Did anyone notice that Kucinich said he wouldn't support the nominee?

[Renew Deal]

That's a bombshell. He said he'd only support them if they supported an end to the war policy (or something like that). Either way, it's shocking.

[goodgd_yall]

1. So...he values peace too much to vote for someone who's not committed to keeping it.

I respect him for that. It's the only good reason not to vote Democratic, in my eyes.

[aquart]

5. Yes, indeed. Voting in the Republicans shows a commitment to peace.

I absolutely see that. Yeah. And when everyone in Iraq is dead, there WILL BE PEACE.

[babylonsister]

11. If you're talking about the appropriations bill last night, he voted "AGAINST"

funding this occupation, and he is the only one who voted against this bill for the right reason.
Get your head..nevermind, get it?

[aquart]

19. The bill has personhood?

I believe this discussion was about Kucinich's refusal to vote for "someone" not "something." I was referring to the general election for president of the United States.

[babylonsister]

27. Fine, but I won't let you slay him for nothing. He has the most integrity

of all the candidates, including yours. She never even breathed his name. He must have cooties.

[cali]

46. How do you know he was the only one who voted

against it for the right reasons? You don't. Both Allen and Michaud of Maine voted against it for the same reasons Dennis did. I'm sure you'll be more than happy to correct your faulty assertion that Kucinich was the ONLY dem who voted against it for the right reasons. From Allen's website:

The War in Iraq has done incalculable damage to America’s standing in world opinion. It has sapped our military readiness to meet the challenges that Al Qaeda mounts in Afghanistan and from its mountainous enclaves in Western Pakistan. It has limited our capacity to invest in infrastructure, research and development, education and other priorities important to growth and prosperity in Maine and America. And its staggering costs have created a mountain of debt for future generations to pay.

I voted against this war and led the opposition to it. I predicted that it would be a strategic and fiscal disaster. I have consistently called for accountability from this Administration for its dubious arguments, counterproductive policies and mismanaged conduct in the lead up to and execution of this disastrous war.

At a potential cost of two-thirds of a trillion dollars or more, there can be no fiscal soundness in a path that “changes the mission” in Iraq to keep our troops caught indefinitely in the crossfire of a religious civil war. The way for us to stop the hemorrhaging of blood and treasure is to set a firm deadline to end this war, force the Iraqis to assume responsibility for their security and bring our American forces safely home.

And an editorial from the Bangor paper:

Editorials
Previous Page
Comment on this Article
Email this Article to a Friend
Print this Article
Iraq funding gambit
By BDN Staff
Friday, November 16, 2007 - Bangor Daily News


Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are correct in bringing the Iraq war back into the spotlight. What remains to be seen is whether the congressional debate over funding the war will become a replay of this summer’s political theater, which ended with no change in direction or strategy, or whether lawmakers can agree on a necessary change of course.

The House proposal was passed Wednesday night by 218 to 203, with four Republicans joining 214 Democrats to vote in favor of it. Fifteen Democrats, including Maine’s two representatives, joined 188 Republicans in opposition. Rep. Michael Michaud has long opposed funding for the war without accountability and Rep. Tom Allen opposed the bill because it did not contain a binding deadline for troop withdrawal.

<snip>

http://bangornews.com/news/t/viewpoints.aspx?articleid=156585&zoneid=34

[babylonsister]

26. He didn't for a second say he'd vote for a rethug. Maybe he won't vote

if no one can act as morally as he can.

[ConfidentialStatus]

33. He didn't say that

however the only one he could vote for is Ron Paul... and I think they're good friends.

[babylonsister]

35. Prove that with a link. They are worlds apart. Don't spout shit w/o proof. nt

[ConfidentialStatus]

37. You misunderstood my post

I was saying the only one he could vote for is Ron Paul. Because of what Dennis said AND because of what Ron Paul HAS BEEN SAYING... regarding the war and foreign policy.

:hi:

[babylonsister]

38. Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich might have one thing that binds them, and that

is this illegal occupation. Other than that, they are worlds apart. Do you know what else Ron Paul supports? If you don't, you need to look into it. He's a libertarian, and not my cup of tea. Go to wikipaedia, check out pro-life vs. pro-choice.

[Donnachaidh]

54. uh dear -- there IS such a thing as a WRITE-IN vote

And inferring that his only option to vote for is a Rethug is disingenuous at best. And unless they've changed Maine election laws drastically in the last few years you should know there is a write-in option. I first voted in Maine, and used the write in option because I wasn't happy with the crap being offered.

Putting words in other people's mouths is a thug maneuver (or at least it used to be). Kucinich was being honest. He gets props for his courage, in my book.

[cyclezealot]

45. If the nominee does not distance her/himself from Pre-emption

Then I hope Kucinich will not only , not support the nominee , but run as an independent himself. An end to neocon foreign policy is my bottom line for my support. We desperately need Kucinich to keep telling them that, or we know they will betray us. Thanks D. Kucinich for reminding them of that. It's not asking tooo much.

