Dennis Kucinich is God. I defy you to watch his new TV commercial and reach any other conclusion.

Although Dennis Kucinich gets little respect from those whose narrow view of the campaign is limited to picking a nominee, those of us who also see the campaign as a battle of ideas know that the campaign is not necessarily a winner-take-all fight because Hillary, Edwards, Obama, or whoever is our eventual nominee may see a brilliant idea from a second tier candidate and adopt it.

In this marketplace of campaign ideas, Dennis Kucinich has a commanding lead over the pack.

Before you reject this idea of Dennis Kucinich leading the Democratic pack, please check out his new TV ad, here:

http://kucinich.us/node/4580/play

After you watch his ad, ask yourself this question: do Hillary and Obama really need more millions or should I send that Dennis Kucinich a few bucks to run his 'No more blood for oil' spot on TV?

and have sent him money.

But God would know better than to appear on Fox News for a debate.

not in the market for a god.

it just pushes a personal button of mine, where it bugs me that people look to politicians as moral/spiritual leaders.

and a cult of Dennis is no better. "Right on almost every issue" does not translate into "hero deserving of worship," at least not in my mind. No matter how much I like a candidate, I'm not going to start throwing around that kind of terminology.

However, I don't believe in god.

this guy is the real deal.

He gets my vote. :thumbsup:

He's a fighter. I'd love to see what he could do with the money that someone like Hillary has.

I'm glad it's on the internet. That way it'll get out there to people. Brilliant concept for an ad to.

I have nothing but contempt for posters who make fun of appearances.

Dennis Kucinich is a patriot.

You are a smearer.

I dare you to post a picture of yourself so the rest of us can dissect it and make fun of you like you did in calling DK a "leprechaun".

This has no place on DU.

Stick to the issues.

:grr:

But seriously, you are entirely correct that people who are judging Dennis based on his appearance -- and I personally think he's a pretty ordinary-looking guy -- are wading in the shallow end of the political debate pool. Maybe when our political debate has more substance, we'll get better government. Here's hoping.

...and all stereotypes notwishstanding, I am NOT "magically delicious."

Believe me, he can take a joke; he has a great sense of humor about his height; and, I'm part Irish-American - we love the "Leprechauns."

But you have to raise money for that.

http://www.politicalmoneyline.com/cgi-win/x_candpg.exe?DoFn=P40002545*2008

He had less that $200,000 on hand. That's not enough for a competative state house race in some states.

That was an emotion piece, no better than Reagan's prison revolving door ad.

Where's the "brilliant ideas"?

go figure . . .

Although in today's America with 20 second attention spans, emotion ads are effective. I just personally don't have much respect for them.

Since you said this is a "campaign of ideas", I guess I expected more. JMHO about the ad.

for universal health care. So here it is:

Our health care system is broken, and H.R. 676, the Conyers-Kucinich bill, is the only comprehensive solution to the problem. It is also the system endorsed by more than 14,000 physicians from Physicians for a National Health Program. Nearly 46 million Americans have no health care and over 40 million more have only minimal coverage. In 2005 some 41% of moderate and middle income Americans went without health care for part of the year. Even more shocking is that 53% of those earning less than $20,000 went without insurance for all of 2005. In fact, the National Academy of Science's Institute of Medicine estimates that 18,000 Americans die each year because they have no health insurance.

The American health system is quite sick. Pulitzer Prize journalists Donald Barlett and James Steele, in their stunning analysis of the health care industry, Critical Condition (2006 Broadway Books), insist that "... U.S. health care is second-rate at the start of the twenty-first century and destined to get a lot worse and much more expensive." Considering the following facts from Tom Daschle's article for the Center for American Progress: "Paying More but Getting Less: Myths and the Global Case for U.S. Health Reform":

