Dennis Kucinich looks like an elf

[boolean]

That's why nobody would vote for him to be the next president. Because of how he looks. He doesn't have a southern accent and he doesn't have white hair. He doesn't look like a president, so people don't take him seriously.

Well, I say enough of this idiocy. Forget Hillary. Forget Gore, Clark, Joe, or whoever the hell else. Dennis Kucinich would probably be the best damn thing to happen if people would only give him a chance. He's a pacifist, he's progressive, he seems to actually give a fuck about the people, and he's not corrupted by big corporations and lobbyists.

You want to send a REAL message to the assholes right now controlling the country? Both the Democrats and the Republicans? (And don't for one second think there aren't corrupted Dems). Send the one guy who the media doesn't give a chance in hell to the white house. Show those bastards that the people are going to take the country back by putting the guy who doesn't look like a president and who was divorced in power.

If you look at his policies, they're the most progressive. They're the best ideas. If he was president and people like him ran the senate and congress, things would actually start to improve. Health care, education, the economy, the world stage. So why don't people vote for him?

Because he looks like an elf.

Sad.

[saltpoint]

1. I got no problem with Dennis Kucinich.

None.

[boolean]

5. Nobody does

I'd say bout 99% of us here agree with his policies.

But when it comes time to vote, people don't do it because they're afraid of how the media will react. It's the same reason Dean lost to Kerry. Enough is enough. You have no problem with him? THEN VOTE FOR HIM!

[HughBeaumont]

9. The problem remains with the middle left -

"I mean . .. Kucinich means well, but GEEEZ, my KID is taller than him and he's only 13! He . .. look at him, he just doesn't scream 'LEADER', does he?"

[movonne]

19. I guess we have to vote for someone that looks presidental..like

bush..a 10 year old could do a better job..

[Writer]

38. See I don't think Bush "looked presidential" in 2000...

but for some whack-job reason, folks participating in focus groups after the Bush-Gore debates thought so. WTF? :shrug:

[HughBeaumont]

57. Name.

That's all they saw. He could look like Alfred E. Neuman or as generic as Jeb, but it's his NAME. Familiarity is all that matters with Dumberica now.

[saltpoint]

10. I do my own votin'.

You do yours.

Kucinich is a good man.

[katinmn]

11. People fall for the line: "He's not electable"

or "He can't raise enough money" and they give up.

[Clark2008]

24. I have not problem with his policies. I love Denny - it's

just I like another potential candidate better and plan to vote for that person.

:shrug:

[Guaranteed]

50. Well, if he's a "pacifist," as you say he is, I'd definitely have

a problem with him being the President. A whoooole lot of other Democrats would, too.

[HughBeaumont]

2. It is sad.

Dumberica likes only medium-to-tall white alpha males with folksy demeanor. Corporations would order the news to paint him as a crazy leaping gnome.

[Writer]

3. He might look like an elf, but liberals are naturally adversed to...

anything that looks like money - pretty is not an attractive thing to liberals, got it? Pretty means money, and in our minds, money is evil.

That's why liberals don't mind that Kucinich looks like an elf.

[Dr Fate]

29. Yeah- we really hate George Clooney & Gwenyth Paltrow too.

All those looks & money are a real turn off to us hairy, potato sack & sandal wearing Liberals.

Are you joking? Because I am.

[Writer]

37. I'm NOT joking.

Note that George and Gwyneth AREN'T running for office. They work in Hollywood... for some reason, good looks work well there. :eyes:

But for our candidates? We go granola. No bleach-blonde jobs for us. No picked-clean, acrylic nail-wearing, gel jobs for us. That's too "Republican." Too "Fox News."

See... here's the deal. Two folks walk into a room - both Democrats. One is wearing fairly preppy clothes, has his/her hair done, and looks fairly mainstream.

The other is a little grungy. He's not completely shaven. Maybe he's shorter, a little scrubby looking. Not quite as manicured.

They both speak similar statements supporting Democratic causes. They're both pro-environment, pro-choice, and anti-war.

Who would ultra-liberals believe? You really think they're going to listen to the preppy one? Likely not. The scrubbier one will win the day. They may even go so far as accuse the preppy one for being a little lighter on Dem issues (DINO), etc. But in the end, they'll ignore the similarities between the candidates and assume, based on appearance, that one is more "Republican" than the other. And that's why Dennis Kucinich wins the day with many on the left, even if he "looks like an elf."

Personally? I didn't think Kucinich was a very good candidate. His only consistent stance was on the war. Otherwise, I thought he was an uneven on issues, especially on abortion.

[Zorra]

52. "His only consistent stance was on the war".....?

