him and will vote for him.

Like many Americans, I have thought that the field of candidates on both sides of the aisle has looked dismal for a long time. The “viable” candidates fight each other to show how electable they are, raising large sums of money and avoiding all “third rail” issues like the plague. Dennis Kucinich alone has staked out clear, unequivocal and honest positions. The darling to the right, Ron Paul tries to portray himself as the candidate of liberty, but too often he is missing for key votes or passes off his bias to the states rather than make a clear stand for equality and freedom for all.

The stand by Kucinich that got my attention was his introduction of impeachment articles against V.P. Cheney, after all the hand wringing by others in his party over tactics, Dennis had the guts to stand for what is right.

Yes I am an unrepentant liberal. I am proud of that and if you had listened to me all these elections ago we wouldn’t live in the messed up world we do today. Seriously folks, you have been paying attention to frauds and charlatans. Here are the key issues that Dennis stands for:

-Creating a single-payer system of universal health care that provides full coverage for all Americans by passage of the United States National Health Insurance Act.
-The immediate withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq; replacing them with an international security force.
-Guaranteed quality education for all; including free pre-kindergarten and college for all who want it.
-Immediate withdrawal from the World Trade Organization (WTO) and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
-Repealing the USA PATRIOT Act.
-Fostering a world of international cooperation.
-Abolishing the death penalty.
-Environmental renewal and clean energy.
-Preventing the privatization of social security.
-Providing full social security benefits at age 65.
-Creating a cabinet-level “Department of Peace”
-Ratifying the ABM Treaty and the Kyoto Protocol.
-Introducing reforms to bring about instant-runoff voting.
-Protecting a woman’s right to choose while decreasing the number of abortions performed in the U.S.
-Ending the war on drugs.
-Legalizing same-sex marriage.
-Creating a balance between workers and corporations.
-Ending the H1B and L1 Visa Programs
-Restoring rural communities and family farms.
-Strengthening gun control.
-Balance Between Workers and Corporations
-Environmental Renewal and Clean Energy
-Restored Rural Communities and Family Farms.

It would be difficult to find anyone, much less a candidate for President, that is as much in line with the real needs of real people, the average, above average and under average American who has to work for a living, pay for their family’s needs, support their communities, and lend a hand for those less fortunate.

With income disparity growing to obscene levels, with more and more of us unable to afford decent healthcare, with more and more of the good jobs being sent to wherever big money wants to set up shop and rape the population, we need a leader who will speak for the citizens of this country, not for the interests of the top 1% who increasingly own and run everything.

Long ago Kucinich was elected to be the youngest mayor of a major city in the U.S. and despite huge pressures to cave in he stood for the interests of the people of Cleveland. At the time he was ridiculed for opposing the sale of a municipal electricity facility. Not until years later did people realize that he was wise beyond his years and that he was right. We need leaders who can stand up to big money, and the candidate who has shown this time and time again is Dennis Kucinich.

Instead of trying to handicap the race for President trying to figure which candidate might get past the Karl rove vote suppression juggernaut, this year show that you have the guts to vote your principles. Don’t vote for someone who is second or third best. At least not in the primary election. Don’t wuss out.

By the time the millions have been spent and either tweedle dee or tweedle dum is selected as the Democratic candidate, vote for the candidate that stands for true Democratic principles, the principles that made this nation great and grateful. Come out of the political closet and stand for progressive, liberal and honest policies.

Vote for Dennis Kucinich for President.

43 Responses to "Dennis Kucinich for President"

  1. Klaus Hergeschimmer  August 8, 2007 at 8:29 am

    Dennis Kucinich may not have a fart of a chance of winning, but what does it matter, the Democrats don’t make good on promises anyway like the new Democratic congress that got in on getting us out of Iraq.

    Do you think that if the Dems ran a campaign to get the majority they now have based on passing non-binding resolutions to get us out of Iraq
    they would have gotten the votes they got.

    The new Congress polls are lower then the Chimps.

    The Dems had a chance and they blew it.

    Dad Blasted Jack-Ass-Party

  2. Klaus Hergeschimmer  August 8, 2007 at 8:33 am

    I wouldn’t walk a mile for a Jack-Ass (except Dennis Kucinich)

  3. VietnamVet  August 8, 2007 at 10:05 am

    RE: new Submitted by Uncle Ludwig on August 8, 2007 – 3:32am

    I do not see anyone on this site advocating only voting for the front runner. Where did you read that? I posted a comment that we should vote for the person most likely to beat the GOP…that does not necessarily mean the front runner. So, it is an open ended question as to just whose logic is insanity. Polls DO have validity, irrespective of your position. If you can name one person in our history that came in to win an election from a 1-2% rating in the polls, you just might be able to support YOUR logic. Meantime, I plan to vote, as I said, for the candidate that has the best chance of beating the GOP. That implies, of course, that his/her position is most closely aligned with the values of the Democrats.

