Dennis Kucinich does not admire Reagan. He will not put republicans in his Cabinet.

He has a superlative Democratic voting record.

He has consistently exhibited far better judgement than the three leading Democratic presidential candidates.

Do you want change? Do you want to end the war? Do you want to put a stop to electronic voting? Do you want to end corporate control of our government? Do you want honesty and integrity as a proven integral quality of your President?

Do you want a President that genuinely believes in, and will fight for, a government of, by, and for, the People?

Then vote for Dennis Kucinich.

Because anything else is second best.

Peace.

Oh well, there's always Mercer.

is that all you guys say? your candidate (any of the three) have done much more important flipflopping and ill point it out as soon as you state who your candidate is. Kucinich has already explained it and if you had 2 seconds you would see why he did. I have already repeated it enough to turn blue. Besides if he was I doubt he would be the type to appoint fundy SCOTUS who would repel roe V wade.

bashers can do? That sure is becoming a weak, tired,pathetic, and lame mantra.

And if that's the best you can do, then it is apparent that Dennis has a whole lot fewer negatives than any other Dem candidate.

I thought it was something from his distant past. He was probably anti gay-marriage at first too. I know he wasn't totally on board with gay rights, it was probably the gay marriage issue.

with gay marriage. He always believe life begins at conception and believed that it really was murder but ultimatly had to give in to the fact that its not his choice to make.

post something instead of saying something inflamatory and devisive.

explain to you that the person responding to your post was apparently a newer member of DU, and was apparently uninformed of DK's history regarding issues like gay rights.

So sorry!

... instead I support Edwards. Both are good guys (Kucinich and Edwards). I appreciate them both. Yes, I know, I know what you're going to say but I still appreciate them both.

for second best, if you do you, are buying into what you've been instructed to believe.

Dennis is a genuine democrat/progressive like FDR. He will bring another "New Deal" to America.

And god only knows, we need another "New Deal", and another President like FDR, right now.

And yeah, Dennis isn't exactly Hollywood bullshit, but really, that's a good thing - FDR wasn't either.

We genuinely need DK to be elected President in 2008.

Bottom line, no one that is running else will suffice.

But we will win the battle. THATS A FACT.

After spotting numerous blog postings that question whether Democrat Dennis Kucinich in fact said he'd consider Republican Ron Paul as his running mate, The Plain Dealer is posting exclusive audio of the remarks Kucinich made on Sunday.

Listen here:

http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2007/11/exclusive_audio_kucinich_consi.html

its editor has always hated dennis. Plus dennis said he had thought about it

(sorta makes sense too if you think about ron paul is his dublicate on the repub side who also has alot of underground followers who cares deeply about the constitution and the war in iraq)

but would never do it because they differ on to many different subjects. these attacks on dennis are as feeble as the top tier candidates.

This is a simple fact check; the motivations of the Plain Dealer are besides the point in this case.

I happen to like Kucinich; his policies are closest to mine, but I cannot let that statement of whether he would or would not appoint Republicans pass unchallenged.

If you support Kucinich based on the belief that he will put party loyalty above other considerations, then your faith is based on a false premise.

but I trust kucinich to put the proper people in the proper places. republicans, true republicans are still out their and do give valuble input. If he wanted to put someone in a position that was suited for them and he knew they would do a good job then great. Would we be any better if the democrats started practising exclusion and cronyism?

Ron Paul is nowhere near his duplicate. Most of Ron Paul's supporters are paid to spam email, and all they care about the constitution is that Ron Paul thinks the part of the constitution that allow taxation are unconstitutional. The guy's one beef with the iraq war is that he didn't get to vote for it, and he's been pitching a hissy fit since.

jeez sorry, im a kooch fan myself. lol just look at all the time i spend defending him.

only in his dreams.

my google fu is pretty good but (dennis kucinich on reagan -ufo -nbc) does not show anything postitive that dennis has to say about reagan. please source it if you find it

from poster below looks like it was from reagans "funeral speech" what do you expect him to do? dis reagan in front of the country? might hold up the top tier candidates to the same candle then.

Seriously, you want Congressmen talking about how much a recently-dead former President sucked? That's going to go over great...

know it.

Besides, Joe Lieberman supporters no longe have any credibility whatsoever on DU.

Poll question: If Gore/LIEberman were in The White House from 2000-2008, would you support LIEberman for P n/tresident?

Yes, I would enthusiastically support him and campaign for him. LoZoccolo Nov-26-07 12:59

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3754806
:shrug:

Sorry. Spin it however you like.

I don't need to spin that.

:bounce:

If you want to be a viable President, you can't cut out an entire section of the voting population like that. Like it or not, the Republicans are our counterparts and are large enough in number to have an election-changing impact. At least some support on their end is important for our nominee to win, and this is one election where they might actually tip off of the fence in our favor.

Assuming our nominee does win, he doesn't simply serve the Democratic voters. He serves all voters from all parties, and will likely include a diverse group if he wants to retain their support. Even Clinton tapped Republicans to be in his cabinet (William Cohen being one), and his terms were ones of overall prosperity despite a number of hefty mistakes.

I am by no means supporting Republican rule, but I also think that realistic promises should be made.

Well, ok, actually he lost, but you know what I'm sayin'...

Do Dems have to appease republicans, but republicans do not have to consider Democrats?
:shrug:

Do you really want someone who would sink to that level? I don't know whether Kucinich would or not, and I do admire most of his views, but I'd much prefer an inclusive office which serves all of the people no matter who's there. After all, it's not just the Democrats that individual will be working for (nor a Republican president solely for his party, if we ever have such a thing as a decent one).

Divisiveness really is doing a lot of harm to our country and the electoral process. I have a similar temptation to just say 'hell with 'em' like they did to us, but at some point, things have to change.

The selfish Kucinich voted to restrict abortion rights for years and supported denying funding to low income women. now he bashes the other candidates for not being liberal enough but the fact remains that Kucinich opposed Roe v Wade until only the early part of this century. His flip flop on abortion was out of pure convenience, just like Mitt Romney's.

The Kucinich people can deny this all they want, but it is the truth. And I'm not going to waste my vote on someone who has no shot of winning the nomination anyway.

Too bad for Dennis though, because he was wrong on abortion until 5 years ago or so, wrong on flag burning, and now he's still at the bottom of every poll that bothers to include him. it makes me happy seeing democrats reject a trojan horse like dennis.

---

And by the way: don't just fucking dismiss it by saying Gore was anti choice too. That doesn't excuse Kucinich. HE TRAMPLED ON A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT. Not like the little guy has a shot anyway, but what assurances could he give anyone that he wouldn't just flip flop again and support overturning Roe v Wade as president? Obama and Edwards and Clinton have been consistently pro choice their entire political careers. Dennis cast many anti choice votes during his first few years in the house. The National Right to life committee praised him as "one of the few pro-life democrats in congress". I will never ever vote for him. Ever. Never.

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT- Kucinich trampled on it. Excuse it all you want, or try to- pathetic.

Show some gratitude, as hypocrites go, he's as good as it gets.

Give me a break, wintersoulja. Seriously.

Pro life is a misnomer. If you're against abortion rights then you are anti choice. Don't you dare to preach to me that Catholic stuff about seamless garments. I don't care. He made a huge mistake opposing women's rights for most of his political career.

And I don't care that he opposed the death penalty, because I support it. So I've been far more consistent than him- since I've been able to reason, I've supported the rights of states and the federal government to execute murderers. I've also supported a woman's right to choose whether or not she wants to terminate her pregnancy.

You think just because the little guy is sooo good and makes good cookies that we should just forgive him?