‘It’s Called Heart’

[dweller]

(from 02/27/07)

With Vilsack out, there's one less dark horse in the running. Can Dennis Kucinich capitalize? The pride of Cleveland on how his anti-war politics went mainstream, what he's got on Obama and Hillary, and what makes him run.

You don’t have to pay thousands of dollars to rub elbows with an antiwar Democratic presidential candidate in Hollywood. Rep. Dennis Kucinich was in town this past weekend, lining up support for his own bid for the White House. How much to meet the congressman from Cleveland? Twenty-five bucks, at one Culver City fund-raiser. And he actually voted against going into Iraq. In fact, he’s the only Democratic candidate to have done so. And unlike the current front runner, he has the experience of having run for president himself before. A recent Cook Political Report/RT Strategies poll showed him weighing in at 1 percent—a tough spot, to be sure, but still ahead of Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd. Kucinich spoke out against the war in his 2004 run; this time around, polls show, the country is thinking more like him. Does that mean the dark horse’s time has come? He spoke with NEWSWEEK’s Susannah Meadows about winning, falling in love and playing third-string quarterback.

NEWSWEEK: How is this race going to be different?
Dennis Kucinich: Four years ago, people weren’t sure about the war. Today, my stand is mainstream. Four years ago, people weren’t sure how they felt about a not-for-profit health-care system, Medicare for all. Today my position is mainstream. And so I think what’s happened is on the biggest international issue and on the biggest domestic issue, my candidacy emerges as the one to win.

But with the polls showing you at 1 percent, how are you going to win?
At one time, everyone comes from 1 percent….There’s time. There are some who feel that if you raise enough money now you can intimidate the others. Well, I can’t be bought. I can’t be intimidated. I can win because I’ve been right. No amount of money raised by some of these candidates is going to be able cover up their faulty judgment of the war. I am now in what I think is a very good position to build a campaign based on the success of what I’ve stood for.

How does this campaign so far compare to your 2004 bid?
It’s much different. There’s a recognition that I was right about the war. This is the central international policy question that faces the United States and the world, and those candidates who were not right about it, serious questions have to be raised about whether or not they’re up for being president of the United States.

What about the candidates, like Barack Obama, who—granted—wasn’t in a position to vote against the war, but who spoke out against it?
That’s fine, except for one thing. He’s voted 100 percent to fund it. If you’re opposed to something, you don’t vote to give it money. And a single speech is not hundreds of speeches. It’s not real leadership. If someone wants to talk about the war, then they better have real credentials for it. And those credentials have to include working to defeat funding for the war. There’s no other person in this race who’s done that. There’s no one else who’s taken a stand for peace that I’ve taken and I think that’s what the American people are yearning for.

CONTINUED

dp

[Breeze54]

1. Dennis Kucinich made an impression on me then

and I'm sure he hasn't changed his stance. ;)

He's a great guy and I wish people could push past height and looks and hear his heart too!

[dweller]

2. and i wish 'views' = 'recs'

for this would be at the top of the "Greatest" page by now.

I admire a candidate that is fluid with the times, even if it takes a period of time to get there. Especially one who is able to change with what the people have spoken.

cool breezes to you 54!
dp

[Breeze54]

3. Hell yeah!

"....and I wish 'views' = 'recs' for this would be at the top of the "Greatest" page by now."

I agree! ;) That it would.

I tried! ;)

[dweller]

4. ...

:hug:

:thumbsup:

dp