  4. VietnamVet  August 8, 2007 at 1:28 pm

    RE: Submitted by Uncle Ludwig on August 8, 2007 – 3:32am

    I do not see any posts on here that indicates it would be best for one to vote for the front runner. I DO see on that indicates one should vote for the candidate that has the best chance of beating the GOP’s candidate. That does not mean it necessarily has to be the front runner in the polls. It could be one polling second, or even third. Polls do have validity, despite your comments. There is a science here called statistics and they are more often right than wrong. Given this, it is an open ended question as to whose logic is sane. If you can produce even ONE presidential candidate in the entire history of this country that has come from a consist 1-2% rating to win, I will concede you just might have a point. Meantime, I plan to vote for the best candidate that has a chance of winning, despite your snide comments about other’s opinions. And, by the way, few people depend on ONE poll, which you use for your logic. Knowledgable people watch for trends over time and what the candidates have to offer.

  5. mimigibson  August 8, 2007 at 7:00 pm

    This is probably the best and most concise article on Dennis Kucinich I’ve read. Thank you, Phil, for writing it. Mimi

  6. mimigibson  August 8, 2007 at 7:27 pm

    Hi VietnamVet,
    Please read my reply to Bill Robinson above. A vote of Dennis would not be wasted and if he wins the Democratic Primary, there is no one in the GOP who could stand up to him. If only people would understand who he is and that he is not a third party candidate, he would be considered “viable.”
    Mimi

  7. Klaus Hergeschimmer  August 9, 2007 at 12:23 am

    I really like Kucinich, and he is expressing views that the pharmaceuticals, Military Industrial complex will never accept, so we are stuck with Pillary who is in the pocket of Pharmecuticals, she even admits this.
    Then there is Obama who wants to start BushCo Lite adventures and bomb Pakistan (yeah, that will help Musharraf to keep control of Islamic radicals even
    more).

    Edwards is the most palatable of the Corporate-Krats.
    Edward’s positives: He’s against commerical nuclear power, his health care plans seem to be the best of the
    three front runners.

    However, I’m at the point where I am doubtfull of even Edwards, but he is less the Corporate-Krat then the other two.

    Again, what does it matter if we get a corporate-krat in again, they won’t rock the boat, they’ll cozy up to corparate Amerika as soon as they get in, their record
    proves it. The corparate-krats used to fill the minumum of catering to MIC, and were acceptable, but now the
    the MIC is their total Mastuhs.

  8. VietnamVet  August 9, 2007 at 5:59 am

    Mimi,

    I read your post. As I mentioned, there are many points Dennis stands for that I fully support, but I believe we have to face reality. At his current approval levels, I do not believe he has a prayer of winning the primary. If we have any hope of having a Democrat as president in 2008, which I believe should be our goal, we have to be realistic in our choice of a candidate. As some analyst have said, 2008 is OURS to loose, and one way to loose is to vote for a candidate that has practically no chance of winning. Thanks for your reply.

  9. bocawayne  August 9, 2007 at 9:48 am

    Did I miss something? When was the constitution amended to allow trolls to serve as president?

  10. nuQler Ostrich  August 9, 2007 at 2:41 pm

    You folks are really something.

    If you like the way this country has been run for the past 25 years, then vote for a “front-runner.”

    If you want a change in course for this country, vote for a different kind of candidate.

    There’s one in the Republican Party.

    And there’s one in the Democratic Party.

    It’s really that simple.

    If you say that you want a change, and then don’t vote for that change, well, I guess then… you’re full of it.

    Oh, and the person wanting to know who was at 2% and then won, How about Abraham Lincoln? And more recently that outsider Jimmy Carter. Both were nobodies in the early going. Even Bill Clinton wasn’t given a chance in hell by the talking heads till after Iowa. You guys have a really bad memory.

  11. Klaus Hergeschimmer  August 10, 2007 at 5:01 am

    I will definitely vote for Kucinich in the primaries, and on the extremely remote chance he wins, I will vote for him against whatever Republikaner he’ll be against.

    I will NOT, vote for Pillary Dillary Crock.

