THE COURAGE OF KUCINICH IN PELOSI'S HOUSE OF WACKS

THE COURAGE OF KUCINICH IN PELOSI'S HOUSE OF WACKS
Submitted by Linda Milazzo on Mon, 2007-11-12 09:03.



Was it retaliation by the the Democratic Leadership that exempted Dennis Kucinich from appearing with fellow Presidential candidates at Friday's Jefferson Jackson Day fundraiser in Iowa?

Was it Speaker Pelosi's vindictive payback to Kucinich for his impudent dismissal of her "impeachment is off the table" dictum that kept Kucinich out of the Jefferson Jackson Day party? After all, hadn't Kucinich introduced HR 333 on the House Floor just that week, calling for the impeachment of Vice President Cheney, in defiance of the prescripted cowardice in Pelosi's House of Wacks? (http://kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/int2.pdf)

Until that moment when Congressman Kucinich introduced impeachment resolution HR 333 on to the House Floor, members of Pelosi's Democratic majority had fallen spinelessly in line, kowtowing to Pelosi's disavowal of Article I Section 2 of the Constitution, which grants the House the authority to impeach. (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h231.html).

Speaker Pelosi's wanton subversion of the Constitution, which has subjected this nation and the world to the continued atrocities of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, will be far more relevant in the annals of history than her singular honor as the nation's first woman Speaker of the House. Pelosi's legacy (thus far), as the most powerful woman in the history of this land, has been shamefully tarnished by catastrophic failures in leadership and courage - predicated principally on her refusal to hold President Bush and Vice President Cheney accountable for their crimes.

On the heels of September 11, 2001, George W. Bush squandered his chance to capitalize on the support of the world by not taking the appropriate multilateral actions against the rogues who'd assaulted our nation from without.

On the heels of January 4, 2007, after becoming Speaker, Nancy Pelosi squandered her chance to capitalize on the support of the world by not taking the appropriate multilateral actions against the rogues who'd assaulted our nation from within - namely George Bush and Dick Cheney.

Pelosi's failure to form the necessary coalitions to pursue Bush and Cheney for their crimes against America is as damaging as George Bush's failure to form the necessary coalitions to pursue Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri for theirs. As Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri plot further assaults from without against America, Bush and Cheney plot further assaults from within. Some may argue the difference between the two-evil-duos is that Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri knowingly harmed America, while Bush and Cheney's harm is unwitting. Unwitting or not, Bush and Cheney have done more long-term damage to the safety and stability of America than Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri had ever hoped to achieve.

more...

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28627

Kucinich didn't get invited by the Iowa Democratic party due to his not having an active campaign in Iowa. If the author can't bother to get her facts straight about that why should I believe anything else she writes.

and my party couldn't be bothered to invite him to the biggest fete of the year. That's shrinking the definition of what being a Democrat is imo, and I share the author's outrage.

it was the Iowa Democratic party's decision not Pelosi's.

have been invited. So much for that big tent.

If I am the chair of the Iowa Dems I would have told her to stick it somewhere. Rules are rules.

It's a very important state, so why has his campaign chosen not to have a presence?

what he doesn't have is a campaign "headquarters". Hence no address, no way to "get in touch". A ridiculous assertion to not include him for this, since Kucinich's support is naturally homegrown. He has scattered volunteers that get together sure, but they are unwavering in their support... and i'm sure one of them would've lent their address had they been asked. Honestly, i believe they looked for an excuse to exclude him and took the first on they found. Tho, I think it's alright since he got as much mileage from not being there as he would have if he sat at the table.

:shrug:

In today's Democratic Party, you MUST "Pay to Play".

Jeez! I thought everybody knew that.


”Unlike other candidates, I am not funded by those corporate interests.
I owe them no loyalty, and they have no influence over me or my policies.” ---Dennis Kucinich

an active campaign, something he did have in 2004 it should be noted.

and Kucinich did speak 4 years ago, when he did have an active campaign.

then it must be true.

Doesn't he have an organized National campaign? Isn't he a declared candidate who has raised millions of dollars?

Do you really believe that this explanation is the truth? Really? Rules are rules?

Fucking pathetic. This is what's wrong with our Party. Right here.

:puke:

then why not have an Iowa office? McCain was banned last time from a GOP event for the same, exact reason with nary a peep heard from us.

sometimes?

Do you really think it's honest and fair to exclude him? And do you really think there are no other motivations? Seriously? Come on.

And I'd argue for fairness in a functioning democracy regarding McCain as well. This happens to be Democratic underground so it's not really a surprise to hear more in this board about a Democratic event.

Pelosi's House of Wacks!
:rofl:

Thanks babylonsister! Great article.

I know there are more, but I don't have a dictionary handy.

thanks.I think W's whores could be added.

first in the nation.

Shutting out a candidate with a national following and an important perspective was disgustingly classless and politically heavy handed.

They should call themselves the Iowa Managed Democracy Party.

Six Leading Dems at Iowa Dem Bash...but Peace Activists for Kucnich and Gravel Marched Outside!

------------------------------------------
Democrats Sound Themes, Court Activists As Opening Tests Near

MIKE GLOVER
AP News

Nov 10, 2007 23:03 EST

The race for the Democratic presidential nomination moved into overdrive Saturday, as candidates scrambled to outdo each other to win over the Iowa activists who will leadoff the contest on Jan. 3.

-snip-

But it was the matchup between Clinton and Barack Obama that was watched closest.

Clinton has a significant lead nationally, but only a small edge in Iowa where she is being pressed by both Obama and Edwards. Clinton and Obama stacked the hall with larger contingents than their rivals, Obama bringing along a few thousand red-shirted backers and Clinton with an equal number of noisemaker-sporting supporters.
-snip-
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi moderated the event, telling activists "they are going to hear from the next president of the United States."

Advocates for various causes held news conferences seeking a slice of the heavy media attention. Anti-war activists were joined in a protest march by backers of former Sen. Mike Gravel and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who were not invited to the dinner because they don't have active campaign operations in the state.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/mochila.php?articleId=1032...

___

Source: AP News

What about the fact that he has an active campaign in the country? If Iowa seeks to be first in all things primary election I would think they should look to country instead of their own state. It disgusts me.

If Pelosi was moderating, you're damn sure she had a say in it.

No, I have lost all patience and sympathy for Pelosi. My willingness to be polite extends as far as saying to her: "I'm sorry your're such an incompetent fool and elitest jerk!"

So we will have two deconstructed parties in this nation--time for a rethinking of the paradigm!

Exactly like one. "House of wacks"? Hey, let's call the leaders in the democratic party "wackjobs", there's a great idea (NOT)!

more respect. I'm waiting...

would stop acting like "wacks" then people won't refer to them that way.

Deja-Vu?

The Hillary supporters had "noisemakers"?
How appropriate.
The handful of Hillary supporters at DU sure make a lot of "noise".

Extremely appropriate

I suppose chanting "two legs good, four legs bad" would require that there actually be a coherant statement about what one stands for.

Noisemakers passed out makes perfect sense.