Um....that is a totally false statement.

Besides that, liberals are simply not impressed by pretty people that lack substance. Liberals would vote for a yellow dog if the dog could do the job better than anyone else.

Conservatives, OTOH, would vote for a completely incompetent idiot if they thought the idiot was attractive. Rich and famous adds to the mix for conservatives.

The election of Hollywood douchebags like Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger are just two examples of how shallow conservatives are when it comes to choosing leaders.

[madmunchie]

102. Ugh, sorry to disagree, but JOHN EDWARDS!!!!

What does he really have to offer? He didn't even finish 1 term in the Senate before he was off and running for POTUS. He is extremely intelligent and a great speaker as well as superb attorney. BUT BUT BUT those are NOT enough qualifications for POTUS. YET, it was JOHN EDWARDS on the ticket with Kerry. He wasn't the only choice, nor was he the best.

He is a handsome and charismatic man, so he became the VP on the ticket with Kerry?!? Sorry, but the Dems in charge are influenced by looks.

[Dr Fate]

67. Perhaps that does describe a tiny minority of "the far left."

But as far as regular old Democrats go, no way.

Carter, Clinton, Gore, Edwards, Kerry- all clean cut, good looking fellas.

[Writer]

68. Yeah, but do you notice that nearly that entire list consists of...

southern Dems and "DLC" types? Just a thought here...

[Dr Fate]

70. So they are not real Democrats then- or are the ugly ones not real?

I thought we were talking about Democrats.

I think you mean Greens or hippies or something.

I dont even think Kusinich is paricularly ugly or ungroomed.

I think you are vaugely suggesting that a strawman "far-left" has an inferiority or loser complex.

[Writer]

73. You know, yeah, I think some do...

I mean think about these comments:

"It doesn't matter, because Diebold will steal the election."

"The media (ALL the media) are Republican-controlled."

etc etc...

I see a lot of that here on DU.

[Dr Fate]

77. Sure- but the thread was about how appearances play into elections...

Not about how strawman Liberals supposedly identify with ugly, dirty people. That was a slur you pulled out of nowhere.

And the media is Republican controlled- why else did they sell us "Saddan has WMDs" and "Saddam caused 9/11" 24/7? How about all that Swiftboat shit?

Knowing that Jack Welch, Rupurt Murdoch, etc are Republicans does mean one has an inferiority complex.

[Writer]

85. And you have hyperbolized my statement.

"ugly, dirty" people - WTF?

Yes, I think many liberals are subject to the same human biases as conservatives. I think we have our own stereotypes and we make decisions based on those stereotypes.

[Dr Fate]

88. "grungy" "not completely shaven" "scrubby looking" "shorter"

Your phrases.

[Writer]

89. And?

So you can then demonize those words into "dirty, ugly people?" (You might as well have added "smelly, swarthy little folk, you racist.") Especially taken out of context? Why don't you learn how to disagree like an adult.

[Dr Fate]

92. You may as well have added those phrases. They are similar.

Except the racist part- I never suggested that- you just added that now.

Do you suggest that everyone who debates you with your own words is not an adult?

You & I know both know what you were driving at.

[Writer]

93. No, we DON'T both know what I was driving at. Only I do.

And my point was well spelled out, in full sentence, several posts ago. Look, I have a life and do not intend on carrying on a stupid online flame war with someone who doesn't know me, my opinions, attitudes, or inclinations in anything I write and think. Why don't you go read a book?

[Dr Fate]

94. I nailed you on your bizzare slur against strawman Liberals.

I would also bow out now if I were you.

[Writer]

95. No you did not nail me, nor "get me" nor any of the other puerile

thoughts in your mind at the moment. We simply disagree and I still have no issue with my original posting on this topic. But since you appear to dwell in this small, small little world where everyone gets into dog fights over innocuous disagreements such as this, I'd prefer to allow you your pathetic prison and move on with my life.

What - need to feed off me a bit more? C'mon, chum. Or, you can choose to do something more useful with your life. That's what I choose.

[Dr Fate]

96. If you dont like debating, then dont slur Liberals on a Liberal site.

If you cant defend your positions then dont present them.

And if you think posting in threads is a waste of time, then go write that novel about the crusading reporter you have always dreamed about.

You know, fiction. ;)

[ruggerson]

30. Speak for yourself

I don't mind pretty and I don't mind money.

[Writer]

33. I don't either.

But I don't think many Democrats are very honest with themselves. If a candidate were to look like Mitt Romney, they'd scream DINO, DemLite, or DLC. Too picked clean, ya know? The more homely, the more "true to roots" the candidate looks to many Dems.