    Obama lost it for me when he said he believes the US should attack Pakistan if there is actionable intelligence that Osama is hiding in a cave.

    Attack Pakistan! Oh yeah, just go on attacking the world like The Chimp already has been doing. Attack the Fu*king world, great plan Obama.

    Edwards is the only votable candidate in my opinion vs
    Pillary Dillary Crock or General Obama Westmoreland.

    I’m sure as hell not one to shrink from military options, but being a rogue nation attacking the world at will has not gained us security as The Chimp’s
    administration has since he’s attacked everyone under the sun except the man on the moon.

  12. VietnamVet  August 9, 2007 at 6:39 pm

    Who has a bad memory? For your information, polls were not even in vogue during the election that put Lincoln in office, BUT he was the second choice in a lineup of four candidates. Bill Clinton, nor Jimmy Carter EVER had ratings of 1-2%, even in the beginnings! Clinton was a well respected Governor of Arkansas, and Carter served in the Georgia Senate as well as Govenor of Georgia. Hardly nobodies as you claim. Before you preach at others in your condescending manner, get YOUR facts straight. And, though you didn’t notice, not a single post on this site advocates voting for the front runner. Read before you write!

  13. Art4Peace  August 10, 2007 at 1:48 am

    To VietnamVet:

    First I need to point out that back in the day of Lincoln they used a much more accurate form of polling … they spoke directly to many people. Today’s polling system is basically a “paid advertisement” for certain candidates! Candidates and various political groups PAY for various polls, which of course are going to be scewed to lean toward their desired outcome. Hillary has paid almost $500,000 on polls so far! Wonder WHY she continually shows up in 1st place, even with all the negative views of her??

    Secondly, Clinton was at about 1-2% at about this same time in the 92 campaign. Carter was also around 2-3% early on! Results depended on what poll (and of course WHO funded the poll), but both of these guys were WAY low about mid-campaign.

    Finally … it seems besides lack of memory, you have lack of knowledge when it comes to Kucinich. Just like Carter and Clinton, Kucinich may currently be “showing” very low in the polls, but he does have ALOT of experience!! Kucinich has more experience than ANY of the “front runners”!! He began in politics over 40 yrs ago, at the age of 23. He served in Cleveland City Council, as well as Ohio State Senate. At the age of 31, Kucinich became the youngest mayor of a major city, mayor of Cleveland. He is now currently serving his SIXTH TERM in Congress, a ranking member in many House committees, as well as chairman of the House subcommittee on Domestic Policy. Not to mention Kucinich was honored with the Ghandi Peace Award in 2003 and the Heart of Humanity Award in 2003!! So Kucinich is loaded with experience … he has dedicated his entire life to public service! NONE of the corp “front runners” can compare! With Kucinich’s experience, incredible foresight on major issues, and his increasing public attention (even without ANY major media coverage) you WILL see his poll numbers start to rise … like cream rises to the top … Kucinich IS the “cream of the crop”.

    http://Kucinich.US
    http://www2.kucinich.us

  14. Klaus Hergeschimmer  August 10, 2007 at 5:02 am

    Hey, excellent points about Kucinich, and why he’s my got my vote. I refuse to vote for Democratic Leadership Council Coporate darlings like
    Hillary Pillary Crock & General Obama Westmoreland.

    I’ve been hearing things like, be realistic, Kuncinich dosen’t have a ghost of a chance because the electoral system is stacked in favor of the CorparteKrats, and if
    the Dems don’t regain the house, a vote for Kucinich is a vote for the Neo-Cons.

    Do you think the Democrats would have regained the house on campaign promises for non-binding resolutions to get our troops out of Iraq and silly BS like censuring the Chimp?

    Nancy Pelosi gave in to AIPAC and took out a provision in the May Iraq spending bill to require the Chimp to go to congress if he wanted to bomb Iran. So if the Chimp bombs Iran, who is to blame.

    Actions speak louder then words when Nancette Pelosi and the Jack-Ass Crats caved into the Chimp on a mandatory withdrawl date for troops on the spending bill in May.

    The Dems gave Bush the right to not have to go to the FISA court for wiretaps.

    Of course, Kuncinich never went along with any of this folly.

    The Jack-Ass Crats under Nancette Pelosi and Hairy Reed
    haven’t done a damn thing, they’ve given away the store
    to the Neo-Cons. Diane Feinstein’s husband is a war profiter.

    There is absoulutely nothing to lose by voting for Dennis Kucinich since Nancette & Hairy Reed ain’t worth spit.