[aquart]

2. Saint Dennis?

Not a compromiser. Which is why he won't be the Democratic candidate.

[Vincardog]

3. He said he would not support a nominee who used WAR as an instrument of Policy. He is correct.

That is why he is my candidate. We do not need any more war mongers.

[silverweb]

4. Yup.

I thought he looked and sounded pretty pugilistic tonight.

While I like the majority of his ideas, I've long had fears that he could turn into another Nader. :(

[flvegan]

6. Not a bombshell. Truth spoken by an HONEST candidate.

I don't see where he said he'd not VOTE for them. Much like DU, eh?

[Renew Deal]

17. Why would he vote for someone he doesn't support?

That would be a little dishonest.

[flvegan]

30. No. I don't support most of the candidates. I'll vote for our D, though.

[Renew Deal]

31. You're right.

[ConfidentialStatus]

34. Exactly!

Truth to power!

[incapsulated]

7. It really doesn't mean much to me

I mean "not support"? That is different from "I'm voting third party".

It's not like Dennis is all eager to be a mouthpiece for any democratic nominee on the stump.

[EndElectoral]

8. I have to say I agree with DK on this. If they don't support an end to war policy,they're toast!

[johncoby2]

9. did you expect anything else from a loser?

Really. His followers are the same way.

If they dont get their way, they are going to take their ball and go home. They will vote for Ralph Nader just to show America.

Look how well it worked in 2000.

[babylonsister]

15. So you want this war to be funded and continue. Gotcha. I don't, and agree

with Dennis' vote.

[madrchsod]

24. so we are losers?

we are going to take our ball and go home? we are voting for nadar? look how well it worked in 2000? wow! now that`s really an insult to all the people here at du that support dennis or believe in what he says. maybe we are wrong about dennis ...maybe we should`t support anyone who thinks differently than the party line...

[johncoby2]

71. At the very least admit it.

You guys act like a bunch of whining babies.

Kucinich is NOT getting the nomination. And now you talk about a 3rd party run? Just cuz you are going to lose?

[lame54]

59. your wrong

I support and will vote for Kucinich in the primaries because I support his policies (why have a primary if you discourage others on voting their conscience). That being said, I have not and will not vote republican just because I didn't get my way. I didn't vote for Kerry during the primaries but still supported and voted for him in the general election. Don't use such a broad brush.
patty lame's wife.

[Paulie]

10. He said not support someone who will continue to use War as an instrument of Policy

I think the policy of if you don't do what we say we will bomb the shit out of you is, um, not a policy we should have as a nation.

All stick no carrot will just means more dead.

[bluestateguy]

12. He's becoming more self-righteous and irritating every day

They're "undocumented" and not "illegal".

Please. That kind of PC tripe is a first class ticket to a 49 state wipeout.

[MalloyLiberal]

32. yeah, I supported impeachment thing he did until I realized he did it to rise in polls

[crispini]

50. Words are important. Read Lakoff.

[rjones2818]

51. No illegal people!

Not even you!

Go Dennis! :woohoo:
http://dennis4president.com
Choose Peace!

[pnwmom]

13. This is why he'll never be a major leader in the Democratic party. n/t

[southerncrone]

14. That was a MSM deliberate ploy to single him out. DK has

said b/4 that he could not support someone who would not end the Iraq War. Just like the UFO question posed to him in the last debate, MSM is trying to frame him as a kook, or a person who would not "unite" the party. This question was posed to all of the candidates so it couldn't be said that they singled him out. But by default that is what happened, which is EXACTLY what they wished to do.

Corporate media is despicable & sleazy!:thumbsdown:

[stuartrida]

16. IOKWDDI

On DU...
It's
OK
When
Dennis
Does
It

Edwards won't support the nominee? Crucify him! Kucinich won't? It's ok! Kucinich votes against SCHIP? It's ok! Kucinich gets a 100% pro-life rating for many years? It's ok! Kucinich supports anit-flag burning amendments? It's OK!

[rucky]

18. I don't agree, but I can hardly blame him...

or anyone else who chooses to leave.

[madrchsod]

20. did he say he was`t going to -vote-for another canidate?

he said he was`t going to support them. he`s not going to leave the democratic party or vote for a republican. if hillary wins i will certainly vote for her but support her? no ..she does`t represent what i want in a president

[durrrty libby]

21. Maybe he loves Mitt

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bluestateguy]

22. He also said he's the only candidate from the working class

That is, well, bowlshit.

John Edwards is the son of a mill worker. He worked in the mill himself for awhile too.

[gateley]

23. I forget exactly what he said but I remember thinking it was admirable and

underlined his strong integrity.