[GreenArrow]

59. Mitt Romney -- that guy is still dripping with slime

from the pod he crawled out of. I wouldn't vote for anyone who looked like that, regardless of party.

[rusty charly]

4. i did one of those online things

where you plugged in all your 'issues' and they gave you your primary candidate.

mine was kucinich.

[ShortnFiery]

6. May God Bless this beautiful Soul ... Dennis Kucinich is the sponsor

of a Cease Fire Resolution: http://www.kucinich.us/

Besides, those of us who have matured KNOW that looks are for first impressions. There have been many beautiful people, who, when they speak become ugly to me. In fact, when I see them again, man or woman, I can only see the "ugliness" of their persona. Conversely, there have been "homely people" (society would judge) who've become beautiful to me due to their warmth and charity toward others.

I think Rep. Dennis Kucinich has never been more beautiful. :-) :hi:

Kucinich Introduces Middle East Cease‑Fire Resolution

Calls on Bush to immediately send US diplomats to facilitate negotiations

Updated July 21, 2006

Congressman Kucinich introduced H. Con. Res. 450 on Wednesday, calling upon the President "to appeal to all sides in the current crisis in the Middle East for an immediate cessation of violence and to commit United States diplomats to multi-party negotiations with no preconditions."

[Radical Activist]

7. Progressives could have made Kucinich the nominee.

But we talk ourselves out of it with hand-wringing about "electability." Well, we picked the most "electable" candidate running in the '04 primary and we saw how that worked out.

[katinmn]

13. That should be forever seered in every liberals' mind.

Vote for the issues, not who the strategists say will win. They get six figure contracts to tell us how to vote. And they've been consistently W-R-O-N-G!

[Radical Activist]

17. More than that

we need to stop listening to who the corporate media says we should vote for. Such as Dean, who was the corporate media's choice for liberals in '04.

[GreenArrow]

15. Democratic moderates could have made McGovern President

but they opted for Tricky Dick.

[LWolf]

25. Not this progressive.

I was with him all the way to the convention. I hear you, though. The number of Democrats who fit the profile you describe is large enough.

[serryjw]

32. I said the same thing until I was blue

in the face. I like many, was a DK state delegate. I may very well write in his name this time and everyone on DU will bash me for doing it.

[sandnsea]

79. 1 on 1 in Oregon, 18%

He visited every single town, campaigned for a good month or longer, with a very strong left/green base, with no reason at all to vote for Kerry. 54% of Democrats turned out to vote. The best he could muster was 18% of the DEM vote with very very blue Dems. If people wanted to vote for Greens, they would. They don't. They want solid Democrats who believe in capitalism and entrepreneurship.

[MuseRider]

8. IMNSHO

He is the best our country has to offer not only to ourselves but to the planet.

For the record I happen to think he is adorable. His soul shines through and it is a thing of beauty.

[sgxnk]

12. you answered your own question

i highly doubt the american people would EVER vote for a pacifist for president

i also think your thesis is absurd. sorry

even a cursory look at polling data

try
www.pollingreport.com

shows that kucinich had no more chance of winning than sharpton, buchanan, nader, or lyndon larouche would

it's an issues thang

the looks don't help.

but even if he was John Edwards Handsome (tm) he would not stand a chance

[arcane1]

14. Kucinich is my man, but sadly, you're right..

in America, we don't elect presidents, we cast actors to play the role of President on TV :evilfrown:

[40ozDonkey]

16. Big battle ahead

The only part of Matt Taibbi's "Spanking the Donkey" I truly enjoyed was when he interviewed Dennis. Straight to the point, with great ideas, and a group of people around him who believed in what he did and it showed. We need someone like him on a national level.
Unfortunately we'll never get what he deserves. For all their cries of victimization, this country is in a stranglehold by culture war cantservatives. The second he proposes his Department of Peace the rightwing propaganda will go doubleplus apeshit to turn him into something he's not just to get their American-hating cultural warriors to the polls.
We need to fight back against the groups like the Heritage Foundation and cantservtive media in general, they're the primary reason for the hateful dumbing down of the general electorate. They're why Dennis would get shot down no matter how much support we give him. Until culture warriors are sufficiently embarassed (Scopes trial embarrassed), they'll keep on destroying America, Kucinich, and great progressive ideas to feed their bloated egos.

[Nye Bevan]

18. Sad but true- just like Robin Cook in the UK

who was a gifted politician but acknowledged that he would never become Prime Minister because he looked like a garden gnome.

[thethinker]

20. Dennis is a giant of a man

He has an excellent mind, great ideas and the spine to stand up for what he believes in.