    I am going to donate funds for Cindy Sheehan’s run against Nancette Pelosi.

    If incumbent politicians don’t feel the wrath of the voters, they’ll keep on feeding the MIC.

    There are a few good Dems such as Henry Waxman, Barbara Lee, and a few others but they are far and few between.
    We the voters have got to try to break the back of
    the Democractic Leadership Councill and its unswerving
    self serving machinations.

  15. VietnamVet  August 10, 2007 at 7:19 am

    Nice try Art4Peace, but you have not provided anything to refute my points. Lincoln was still second on the slate, despite your comments, thus making him a very viable candidate. Clinton was a favored candidate early on, from everything I can find on the net. And you provide not one iota of evidence that either Clinton or Carter were at 1-2% early on. How about some evidence, such as links on the net to support your position? Even if by chance you find some obscure poll that so indicates, it STILL does not detract from MY point, which I restate at 3. below. I searched the net and could not find anything that indicates that either were that low. Then, your ad hominem attack stating that I do not know Dennis’ positions is an unfounded assumption on your part. You don’t know me, what I read, what I listen to, and so on. Early on, in my first post, I clearly indicated that any Democrat could find points of agreement with Dennis’ position. Assumptions are the mother of most screw ups!

    I do not plan to post further comments on this subject, so let me close this one with a few final comments:

    1. I have not posted a single negative comment on Dennis Kuncinich’s positions. If by chance he becomes a viable candidate, with a possibility of beating the GOP candidate, he would probably get my vote also.

    2. I do read and respect other opinions on this site and others I visit. I avoid ad hominem attacks, assumptions about others, and try to show respect, UNTIL someone comes on and seems to enjoy that type post.

    3. My first post on this subject simply indicated that we should vote for a candidate that has the best possibility of winning against the GOP. That is STILL my position, despite other comments posted hereon. I believe we should not take our eyes off the ball, that being, putting a Democrat in the white house.

    Take care folks and thanks for reading my comments.

  16. Manila Ryce  August 10, 2007 at 7:12 am

    VietnamVet, I’m not going to pretend that I know what the poll numbers of every president were. What I do know is that there is a major factor in this campaign which has previously been non-existent in previous ones – the internet. Information and attitudes travel much faster now than they ever have before. Predicting the outcome of this election based on previous trends is a bit short-sighted. Just look at how fast things have turned around for Obama. Just a month ago people thought he was the messiah. While you may not think that Kucinich can win the presidency, I’d urge you away from being so absolute in your opinion.

    Kucinich can’t win if we don’t vote for him. Let’s stop being so self-defeatist. The mainstream media tells us that the top two candidates are the only ones worth voting for. Let’s try and examine why they would want us to believe that.

    Anyone interested in supporting Dennis further should visit The 35 Percenters to see our most recent video on Dennis’ Universal Health Care plan. Peace.

  17. Klaus Hergeschimmer  August 10, 2007 at 2:48 pm

    Pharmaceuticals tickle Hillary’s epiglottis with the big campaign bucks from its medicine chest as well as the medical insurance pimps. Obama is making noises like the Chimp about pre-emptive bombing of Pakistan -you’d think with nearly 5 years of Bush attacking the world that we wouldn’t hear this kind of mindless dribble from
    the Jack-Ass party.

    The Corparate media as the previous poster stated is trying to convince us that Pillary Dillary Crock & General Obama Westmoreland are the Cats meow and you have got to question this, the very right wing echo machine that’s trying to get Amerika juiced up for a war with Iran.

    I’ll eat spinach & Vote for Kucinich

  18. JoshuasGrandma  August 11, 2007 at 6:52 am

    It’s hard to disagree with most of Kucinich’s goals but on closer examination, many are really pie-in-the sky, like ‘a chicken-in-every-pot, or actually contradictory.

    For example, how do you replace our troops with an international force when there is NO international force ready, willing, or able to step in – it would take years to develop the size of international force needed. So while commendable – very unrealistic.

    Or -
    How do you expect to ‘Foster a world of international cooperation if at the same time you are immediately withdrawing from the World Trade Organization (WTO) and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

    Finally I wonder what the implementation plans and costs look like for guaranteed quality education for all; including free pre-kindergarten and college for all who want it. And what is the definition of ‘quality’.

    Most of these goals while desirable represent what my husband calls ‘the just-nail-it-together’ mentality – sound great but there’s good reason why they’ve not already been undertaken – doing it is unbelievably complicated.