* Americans are The Healthiest People in the World.
FACT: Citizens of 34 nations live longer than Americans.
* The U.S. is the Best Place to Get Sick.
FACT: The World Health Organization ranked the U.S. 37th in the world for health system performance. Countries like Australia and the United Kingdom rank above the U.S. Americans have lower odds of surviving colorectal cancer and childhood leukemia than Canadians who do have national health care. Americans also experience greater problems in coordination of care than the previously mentioned countries and New Zealand.
* Covering All Americans Will Lead to Rationing.
FACT: Same-day access to primary-care physicians in the U.S. (33%) is far less available than in the United Kingdom (41%), Australia (54%) and New Zealand (60%). Per capita spending for health care averaged $2,696 in countries without waiting lists and $5,267 in the U.S.
* Global Competitiveness is Hampered in Comprehensive System.
FACT: "Health care costs are not just a burden and barrier to care for individuals; they are taking a heavy toll on American businesses." The strain on employers in 2005 was staggering. "The average total premiums for an employer-based family plan was $9,979 in 2005 ..." Most of our competitors in the world markets finance their systems outside corporate taxes and employer mandates. Without Medicare for Everyone, the U.S. will continue to hemorrhage jobs.
* We Cannot Afford to Cover All Americans.
FACT: We already spend enough to have universal health care. "The truth is, we cannot afford to not reform the health system." We spend about 50% more than the next most expensive nation and nearly twice per person what the Canadians do. On May 1, 2006 Paul Krugman explained in Death by Insurance how incredibly wasteful the current system is. The doctor he referenced has two full-time staff members for billing, and two secretaries spend half their time collecting insurance information on the 301 different private plans they deal with. This type of waste is easily 20%. Also consider that 98% of Medicare funds are spent on medical care.

More here: http://kucinich.us/issues/universalhealth.php

Obama and Hillary have some tentative thoughts on health care (which they call plans), and Edwards has a pretty good plan, but Kucinich has not only the best plan, his plan is actually a piece of legislation.

Here are Dennis Kucinich's Ten Key Issues:

1. Universal Health Care
2. International Cooperation: US out of Iraq, UN in
3. Jobs and Withdrawal from NAFTA and WTO
4. Repeal of the "Patriot Act"
5. Guaranteed Quality Education, Pre-K Through College
6. Full Social Security Benefits at Age 65
7. Right-to-Choose, Privacy and Civil Rights
8. Balance Between Workers and Corporations
9. Environmental Renewal and Clean Energy
10. Restored Rural Communities and Family Farms

They are all linked to substantive analysis and discussion, here: http://kucinich.us/issues

Which is why your topic title about "watch an ad and think Kucinich is god" struck me as impossible. It'll take more than a "emotion ad" to be known as the Idea Candidate.

Personally, I think he's got no chance, but he is playing a valuable role. He really does have some good ideas that may end up being planks in the campaign for the eventual nominee.

if people like yourself continue to back an impotent and same ol story candidate instead of voting for the candidate that has the principles this country is in such dire need of.

When will we ever learn that we need to STOP voting for whoever we think has the best chance to win, and start voting for who is best for our country.

All real 'Idea Candidates' should eschew the medium of television entirely. It is a vile machine and anyone that uses it cannot possibly be considered a thoughtful or intelligent candidate.

All proper 'Idea Candidates' should also avoid any possible emotional appeals of any kind.

seeing all the data that is so thoroughly buried in the Captive Media. Data that represents real-life actions taken by the Bush Admin. that are shaking the world apart as we speak. And despite the gravity of it all, these enormous events remain only tangentially felt by most Americans due to collusion among the Big Business owners of the Captive Media who have their snouts in the same slop-trough that Big Oil does. The trough of endless money put out by the Bush junta that is available to any company that will help enable them.

The big idea is: that merely seeing the suppressed data is close to a life-changing event. Things are that terrible. And a viewer of the ad wonders why the media leaves him/her in the dark. Why the Republican Congress was so complicit in this disaster. Why the Dems in D.C. also don't speak of these things in the direct way of this ad.

The idea is: something keeps all of this horror sequestered away from the average American. Seeing it - maybe for the first time - right there on the same TV screen that is normally used to filter out exactly this type of information is Step 1 for a majority of the populace.

This ad is an intervention. This is a family member saying (finally!) "let's talk about Dad's drinking and Junior's Oxycontin use.

The big idea is: this ad takes Step 1 when NO ONE else wants to. and that seems to me to be the essential place to begin.

On Edit: Huey Long pushed FDR from a moderate to a liberal...


In 1927, the Democratic Party had died and was awaiting burial. As depression approached, the coma-Dems, like Franklin Roosevelt, called for balancing the budget.

Then, as the waters rose, one politician finally said, roughly, "Screw this! They're lying! The President's lying! The rich fat cats that are drowning you will do it again and again and again. They lead you into imperialist wars for profit, they take away your schools and your hope and when you complain, they blame Blacks and Jews and immigrants. Then they push your kids under. I say, Kick'm in the ass and take your rightful share!"