While the rest of critters in congress are voting with the president and selling out the people, Dennis is speaking out and voting for the right things. He hasn't sold his soul to the highest bidder.

[jaxx]

21. Kucinich is one of the very few who thinks like I do.

I think he's electable......if we go out and elect him. There is something very refreshing about a man who says what is definitely not popular with the ass kissers.

[RethugAssKicker]

22. Hes definietely the MAN... but Americans are too stupid

to appreciate him!

[GreenArrow]

23. Kucinich is ahead of his time

Instead, we'll get some venal or ego-driven sap like Hillary, John Edwards, or Mark Warner.

"A prophet is not without honor, save in his own country".

[LWolf]

26. Or his own party. n/t

[cosmicdot]

98. I wonder how so?

I agree with your 'instead' statement. I'm just thinking aloud to your statement.

... on what particular problems are DK's thoughts and solutions 'ahead of his time'?


Who's in charge of 'outreach' in the House? Nancy Pelosi?
I think Hillary is in the Senate.
Who decides who gets air/media time; or who gets to speak as a Democrat for the TV audience?

How can 'the people' determine if DK is 'ahead of his time' when the system doesn't allow equal time and/or exposure for his ideas and opinions to be heard? During the 2004 election, at least one of the networks pulled its embedded journalist from the DK campaign (ABC, I think).

Are corporatists afraid of his ideas? Is it that he might actually help people and improve their lives? that his policies might lead to a reduction in conflicts not profitable to the military-industrial complex?


Are our problems ahead of their time?


It's just not Dennis. Conyers and others seem to be relegated to the basement. Out of sight, out of mind. The same people seem to be on TV all the time. That's a very narrow way to run a democracy. Some get their names planted in the corporate media virtually on a daily basis.

but, I've heard that mentioned before ... 'he's ahead of his time' ...


I'm almost 56 ... I've been waiting for a leader to move this country forward, to get this country moving again ... since 1968 (RFK) ... so, if I live another 38 years, will there be a politician down the road who will still be 'ahead of the times'? ... FDR probably was 'ahead of his time', too ... who decides that anyway? the corporatists? the media? the corporate-friendly politicians and their supporters? how much longer do I need to wait for the times to catch up to the progress this country needs? imo, there hasn't been much progress since the 1960s ... unless, of course, you're a corporation. Will we remain in the same middle of the road gridlock ... maintain the status quo with corporations writing bills affecting people ... adrift in mediocrity because people with solutions and vision relating to problems which have NOW ... and, with a country's infrastructure in need of a 21st upgrade ... are ... 'ahead of their time'???

~ is the person who makes the times
or is the times which makes the person? ~

Perhaps more than one 'inconvenient truth' will indicate that DK is within the times, and everyone else is anachronistic.

Maybe his 'ahead of his time' solutions and vision will be "OK" when other "electable" politicians 'borrow' them.

I heard him 'in person' on the campaign trail in 2004 ... if you haven't, I highly recommend it.

[GreenArrow]

104. "you can lead a horse to water

but you can't make him drink". Consider Dennis' time in Cleveland. No doubt you are familiar with the power company battle that cost Kucinich his job as mayor, and is often used by his detractors to paint him as either incompetent or a Stalinist. If not, here is the story as realted on DK's own website:

As Cleveland Mayor, Kucinich's Fight To Save Public Power
A Profile in Political Courage... and Vindication

Having been elected to Cleveland's City Council at age 23, Dennis Kucinich was well-known to Cleveland voters when they chose him as their mayor in 1977 at the age of 31. He was elected mayor on a promise that he would not sell off or privatize the beloved and trusted city-owned power system, though Cleveland was deeply in debt.

Cleveland Magazine offered this summary: "Kucinich refused to yield to bankers who gave him a choice: Sell the Municipal Light System to the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. or the city will go into default. The mayor said no."

When Kucinich refused to sell Muny Light, the banks took the unprecedented step of refusing to roll over the city’s debt, as is customary. Instead, they pushed the city into default. It turned out the banks were thoroughly interlocked with the private utility, CEI, which would have acquired monopoly status by taking over Muny Light. Five of the six banks held almost 1.8 million shares of CEI stock; of the 11 directors of CEI, eight were also directors of four of the six banks involved.

By holding to his campaign promise and putting principle above politics, he lost his re-election bid and his political career was derailed. But today Kucinich stands vindicated for having confronted the Enron of his day, and for saving the municipal power company. "There is little debate," wrote Cleveland Magazine in May 1996, "over the value of Muny Light today. Now Cleveland Public Power, it is a proven asset to the city that between 1985 and 1995 saved its customers $195,148,520 over what they would have paid CEI." He also preserved hundreds of union jobs.