  19. Kacela  August 11, 2007 at 8:19 am

    I like Dennis Kucinich – except for his stance on strengthening gun control. That’s why I’m crossing over and supporting Ron Paul. The two-party system is a joke anyways. Paul is amazing to listen to. He will restore your hope in America – for real. Just listen to the man.

    I wouldn’t mind a Kucinich / Paul ticket. It’s what’s best for us a country.

  20. canardtahiti  August 11, 2007 at 9:55 am

    In 2004 I follwed the other Dem sheep and accepted the “more electable” candidate, John Kerry over Dean. What a scam THAT lie was.

    Today I am absolutely convinced the DK is the only viable leader who can lead the nation out of this debacle, this morass, these darkest days of cheneybushslut fascism.

    I am sick of hearing how he lacks charisma and is “too short.” Kucinich has a formidable intellect, a gutsy delivery, a great voice, and a depth of character UNMATCHED by the other pretenders. He is taller than Napoleon — and at 5’7″ is likewise taller than Truman was. John Adams and Quincy Adams were no taller than Dennis (and they lacked his great mind). Van Buren was shorter. FDR was a CRIPPLE, for chrissake…who could barely stand alone.

    So, I beg you to STOP BEING POLLUTED by these media propagandists who dismiss DK as “un-electable.” He IS ELECTABLE if WE sweep him into the WH, where he BELONGS and where he will prove to the world that he is A GIANT OF A MAN, who towers above the small-minded other pols.

  21. Citroyen  August 11, 2007 at 11:13 am

    I disagree with your contention that “not a single post on this site advocates voting for the front runner”.

    Several posts are saying exactly that by saying that a vote for Kucinich would be wasted because he hasn’t a chance of winning. So it is clearly inferred by the people posting this sentiment that we should vote for someone who has a “chance of winning” ie: between the folks chosen by the media and the moguls as the “front-runners”.

  22. canardtahiti  August 11, 2007 at 2:05 pm

    Most people do not know that FDR had to be CARRIED from his wheel chair up onto podiums, in and out of vehicles, etc. The press was respectful enough to not snap photos of that.

    When FDR “walked,” it was always between his two adult sons, holding on to them and literally dragging his dead legs forward.

    So there, folks…it takes courage to overcome such adversity, and the man was lucky enough to at least have a lot of money to cover his medical expenses and daily care…not the case for tens of millions of American citizens.

    Dennis Kucinich has overcome immense odds in his life, and he never let the fact that he is not tall, or handsome or rich STOP him. WHY SHOULD IT STOP US?

  23. erika morgan  August 15, 2007 at 4:04 am

    So far I’ve agreed with Kucinich more then any of the others, I’m heartened to find all this support for him here. There is a lot of feeling “to go with an obvious winner”, get the test question right, follow the main stream, etc. I think it is incumbent upon us to do the brave thing in the primary and vote for the best man rather then the best bet, then if necessary reassess for the general election. We ask our representatives to vote a conscience, which we attempt to help educate and form, rather then following the pack or vote out of fear, we need to be ready to do our part when it is our turn in the primary.

  24. Klaus Hergeschimmer  August 12, 2007 at 2:56 am

    When the House Democrats let the Chimp have
    un-fettered control over the FISA court it is time to not be spoon fed what the corporate media is coddling as the only electable Democratic candidates. What is to lose when the Jack-Ass party turns the other cheek to the neo-cons one billion times in a row.
    The Democratic Leadership Council has to be taught a lesson, vote Kucinich.

  25. Paolo  August 17, 2007 at 9:23 am

    I like Dennis Kucinich’ stand against the war in Iraq, against the Patriot Act, and for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney.

    As a libertarian Democrat, I look at Kucinich as a good second choice, after Ron Paul. The way I see it, Kucinich would stay out of wars in the Middle East and would restore some important civil rights at home.

    Unfortunately, he would also institute a lot of ill-conceived government programs like mandatory “single payer” medical “insurance.” He would also further erode our right to own guns: our best defense against criminals and politicians (in the rare cases they can be distinguished from one another).

    Though these domestic programs are harmful, they pale in comparison to the worst government programs ever invented: war and empire.

  26. Caine  December 17, 2007 at 9:12 am

    I too will be voting for Kucinich. He is not perfect, but for me he is much closer to my ideals than all other candidates.

    It seems to me that many of his ideas were what democrats used to stand for. It seems today, everything has shifted to the right so far that what used to be considered good democratic stances, no longer stands a chance of winning.