Huey Long laid out a plan: a progressive income tax, real money for education, public works to rebuild Louisiana and America, an end to wars for empire, and an end to financial oligarchy. The waters receded, the anger did not, and Huey "Kingfish" Long was elected Governor of Louisiana in 1928.

At the time, Louisiana schools were free, but not the textbooks. Governor Long taxed Big Oil to pay for the books. Rockefeller's oil companies refused pay the textbook tax, so Long ordered the National Guard to seize Standard Oil's fields in the Delta.

Huey Long was called a "demagogue" and a "dictator." Of course. Because it was Huey Long who established the concept that a government of the people must protect the people, school, house, and feed them and give every man or woman a job who needs one.

Government, he said, "We The People," not plutocrats nor Halliburtons, must build bridges and levies to keep the waters from rising over our heads. All we had to do was share the nation's wealth we created as a nation. But that meant facing down what he called the "concentrations of monopoly power" to finance the needs of the public.

In other words, Huey Long founded the modern Democratic Party. Franklin Roosevelt and the party establishment, scared senseless of Long's ineluctable march to the White House, adopted his program, called it the New Deal, and later The New Frontier and the Great Society.

America and the party prospered.

America could use a Democratic Party again and there's a rumor it's alive -- somewhere.

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0902-32.htm

Huey Long was a notoriously corrupt politician. Considering he coined the phrase "I am the constitution" I can't imagine why people would call him a dictator.

And unfortunately, most people are not going to vote for president based upon that candidate's great ideas. Most Americans vote for president based upon how that person makes them feel. It may not be right, but that is the reality that exists. Dennis Kucinich has trouble selling his great ideas (I am not disputing that they are great ideas) to Congress much less to the entire nation. He is very good at selling his ideas to the Liberal Left (I am a Liberal, but am pragmatic enough to want a Democrat elected in 2008).

I read somewhere that Kucinich's odds for winning the nomination are 25,000 to 1 which is a real longshot for a race horse (could be worse, Gravel is listed at a million to 1). To become the next president our Democratic nomninee must not only get votes from the Liberal Left (we tend to pout if we don't get our way), but from all Democrats as well as independents and even Republicans. If you do not get elected president you will not be able to direct any of your ideas, great or good. If Kucinich was a race horse I might put a buck on him, otherwise I'll go with one that actually has a chance to win (although Gravel's million to 1 odds is "a" chance in a million). But since Kucinich will not be the nominee, this is all academic anyway. Plus, if Gore runs you will never hear about Kucinich being a "god".

very well adopt some of Dennis Kucinich's plans.

God knows, Obama is a mountain of potential set upon a whole continent of hope and good will but he's just a wee hill of actual substantive campaign platform specifics; perhaps Obama can use some of DK's proposals.

And Edwards's platform is not really that far removed from DK's - certainly, Edwards's proposals are nearest to DK's of all the top tier candidates.

I'm tired of the same old story.

I want someone like DK who will stand for his principles... OUR principles!!!

Your principles are your principles and you are assured that yours are the correct ones. Who exactly is the "OUR" of which you speak, exactly how many of you are there, and have you designated a person to speak for all of you? Is the Democratic Party one large monolith where everybody thinks and believes exactly the same? Otherwise, if Kucinich's principles are OUR principles, then he should be the only candidate.

I have a U.S. senator in Russ Feingold who stands up for his principles even if they are not the principles of everyone. His was the lone vote against the Patriot Act and he even stood up against his own party to cast it.

He's running further to the left this time around, and I think that Kucinich might have been at least a partial factor here.

They are old school politicians, who will continue to sell thier votes to the highest bidder. They are already pandering to the religious sects of this country, and have already begant thier decent into moderatism, selling out thier principles to try and get those couple extra bucks, and votes.

More of the same? No thanks...

The majority of Americans want out of Iraq now. The majority of Americans want universal health care. I could go on and on. His ideas match very well with the majority of the Americans view points.

Kucinich has trouble selling his ideas to congress? What does that tell you about our congressmen?

I disagree that most Americans vote for a candidate that makes them feel good. That didn't seem to be true in 2004.

Where did you get these odds?

I hear people say that Kucinich can't be president because he is too short. And in the next breath, they tell me that a white woman or black male is what the public wants this time and that is what can win. OK. Some how, I think those red neck cross over voters might like a short white male with great ideas.