When Kucinich re-launched his political career in the mid-1990s, it was on the strength of having saved public power. His campaign symbol was a light bulb. "Because he was right!" was his campaign slogan when he won his seat in the state senate in 1994. The slogan that sent him to Washington two years later was "Light Up Congress."

In 1998, the Cleveland City Council issued a commendation to Dennis Kucinich for "having the courage and foresight to refuse to sell the city's municipal electric system."

He was certainly ahead of his time on this issue. But what it further illustrates, is his courage in going against the established grain, and the prevailing patterns of thinking. I suppose I mean that DK is ahead of his time in that he is actually offering pointed solutions to this country's myriad problems. Not easy solutions, real solutions. He's not looking to benefit big business and corporate interests, and neither are they looking to benefit him, unlike Pelosi and Clinton. He's ahead of his time in that he actually asks people to think...to make sacrifices...to question what they are doing and how they are living...

There should be a nationwide clamor for things like affordable Single Payer Healthcare (which really involves putting insurance companies out of business and which is why you see no real action on this issue from either party.) But mention cutting the defense budget applying the money to other areas and one is derided as weak, foolish, a communist, a terrorist -- name your poison. "A department of Peace, Good God, how naive". Naive, yes, because we all instinctively know that peace is a terrible state of existence, and that armed conflict is really another name for business, and really, after all, the business of America is business, and it takes money to make money, and to make an omelette you have to break a few eggs, so who really needs peace anyway? And how do we know those things? Because the corporate controlled media tells us so. Because their political toadies tell us so. "Freedom isn't free", you know. Why are the same faces always on TV/media? Because the media and the "faces" work for the same bosses, and that's not us. We get cheap consumer goods out of this arrangement though, so what the hell. We don't have to think; our leaders will do it for us! Never mind that there may be times when we will be the eggs.

It doesn't really answer your question, I suppose, but Kucinich is riding on the same train as the rest of us and his one of the few who understands that not only is the train going too fast, is on a broken track, with a drunken engineer, but that the destination itself is one that is leading us to ruin. Compare with Edwards, Clinton, Pelosi, et al who promise instead to slow the train down, fix the rails, replace the engineer, but lead us to the same end, if at a slower pace. It's not the track, it's not the train that's the problem, it's the destination.

I suspect that more people than not would agree with many of Dennis' positions if they were not associating them with him, yet they keep on falling for the same old sales jobs, choosing rather to cast their collective lot with connected, moneyed, glib talking, well coifed, and safe politicians who promise them the moon --pre-fab candidates with pre-fab ideas. I further suspect that a sizable number know they are being jobbed and that the system is rigged and either drop out of the system altogether, or slog their way to the polling place out of some sense of routine or duty. Business as usual.

Let me add just one more illustration to this already rambling piece that no one is going to read anyway. Back during the primary season in 2004, some paper or another published an article spotlighting the various Democratic candidates homes. Kerry's was a hulking brownstone brick fortress, Edwards' an ostenatious McMansion, Clark's a conservative Colonial style, and so on, but Kucinich's was very small and modest, not in the best neighborhood, simply utilitarian. Now of course, one of the cornerstones of the "American Dream" is the idea of owning one's own house. Everyone understands this. But as kind of a sidelight to this, is the seldom spoken, but religiously practiced idea that we can (and should, as a sort of proof of Divine Favor) have more than we actually need; bigger homes, larger spaces, newer cars, more gadgets, more convieniences, and so on...What DK is suggesting to us, and really he is a very moderate man, is that we as a society are going to have to learn how to deal with having less than we are used to, that we are going to have to accept that in this great wide world, we are no longer going to be able to take more than our share, and that we can realize this now, and take practical and mindful steps to deal with it, or we can continue to believe that we are entitled to a greater share of the world's riches and the rest of the world can be damned. (God Bless America, and to hell with everyone else). We can learn to get by with having enough, or we can continue to strive for more than we need. At this point, most people do not seem prepared to accept that they are going to have to learn to live with less. People were willing to accept Roosevelt because they had to deal with the reality of the Depression. It apparently will take another traumatic period like the Depression to make people take heed of Kucinich's words.

AS I said, Kucinich is really a very moderate man, even conservative in some ways. I don't agree with him on every position. Sometimes, I disagree with him strongly. But he is something of a rarity among politicans--he is basically honest. We are "adrift in medicocrity" and told that we must focus on the "pragmatic", and forget childish idealism, that we must not let the perfect become the enemy of the good, without realizing that by the same token, mediocrity is also the enemy of the good, and that without focusing on ideals, and working towards them, all the talk of pragmatism in the world is so much hot air and puffery.