    To me Kucinich brings back those old time democratic standards and ideals. He appears to be for the average working family. He seems to understand our needs.

    As far as Iraq, and getting us out, I think he has the right idea. Even if there is no multinational force to take the place of the US, why can’t the Iraqi’s be left to fix this mess themselves? Hasn’t the US already done enough to screw up their lives?

    I hate to not clean up my own messes, or fix my own mistakes, but this Iraq debacle is just another military-industrial complex party for those top 1% of the wealthiest get to continue their rape of the world!

    So, instead of being so stupid to get in to such messes in the first place, I’d rather see a leader that has the wisdom to do what is the right thing to do: not what is best for the top 1% of the world! We should have never attacked Iraq and I’d bet that if Kucinich was our leader at the time, we would not have!

    There was a time when I was thinking about voting Obama since he had a chance to win. No longer! I will now vote for the one that is closest to my own goals! I will vote Kucinich even if he is a write in!

  27. Jim C  August 6, 2007 at 12:32 pm

    Kucinich is without a doubt the best man for the job and is the only candidate who really represents the middle class . Sadly the corporate power structure will never allow him to get a foothold . He is also hindered by the breathtakingly stupid concept of not looking presidential , whatever the hell that has to do with anything . The fact of the matter is that we are slowly turning into Mexico . In Mexico corporations and a tiny oligarchy have become so powerful the government has lost the power to regulate them and the average mexican has no real say in their treatment or governance . We are blindly sliding into the same pit of corporate fascism lubricated by our own collective stupidity , ignorance and inattention to history . So , Dennis , it would have been great but sadly you have no chance . You will get my vote and a few others and we will watch as you are buried in a fetid pile of corporate money and greed abetted by a public that has become a herd of blind mindless , selfdestructive sheep .

  28. Citroyen  August 11, 2007 at 7:28 am

    It’s not simply the corporate power structure that will not allow Kucinich to get a foothold. It is also the fault of so-called progressive and liberal blogs that are focusing almost exclusively on Clinton and Obama. They are buying into the corporate media’s framing of the race for the democratic nomination.

    If Dennis has no chance it is because of a wierd alliance between the mainstream corporate media that is interested in selling merchandise and for whom a fight between Obama and Clinton represents potential viewership and money – and the progressives and liberals who are comatose and see their future in an alliance with the democratic party no matter who is the nominee.

    I will also add that the observation that Hillary Clinton has “balls” is disgusting. The observation that Obama has “charisma” is in the eye of the beholder. He comes off as an arrogant panderer in training to many of us.

  29. michaelstephenlevinson  August 7, 2007 at 10:11 am

    Dear Phil,
    I like Dennis. Having said that, I am a candidate for president, hanging in the weeds, building my campaign web site, and writing down my platform which is articulate programs – what we need to do and how. On the web site http://www.thekidskeyboard.com you can see my recently published “New World Hors D’oeuvres” (subtitled) The Recipe for World Peace, besides my software for teaching the alphabet and numbers to preschoolers. I developed it. Click on the dolphin teacher in the screen shot and see how it works.

    The campaign website is http://www.michaelslevinson.com. I urge you to take a look, especially at the hemp for health link and the Executive Orders. This web site is actually a repository of my campaign writings from 2000. Relative to Hemp, that plant loves carbon dioxide and spits out oxygen, so we need an Executive Order requiring all paper used by the government, all clothing worn by the military, to be manufactured from industrial hep grown by American farmers.

    I look at the so-called candidates and hear bad poetry. They are good at identifying ‘prob limbs’ but light on actual solutions.

    I have a carefully written a very specific Exit Strategy out of Iraq. I would love to do a deal with capital blue whereas I get these solutions written down I am then able to post them. Hopefully within the week I will have videos. One I would like you to see is of a speech I gave in New Hampshire, on New Hampshire Public television, in 1988.

    There is a passage where I display my “Television Scripture” written down to perform on ‘whirled’ wide television for all man kind to participate in all at once, a passage (in rhyme) where i say / show the ice caps are going to melt from the dioxides in the air – i also had a solution back then.

    In any case i am a victim of the Bush clan. Bar Donna Bush Corleone met me (or me – her) on election day back in ’88, and she made it clear she despised me (because of remarks I made about her husband in my televised live speech).

    The only jobs I can get, with her son president, is washing dishes in a hotel, through a temp agency. Any regular job, regardless how good my performance, an fbi person shows up, finds someone they can deal with above me, and I get pushed out. A pattern.