[babylonsister]

25. Admirable of him imo, and in keeping with his morals. nt

[madrchsod]

28. morals......in short supply these days

[babylonsister]

29. That's why he's 'special'.

:D

[durrrty libby]

43. He's 'special' alright

[riqster]

36. Without DKs EXACT WORDS, this is bullshit

He's been around long enough (since the '70's, longer than most others) to know how to say what he wants to say.


Quote, please?

[ChipperbackDemocrat]

39. I agree

I will not vote for a Democratic nominee IF they are for prolonging and/or extended this war.

This war is a large part of our common problem.

[Renew Deal]

40. This is the closest we got until a transcript comes out

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3723766&mesg_id=3723829

[babylonsister]

42. Can of worms you've opened, just tell me why? It's disingenuous of you.

'or something like that'. Nice. I realize it's rare to see a principled politician; maybe that's why you can't fathom it?

[cali]

49. You seem to think any criticism of Kucinich is

unwarranted. He's a candidate, he's going to get criticized, both in style and substance. That's the way it works when you run for president.

[sss1977]

44. He's not the only one.

I don't find it all that shocking.

[Freddie Stubbs]

47. Why is that surprising? He votes with the Republicans more than Rahm Emmanuel does

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/house/party-voters/

[rjones2818]

52. When the House tries to pass bad bills

Dennis should vote against them, and he does!

[Freddie Stubbs]

62. Yet he voted against the Iraq funding/withdrawl bill, and was only joined by

Republicans and Democrats who support a continuation of the war:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll1104.xml

[rjones2818]

69. A bill where the

withdrawl provisions were/are non-binding. It's a bad bill because of that. He was right to vote against it.

Go Dennis! :woohoo:
http://dennis4president.com
Choose Peace!

[LWolf]

48. It doesn't shock me.

I feel the same way, and have been saying it all along.

I don't know why people would be shocked that, after publicly deriding, marginalizing, ignoring, and then, the final act, voting to table the impeachment of Cheney, the dlc wing of the party would lose his support.

I guess unity is only for elections, but not for action in the house that supports and defends the constitution or holds government accountable.

[skipos]

53. Lame if it is true. But he is bottom of the pack for me anyway along with Hillary

so this doesn't change my tune

[SaveElmer]

55. He can take a long walk on a short pier then...nt

[GeneCosta]

56. Ideology comes before party loyalty

Every time. Kucinich is wise.

[PDittie]

57. I thought he opened the door for

a third-party run. Green, Independent, something.

That would be the kiss of death to Clinton in the general if he did so (MHO). UNLESS the Repukes run someone to the right of Rudy, a distinct possibility and a scenario that likely assures a President Hillary, mostly irrespective of any third-party (left) candidacy.

[bluedog]

58. Only if they oppose war as an instrument of policy.

MR. BLITZER: I just want to go down the line and ask everyone, and then we're going to move on to the next question.

Just to be precise because there was a little confusion, thanks to Senator Edwards earlier in the week, I just want to make sure I fully understand all of you Democrats. Are you ready to commit absolutely, positively that you will support the Democratic nominee, no matter who that nominee is, no ifs, ands or buts?

Senator Edwards.

MR. EDWARDS: Is that a planted question?

MR. BLITZER: Yes, I planted it. (Laughter.)

MR. EDWARDS: Yes, I absolutely will support the Democratic nominee for president.

SEN. DODD: Absolutely yes. (Applause.)

SEN. CLINTON: Absolutely yes.

REP. KUCINICH: Only if they oppose war as an instrument of policy. (Applause.)


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/us/politics/15debate-transcript.html?pagewanted=6&_r=2&adxnnlx=1195222113-N6lmMYWt2WYdxFDmXEptEw



GOV. RICHARDSON: Yes, I will support the nominee.

SEN. BIDEN: Hell, no, I wouldn't support any of these guys. (Laughter.)

No, I'm joking, joking. Of course, for them all.

[riqster]

67. Thanks for the quote.

Mixed feelings about that. My gut tells me that it's classic DK, pushing the Party to take a stand.

Like SCHIP and other instances. He takes a hard-assed position when it won't hurt the party or help the Reeps, but when it's unity time he closes ranks.

[riqster]

60. So....how about a transcript? nt

[bluedog]

61. NYT transcript here

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/us/politics/15debate-...

[riqster]

65. I got a page not found error nt

[vireo]

70. Try this

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/11/15/us/politics/20071115_DEBATE_GRAPHIC.html#video

[mrfixit]

63. Never said any such thing. He said he would ONLY support

a candidate who did not support war as an instrument of policy.

Summary of DK's highlights...starting off with that very question! He kicked ASS, period!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYWWBwf2wHE

[mvd]

66. I had no problem with that answer

If our nominee supports war with Iran (so far Hillary hasn't gone that far,) I would have to second guess voting.

[progressoid]

64. Yawn

[Renew Deal]

68. Indeed