[LWolf]

27. Perhaps those shallow thinkers will be silenced

should he ever run again, with his tall, beautiful wife standing at his side.

[KoKo]

31. Those who heard him speak "in person" have to have alot of love in their

heart for this "amazin elf."

He's a "good guy" ...no doubt about it...

[LWolf]

39. He is an accomplished listener,

and his passion about the issues that affect real people is so evident, whether he is talking to a large group, a small group, or one-on-one. I spoke to him briefly twice in '04, and it was an honor. No one in the room noticed his height, haircut, etc.; the focus was all on the conversation.

[eridani]

90. If he could bottle and sell what he has in person--

--he'd be pretty wealthy. Since it doesn't photograph well, the way to get him elected would be to have him visit every county in the nation.

[Pushed To The Left]

71. I saw him speak at the "Uppie Awards" last year

I was extremely impressed! One of the most passionate speakers I have ever seen.

[ecstatic]

28. Edwards probably would have fared better as the frontrunner

I think Kerry's looks may have hurt him as well.

[politicasista]

34. It was the media and the Dem party's lack of unity that hurt more n/t

[karynnj]

41. That fly in the face of the primary results

where Kerry trounced Edwards in the primaries. Kerry was very Presidential looking. I personally thought he looked far more interesting than Edwards. (I think Edwards may have been hurt as much because he looked too young.)

Frankly, Looks are more important for models than for Presidents. (Kerry is better looking than Clinton, Bush 1, and Carter for starters - those mentioned as they weren't even close.)

[benny05]

53. I Agree that I Get Tired of Folks Judging on Looks

Even Al Frum, Mr DLC, said that Edwards wasn't invited to their meeting this past weekend, but not to make much of it because they didn't need a beauty contest anyway. What a snark.

Regarding Dennis, he's a fine patriot. I'm glad he's in the House still fighting for all of us, especially for the men and women in uniform.

[karynnj]

58. I think From was meaning that the DLC event

was not meant to showcase all potential DLC related potential 2008 candidates. Edwards was DLC when in office and members have to be in office - It's interesting that Edwards was NOT there as it is quite possibly a sign that HE doesn't want to be connected anymore. (when From months ago listed potential DLC 2008 possibilities - they were Clinton, Bayh, Warner, and Vilsack - Warner is out of office as well as Edwards.) My take is that Edwards is not trying for DLC support and From's choice to make that comment was that it leaves the door open - where saying in effect "he's not connected to us" would close the door. Note: Kerry hasn't been there the last 2 years either.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

35. The sentence that we DK supporters heard more than any other was

"I just LOVE Dennis, but he can't win."

If everyone who said that had actually voted for him, he would have won. I'm serious.

[Earth_First]

44. You are 110% correct.

You know who I must have heard this the absolute MOST from? Howard Dean supporters.

[blm]

36. You are wrong - Dennis has always been attractive to me and

I believe to many other women, as well. He has way more sizzle than most men.

[LoZoccolo]

40. I didn't vote for Kucinich because he is Bush* lite.

And look at the URL. That picture was posted on Kucinich's own web site.

He also voted for the flag-burning amendment.

Fuck that DLC DINO Joementum spineless twit; there's two reason NEVER to like this guy.

_{NOTE: This post is sarcastic.}

[LWolf]

42. ROFLMAO

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

I award you today's Orwellian Achievement Award for the best mischaracterization of the day, if not the year.

[Earth_First]

43. This is the man who turned me onto politics...

I'll never forget taking the leap of faith I took when I quit my job to work for Dennis for a month in New Hampshire. The proudest day that I ever had as a voting American was when I cast my primary vote in New York for Dennis Kucinich.

Dennis, thank you, thank you, thank you!

[tinfoilinfor2005]

45. I agree with every word you say.

And sadly yes the days of people voting for people who look like Lincoln or Cooledge or anyone outside the accepted main are pretty much over with. The tv records every freckle and tonsil. For myself, I would like to see a law passed that political candidates would have to give their own speeches and that speech writers would be banished upon fear of death. I want to judge a candidate by the words coming out of his own mouth, not someone elses. I think Kucinich probably comes closest to that of any of today's politicians.

[Skittles]

46. I voted for him

yes INDEED

[BluegrassDem]

47. He's Keebler, reincarnated!

nm

[Greyhound]

48. Sadly your post is absolutely correct.

I think he could be a very effective VPOTUS.

How about Clark/Kucinich?