    Every couple months, like clockwork a telemarketer from India calls me to inquire am i interested in their services for international calling. Ahhh. . . an overseas call – could be enemies – ahhh the 24/7 tap on my telephone. How about less than 700 words explaining a health program to provide coverage for 45 million people. How about an essay explaining how we have free political speech on network television paid for via a $2 check off on our income tax, and the threshold C-Span to eliminate obvious American Idol type publicity seekers.

    Specific programs – not the whats, but how. The site is opposed to poli candidates pushing their programs, but how can such a ‘rule” apply when we are talking candidates. My purpose here, were i able to offer the solutions I see, is to get feedback from the readership. In good faith

    Michaelslevinson

  30. Bill Robinson  August 7, 2007 at 11:01 am

    OK Phil. Give me some of whatever you are smoking and I will vote for him too.
    If he is the candidate.
    I don’t want to waste my vote on a 3rd party and let the damn republicans have another go at us.
    Thanks tho for making me aware of DK. He sounds too good to be true.
    Bill Robinson

  31. mimigibson  August 8, 2007 at 7:11 pm

    Hi Bill,
    So many people like Dennis Kucinich but think he’s a third party candidate. Dennis is running in the Democratic Primary just as Clinton, Obama, Edwards, etc. Dennis is the Democratic Representative from the Cleveland area in Ohio. It is a very common misconception that he is a spoiler just as Ralph Nader was in the 2001 race. Have a good one.
    Mimi

  32. VietnamVet  August 7, 2007 at 11:16 am

    Any Democrat worth his salt can agree with a lot of Kucinich’s positions. But, we need to cast our votes where they most count, and that is for the candidate that has the best chance of beating the GOP’s. Remember the Ralph Nader effect and how it attrituted to Gore’s loss, especially in Florida. Kucinich’s position in the list of candidates is around 1-2%. That means his chances are about as good as a fart in a whirlwind! Unless he is able to pull himself up to a reasonably viable candidate, I would NOT waste my vote on insuring that the GOP candidate wins! Use your head!

  33. Citroyen  August 11, 2007 at 10:51 am

    I will never accept the contention that Nader contributed to Gore’s loss.
    It assumes that Nader voters would have voted for Gore. I know I wouldn’t have.
    Gore ran an absolutely terrible campaign beginning with his idiotic and short-sighted selection of Lieberman as his running mate. They both were terrible campaigners. Gore was trying to “find himself”. Gore was trying to run as a successor to Clinton while trying to distance himself from Clinton at the same time. If Gore had even managed to carry his home state we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
    Voting for Kucinich and demanding equal treatment for him in the media is what democracy should be about.
    At this point in time, I honestly don’t know if Obama or Clinton would be any different than Romney – especially when it comes to a willingness to engage in warfare. They both pander to the right wing because they think the left wing and minorities are in their pockets.
    This argument has been going on for decades – eg: The big difference between nutty Goldwater and sound and solid Lyndon Johnson. Johnson gave us an unending unnecessary war begun with a lie. He laid out the blueprint for Bush. It could not have been worse under Goldwater in my opinion.
    If people who cherish the vote will not vote for people who truly represent their interests we will continue down this path of having to choose between people who are beholden to big money and simply have slightly different ways of selling us out.

  34. Oyate  August 15, 2007 at 3:24 am

    Hey, I wouldn’t worry about us in the GOP winning. All our “top tier” has is a on old, scratchy record. All the emergent tiers are hawks. It’s not going to sell natoinally. The GOP is fractured by dissident groups on the one hand and the increasing isolation of the neocon/evangelical camp on the other. And some heavy economic waves are going to start crashing. Discontent with the status quo will rise like a mighty tide. All you guys need to do is offer a legitimate alternative. Hillary and Obama certainly aren’t that.

  35. michaelstephenlevinson  August 7, 2007 at 12:15 pm

    I have a giant strategy to wrest the election from politishinz. This is my lifetime ambition and I have a solution to nearly every prob limb we face! Truly I do. Don’t reject me because I have not yet raised a g’zillion dollars. Having said that, on the politico site there is an article by Josephine Hearns Anti-war Dems divided over strategy. At Post 105 I put up the first part of my Iraq Exit Strategy. Then I followed it @ 106 or 107.