Kucinich won't be the nominee because corporate America does not like his ideas. He will not be the nominee because the Democratic party, like the republican party, sell their souls for corporate contributions. It is not about ideas, who can best win the voters over, who makes them feel good, or anything else. It is about money. So let's just call it what it is. What bothers me is how accepting many of us are of this system.

Most Americans vote the candidate that they feel good about, not one that makes them feel good. This is 2007, not 1887. Like it or not, appearance and the ability to communicate your message is important. It's not fair that tall men and women who are good looking have a much easier time in life than the rest of us. Abraham Lincoln would probably have a hard time getting elected today. If somebody cannot convince 435 members of Congress, how can that person effectively convince over 300 million American citizens that he knows what is best for them. If you cannot sell your ideas, then it does not matter how good they may be. How did I get the odds? Try Google, it's very simple. In a Boston Globe article Kucinich give his own odds for himself at 26:1. Another site has him at 30:1 (much better than 25,000:1) with Clinton at 5:3, Edwards at 4:1, and Obama at 9:1. But like I said, it's all academic since Kucinich will not get the nomination. Ever consider the remote possibility that most Democrats might prefer someone other than Kucinich, no matter how godlike he might appear to some?

Dennis was elected in "96. How many bills were passed by Dems in '97 in the house?

So I guess what you are saying is all the House Dems who served from 1996 through 2006 can't get bills passed, right?

Or then, who passed what?

I await your list of all the great bills our Dems in the house passed in that period. Please don't try to include them all, since there are probably so many, just include the highlights.

Thanks!

We listen to the media, and let them tell us who will win.

NO MORE!!!

If we don't learn from our mistakes, and people don't support and endorse candidates with principles instead of finances, then we deserve whatever we get when the new Democrats sell us out again.

you'd second-guess what other people want? After all, the "cool kids" in the mass media ignore Dennis, so how could he possibly have any appeal to anyone?

The primaries are our ONE CHANCE to express our real opinions about the candidates instead of accepting the media-anointed darlings.

I'm not going to waste my Minnesota caucus vote on anyone I can't support whole-heartedly, and that includes ALL the so-called "front runners" and Gore and Clark.

I agree, and I will be backing Kucinich as well.

My only irritation is that because tof the way the caucus is organized our primary votes don't even get considered until much later in the process. Most people see Minnesota as being somewhat irrelevant in the scheme of things.

So you are basing a candidates electability on bookmakers that go to pundits and pollsters to try to ascertain this? And what all is this based on ultimately? The media? Polls? Money? Primary viability? Connections?

Well the polls require that the public is informed and familiar with the candidate and their positions. Which of course relies on the media to properly give ink, bandwidth, or airtime ot said candidate. Of course in modern American political "news" the punditocracy rules who we get to select. And of course most of the reporting outside of this seems to fixate on who has raised the most money to run for office.

The run to the center has been a mistake, particularly when we have the ultra right wing so much better represented in the media. For the Democrats we only seem to have DLC scum. And of course these people are all the same DLC scum that we pretend represent the majority of Democrats on television. This is not a winning formula. This is a formula for propping up uninspiring and unpopulist candidates that speak safely and will be garaunteed not to rock the boat for corporate America.

If the "liberal left" do not have a voice in the next election for president, then the rest of the "Democratic Party" better hope they can prevail without many of us on board.

the whole purpose of '04's primary schedule was exactly to squash the debate that is supposed to take place during primaries. and many a good dem supported it so that we didn't form a 'circular firing squad'.
i do not know if al gore intends to run eventually. but i think that his refusal to make a 'sherman statement' is intended to promote just this kind of debate.
dennis is starting to grow on me. but i am still pissed that he didn't stand up during the '04 vote count. how different would things be now if he had?

He's the reason the conservative media is keeping Obama & Clinton's moneyraising numbers & polls in the headlines!

Cold, hard, truth from a Presidential candidate.

No wonder he's such a long shot.

Calmer, more focused, still with the same ideas about health care and foreign affairs and conservation, etc.

I'm sticking with him until forced to choose otherwise. I like almost all the candidates, but DK is the only one pushing a single-payer, not-for-profit health care system. The others rely on the insurance companies and the business owners, etc., the usual stuff that has too many down sides IMO. He's the only one with the courage and the insight to sniff out these foreign blunders before they're even an idea on the horizon and to stand solidly against them from the beginning.