[Cobalt-60]

49. I voted for him

In the Primary.
I too think he kicks *ss

[Zorra]

51. Our country desperately needs Dennis in the White House.

In fact, our planet desperately needs him in the White House.

[Cocoa]

54. I saw a focus group on C-span

during the summer of 2003, about the dem primary candidates.

They showed the panel pictures of the nine candidates and asked for their impressions.

There were something like ten people in the focus group, and a couple of them recognized a few of the candidates, the rest recognized zero of them.

No one recognized Dennis. Their reaction to his picture was to laugh.

[Mira]

55. Kucinich is all Bush is not, and after that comes the good stuff

If we had a pendulum - they are the two extremes. That is the reason Kucinich does not have a chance.
I don't think it is possible for enough people to make such a big mental stretch to elect this guy.

He is creme de la creme to have offered his service to this country, and we are unable to see that.

I love that man, and I wanted to marry him, but that English woman Elizabeth beat me to it.

[NoPasaran]

56. Looks aside, I wouldn't vote for him because I disagree with him

Looks aside, I wouldn't vote for him because I disagree with him on many issues. Especially his chilling proposal for an Orwellian Ministry of Peace.

[AnOhioan]

61. Orwellian????

I would love to know how you see the DOP proposal as "Orwellian".

[mr715]

65. Uh

Because we have one called the Dept of State.

We dont need a Dept of Peace, or a Dept of Happiness, or a Dept of Cuteness

Peace is something existing agencies should act towards. It is a goal, not an object.

Hence, Dept of Defense is no longer the Department of War.

Orwellian? No. Stupid? Yes.

[AnOhioan]

66. "Peace is something existing agencies should act towards"

Yeah...The State Dept has been doing such a marvelous job of that.

Call it stupid if you will, deride it if you will.

It is an idea that has been around since the founding or our country.

[NoPasaran]

82. From his own website

A Department of Peace can look at the domestic issues that our society faces and often ignores as we focus on matters internationally. We have a problem with violence in our own society, and we need to look at it and address it in a structured way. Domestically, the Department of Peace would address violence in the home, spousal abuse, child abuse, gangs, and police-community relations conflicts, and would work with individuals and groups to achieve changes in attitudes that examine the mythologies of cherished world views, such as "violence is inevitable" or "war is inevitable." Thus, it will help with the discovery of new selves and new paths toward peaceful consensus.

The Department of Peace will also address human development and the unique concerns of women and children. It will envision and seek to implement plans for peace education, not simply as a course of study, but as a template for all pursuits of knowledge within formal educational settings.

http://www.kucinich.us/issues/departmentpeace.php

At the very least, Minipeace is a gigantic escalation of the nanny state. The next step would be re-education camps.

[AnOhioan]

83. "Re-education camps"

I will assume you forgot the sarcasm qualifier. If you intended your post as serious, you have bigger issues than I can help with.

[saltpoint]

76. I checked the Kucinich file and found no Orwellian traces.

There were significant portions of Dr. King, Gandhi, St. Francis, RFK SR, RFK JR, and any number of other excellent folks.

Didn't see even microscopic hints of Orwellian themes.

The Defense Department used to be 'War' and not 'Defense'; I think a Secretary of Peace presiding over a corresponding department would be a damn good thing, better late than never, and for that matter, who better to sit at its helm than Dennis Kucinich?

He's a good man.

[noonwitch]

60. A pacifist has no chance in the next election

And probably never will, unless they start putting valium in the water supply.

I have nothing against Kucinich, personally, but he sounds very naive when discussing world events. I don't think that you can be president of one of the two remaining superpowers and still be a pacifist. Sometimes, out country is going to have to go to war. That's just the way it is.

[boolean]

63. And look at how well that worked out!

What do you mean have to go to war?

The last war anyone had to go to was WWII. That was 60 years ago. And the only reason the US joined WWII was because of the attack on pearl harbor. In other words, it wasn't even preemptive. (Which is quite ironic considering all the conservative gasbags on TV that always point out the great success of WWII and compare today's world with that of the Nazi threat. The US was the last country to even enter WWII)

What about Korea. Vietnam. Iraq. Afghanistan. What about all the other little incursions and bombings? All colossal failures. All making the rest of the world hate the good old U.S.A. If you made a list of every war or military operation in the last 100 years and put a check beside the ones that were successful, I bet you'd barely be able to count them on one hand. I don't even list desert storm because that was a U.N. backed operation. (That's what the U.N. is for. To determine when you have to go to war. Too bad chimpy and those like him don't seem to get that)

It's precisely this warmongering bullshit that has to STOP. It's NOT just "the way it is".