    I’d like all of you to read it. I would love to articulate a solution to every quest yin you have about anything. When I get http://www.michaelslevinson totally updated and remodeled I will shout about the site from the roof tops. Later, in good faith

    Michael Stephen levinson

  36. allan hirsh  August 7, 2007 at 1:30 pm

    mr. hirsh
    The democrats usually find a way to lose. Maybe you’ve given them what they need. To lose again.

  37. michaelstephenlevinson  August 7, 2007 at 11:59 pm

    Dennis was very funny at the debate. He said, relative to our economic relations with China, when he was a kid they used to say, dig a hole and when you are done digging you will be in China. . . He looked into the camera and said, “We are there already.”

    I’m pleased my posts earlier were not erased because iamb a candidate.

  38. Gerald Sutliff  August 8, 2007 at 3:26 am

    After watching Dennis tonight I’m coming ’round to your point of view. No doubt he scares people because he really means it. My fear is that he’ll cause a military/industrial complex coup.

  39. Uncle Ludwig  August 8, 2007 at 3:32 am

    If I hear one more political “sophisticate” claim that voting for the guy currently at the bottom of the polls is a wasted vote, I will SCREAM.

    Do you not hear the insanity of your logic?

    “I won’t vote for somebody I consider the best choice for the job because they don’t have a chance of getting elected…because I won’t vote for somebody who doesn’t have a chance of getting elected because I don’t want to WASTE my vote.”

    Arrrrgh. Get out. This is the WORST FORM of front-runner mentality, and goes against the heart of our republic.

    Polls are usually based on the views of about 1000 people. If 30% of them like a candidate in a large field, that might be enough to make them the front runner. So, for those who won’t WASTE their vote on anybody who’s not a front runner, that early front runner may not need more than that 30% at the end, since people who subscribe to this nonsensical logic will vote for the front runner, and people who are less interested will not consider their votes necessary which is why turnouts often fall well below 50% of eligible voters. And all this based on the views of a fraction of the nation’s population…

    So these brilliant logicians who consider their vote wasted on someone in a large field who only garners the interest from 1-2% of the poll’s voters ignore the possibility of developing a coalition of those other 70% who don’t favor the front runner.

    Wake up, self-centered sophisticates. Your vote is wasted if you REFUSE TO vote for the person you think is the best one for the job.

  40. Josephhill  August 8, 2007 at 2:24 pm

    I LOVE you, Uncle Ludwig!!! Some people are too “smart” for their own good…persuading themselves that the point of any election is to pick a winner. They will go through paroxisms of hope and despair attempting to second-guess how everybody else is going to vote.

    They have become conditioned to believe the two major parties represent GOOD and EVIL and they represent the entire spectrum of political possibilities. Lately, the GOOD that USED TO make the Democrats the ‘Party of the People’, the ‘Defender of the Working Man’, the ‘Protector of the Poor’, the ‘Champion of Civil Liberties’ has morphed from ‘GOOD’ into ‘LESSER EVIL’; and it seems no one cares any more what platform or principles are being followed (or left by the wayside). Issues…schmissues…who cares?

    Just give us a winner…we’re willing to vote for continuing the war, for the rape of our civil liberties, for corporate-friendly policies that will put a tighter sqeeze on the ‘non-wealthy’ among us…whatever you say, just so long as it’s a Democrat who will be pushing all these policies.

    People at the DNC/DLC must not get out much; otherwise they wouldn’t keep nominating Republican-Lite candidates. They had better wake up and smell the tar and feathers…more and more progressives are talking about a party that would represent not only progressives, but also disgruntled libertarians, and–most importantly–the millions of eligible voters who have simply given up on being heard.

    The only vote I have is my own. I wouldn’t presume to bully and demonize others into voting for a candidate whose policies they disagree with…even if the opposition candidate is a complete doofus. I see no point in casting my own precious vote for a Hillary Clinton or Barak Obama. I take voting very seriously, and where I cast MY vote depends on a candidate’s integrity and proposed policies…NOT on whom The Media and the party hacks have pronounced “available for my consideration”.

    “And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” –
    — Friedrich Nietzsche

  41. Citroyen  August 11, 2007 at 10:58 am

    To Uncle Ludwig and Josephhill:

    Well said.

  42. mimigibson  August 16, 2007 at 7:57 pm

    This is what Dennis is up against. It’s no wonder people think he’s third party when the media insists on listing every candidate running on the Democratic ticket except Kucinich. I see it almost every day. Mimi

  43. Oyate  August 15, 2007 at 5:09 am

    Whew! Good save there! This is what you guys have to work with?

Comments are closed.