The election in 2008 will be just like the election in 2004 (and 2000 as far as that goes): if the votes are counted fairly, the DEM will win (any Dem) and by either a pretty good margin (HRC or DK) or a landslide of epic proportions (Edwards or maybe Obama). If however, as it looks like will happen, there are a lot of dirty tricks and nobody is able to audit the voting machines, anything could happen, and it won't matter how much the pre-election polls say the Dems will win by. An electronic voting machine depends on only one thing: the program that's put into it. How people actually vote is absolutely irrelevant.

Of course, the more the programmers have to fudge the numbers, the more obvious the scam will be, but "obvious" doesn't mean anything to our blind and half-witted MSM and the enablers among the punditry. And the vendors of these machines are willing to do anything to make sure they get their way: witness the 05 referenda in OH or the 02 results in GA. If they know what the percentage fudge-factor needs to be over a month before the election (that's about how long it takes to get the machines ready for use in an election), then they can overcome any real-world result. In 06, Foley and some other events happening close to the election upset their percentages and gave the Dems the victories they achieved. Actually, the Dems should have won a much larger victory in 06 and would have with a fair vote count.

If by some strange miracle, DK got the Dem nomination, he would win fairly easily I think. Once the American people got used to him, they'd be drawn to him just as they would to almost any of the Dems running at the moment. Meanwhile, DK is the best spokesman for the ideas I think are important and as long as he's in the running I'm supporting him in every way I can.

except to set lofty goals - universal coverage, free college education, etc., without specifics as to how such a pie can come from the sky to the earth.

Also, he does not go far enough on taxes IMO.

"The administration statements that the poor and middle class received most of the tax cuts is not an issue for debate. It is a lie, no matter how you try to order the evidence. Much of the most direct evidence, by the way, the administration refuses to release. Perhaps they feel the facts would weaken Republican -- not national -- security.

The Clinton period tax rates for the most affluent should be returned, while the tax cuts for those earning less than $405,000 a year should be maintained, for now, until we see how the economy fares."

I do not see why the tax cuts for the $100,000 - $405,000 people should be maintained. That's alot of lost revenue, and he'll still be running up huge deficits. Especially if he spends money on social programs.

waste would make those things possible.

especially after 911. They kinda crucified even Kerry for that.

:patriot:

No big money donations from such things.

Sure, he through out some rallying cliche of "no more blood for oil", but that really doesn't mean much of anything nor qualify someone as the best candidate. To be honest with you, any DU'er on any given day could've thrown that video together inside of a few minutes. I thought it was going to be impactful and inspiring, but I actually was a bit surprised as to how empty it turned out to be. What is it you found so brilliant about it, if I may ask?

who could not tell you the number of U.S. soldiers killed or wounded; who has no clue about the number of Iraqi civilians dead; who know they are being gouged at the gas pump, but don't know that the oil companies are simultaneously stealing BILLIONS in oil from Iraq -- this is all new information put together in an attention-grabbing way.

Educating the people is a very, very important part of the Kucinich campaign. I don't think Kucinich will win unless there is some cataclysmic event that wakes up a HUGE proportion of the population -- but he is opening minds and hearts with his campaign.

:hi:

One thing I admire about Kucinich is that he stands by his ideals. I like that. Someone who isn't willing to sell out to special interest groups. Like it or not, that ad struck me as powerful.

And yes, it is that important to me and to a lot of people.

I think either would do fine; I'd vote for Clinton also. And I'd vote for Kucinich against any Republican I can think of though I'd frown while I was doing it.

Honestly I care less about who the next President is than I do about how many Congressmen and Senators he or she brings in on his or her coattails.

so does Lieberman! And the varmint-hunter Mitt Romney.

I have no gun-luv myself but it seems to me that we are doomed to have morons drive us off the cliff if that's the big holy grail issue. Maybe one of the most destructive things about guns is the leaders it sticks us with!

Well, sure * and Dick like to have guns for themselves, but they're just as willing as Kucinich to take them from American citizens. Look at the BS they are trying to pull by keeping people listed on the notriously inaccurate and unappealable "no-fly list" from buying guns. Or the forced disarmament of citizens after Katrina (that seemed to be about the only part of the response the Government managed to get done...)

Bush and Gonzalez do not want you to be able to defend yourself. That should worry you.

I'm tired of settling for; Republican or Republican-lite.

He's not presidential, (not smart enough, not a good administrator) and no ad could make him so, IMO. In addition he's wrong on almost every important issue, and this ad appeals to the tinfoil hat crowd, and few others, IMO.