Interesting that you brought up the "superpower" subject. I wonder what the world would be like today if the same warmongering asshats running things today had decided that the USSR was a threat and that it needed to be invaded. Isn't it ironic that the cold war (and I resent the term "war" to describe it. Notice how everything is a "war"? War on drugs. War on terror. War on this war on that. It's no wonder so many people are warmongering idiots. Everything's a fucking war to you people.) ended without a single shot being fired? Diplomacy happened and what do you know! Nobody got bombed to smithereens! Imagine that!

You attitude needs to end. This is the 21st century. Enough is enough. Start putting money into education and health care instead of more guns and more bombs and more tanks. Maybe if someone like Kucinich came in and fixed the goddamn education system the people wouldn't be so ignorant anymore.

[HughBeaumont]

91. That's NOT just the way it is.

Read Addicted To War: Why The US Cannot Kick Militarism. Nobody but the rich benefit from wars. Our country's image certainly doesn't and contrary to prior belief, neither does our economy. Our schools, roads, infrastructure, communities, utilities, etc all go to shit when monies that would improve everything go towards some purposeless invasion (such as the one we're currently trying to dig our way out of with a toothpick).

With every illegal invasion on sovereign nations, with every installation of a crackpot dictator that kowtow's to Big Business's and the CIA's needs, with every tax dollar that gets funneled into the Penta-gone, it ends up as just another reason we have to stay in perpetual military conflict. Life isn't a big dick-swinging contest.

[Bushwick Bill]

62. No worries.

His wife balances it all out.

:)

[Ignis]

64. Next up: Prime Minister Elrond! :) NT

[AJH032]

69. or maybe...just maybe...

America isn't quite as far to the left as DU wants to believe it is, and that's why Americans won't vote for him.

[NCarolinawoman]

72. What would all the Dem '08 candidates look like if they were bald?

I wish I knew how to photoshop. I think Wes Clark would look like Captain Pickard of that old Star Trek series. I wonder what the others would look like. (not counting Hilary). :)

It would kind of work as a leveling field to see them all bald. The race for President would become a thing of substance. (I always was a big fan of Jerry Brown of California.)

[T Town Jake]

74. Disruption down in the Gungeon...

...and the same up here.

Having fun yet?

[juajen]

75. I totally agree. Dennis is wonderful and our country

would be so much better off if he were leading us. It's a rotten shame. BTW, I believe most women really like the way he looks. I personally do and I know others who agree. He's brilliant, and I wish we could elect him.

[Mr_Spock]

78. Romulan

He looks like a Romulan :D

[Clarkie1]

80. Maybe, but he has a really hot looking wife! nt

[Hippo_Tron]

81. I think that you are pretty much correct

Granted, I'm not sure that the country would be ready for Dennis Kucinich even if he had all of those qualities. But, there is no question that he would be a lot more viable if he had John Edwards' looks, height, and accent. Not that I'm knocking John Edwards, but I'm just using him as an example because he seems to have all of those superficial qualities that are, unfortunately, what people care about in politics.

[benny05]

87. Why do we look harshly at pols...

Who are blessed with good appearance in addition to great political skills, empathy, etc? That is so OLD.

And why are we judging Dennis on his looks? Heck, he got remarried last year to a smart babe; only she gets to judge on his appearance, and she doesn't seem to do so.


We all know Dennis is great patriot, and I'm damned glad he's fightin' for us every day and that he is running for re-election (I hope).


Nuff said on this. Let's discuss real politics or take this to the Lounge.

[Bridget Dooley]

84. Yes, he's an elf alright...

...but a damn principled and progressive elf.

[LWolf]

100. True.

I wonder what Orlando Bloom will look like at Dennis' age?

[Bake]

86. He's shorter than W and reminds me of Michael Dukakis!

That's what the media will say and middle America will blithely repeat it.

And that spells L-O-S-E-R, particularly in the Age of Television.

And that rather sucks. Large.

Bake

[ray of light]

97. that's mean.

[T_i_B]

99. I always thought....

....that he looks more like Jimmy Krankie! :wow:

[mainer]

101. And Judy Dean's hair "doesn't look like a first lady's"

I still remember reading that comment in the reader response letters in PEOPLE MAGAZINE, after the Deans were featured. I couldn't believe it. The article talked about Judy's brilliance as a doctor, her dedication to her patients, her graciousness, and some bimbo from Arkansas writes in that she'd never vote for a man whose wife didn't bother to fix up her hair-do.

Americans are shallow. That's the bottom line.

[MrSlayer]

103. More like a gnome.

Elves are extremely beautiful and are tall. Gnome is a better description.