Explain why he's wrong on every important issue.

Could you elaborate?

No, I didn't think you could. You're like everyone else who has a kneeJerk reaction to Dennis. Tinfoil hat. Yeah, that's not a Republican talking point. :eyes:

Any chance you could add some substance to your weak argument?

He says end the war now, end the war on drugs, start becoming serious about the environment, and implement universal healthcare, not to mention hold the current criminals in office accountable. Not only is he right, but the majority of Americans agree with those policies. As Bill Maher said, "Why are you the crazy one?" It's everyone else that's crazy.

this post has been up for five hours.

No, really. Do Tell. Which ones and how?

:)

I'm a Yale Ph. D. and pretty well informed on the current issues, and I tell you, I was impressed with Dennis when I saw him in person three times.

People threw all kinds of questions at him on every conceivable topic, and he was either able to give a detailed answer--a detailed, specific answer--or he offered to take the person's name and provide an answer later.

This were in open mike situations, no prescreened questioners, just whoever happened to get to the mike first.

"There are more "might be's" "could be's" and "no evidence, but lot's of worries" about depleted uranium.

There's no scientific reason to be concerned, IMO. I'd like to see a real study done, so this fantasy could be dismissed."

You have no credibility with me.

I think she or he is fucking with us, and we're just too dense to get a joke.

Edwards/Kucinich '08!
or maybe Kucinich/Edwards '08!
:shrug:

the most progressive candidate, period. more courage and real patriotism than the others put together. all other choices in the primary pale. why settle for less?

Also rather unlikely that God's Wife would have a tongue-stud. :shrug: On the other hand, God's Wife would probably be a lot younger than Him, what with the whole eternal, non-created nature of the Ultimate. So that part matches up.

and anyway, I think Elizabeth would look swell on a throne.

Of course God was married, and she WAS a tell red-head.

You've got some boring, pedestrian Gods, don't you. I bet they go to bed at 9, too?

:yourock:

Sid

They probably should, but I don't think they do.

Jello really should be on more Pundit shows. It would be nice to hear someone that is more accurately on the left rather than a bunch of corporate-centrist DLC stooges.

He has my vote for the primaries. There's no denying his courage and gumption. He may not be the most eloquent or the most handsome or the most charismatic or the most connected, but there's no denying this man has the courage of a giant and is someone who day by day, interview by interview, word by word, action by action has gained my utmost respect the old-fashioned way -- he's earned it.

at your neighborhood park, have food and drink and ask people what they want, don't push the candidate. And after they have answered, would you believe DK is the man.
Grass roots, real grass at the park. If it is just a friendly neighborhood gathering, no need for a permit.
ORGANIZE!

...but heck I like it! :D

As an "atheist on DU", I think the OP tends towards hyperbole, but beyond that I don't have a problem with it.

Other YouTube videos are playing fine for me. Anyone else having this problem? I did report it to YouTube.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

Thx, tho.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

It's a good ad, and I like Dennis. I know he's genuine, but the fact is, he doesn't have a chance - someone posted his odds above. I can't see voting for him in the primary, unless you really don't care who wins the general. There is someone I very much DON'T want to win the primary - our supposed "front runner", mainly because I don't think she can win the general, so my primary vote has to go to a person I think can win the general.

I agree that they could use some ideas from Dennis, for sure.

eom

or else I might agree with you.

that are in my sig line, numbers that most Americans aren't aware of.

CLICKED ON A LINK IN THE EMAIL WENT TO THE SITE AND WHAMMY..... THE EMAIL DISAPPEARED.

WHAT TECHNOLOGY IS THIS.

:toast:R

Presidential candidate. His views on both economic, social, and foreign policies are all too far left of the American population and he lacks the charisma to convince the American public that his policies are consistent with their goals. It also seems that he is not willing to play the games that are unfortunately necessary to win a presidential election.

Personally, I like his view on foreign policy. It is perhaps the best of all of the candidates. I don’t much care for his economic viewpoints. They strike me as being to focused on direct intervention and not enough on incentives.

understand that these games are played for a reason. They are effective at garnering votes. It is a necessary thing that politicians must do if they want to get elected.

Wow. It tells the story the story very succinctly.

K&R

It's was extremely heartening to see this.

:)



While I don't know about "god," I certainly agree that I'd love to see this ad on nationwide tv. DK eclipses the rest of the pack, and I'd like the nation to get to know him and where he stands.