Is anyone else tried of Kucinich in the Debates?

[beyurslf]

It doesn't matter what the question is about, all he does is bring it back to Iraq and the fact that he would bring all the troops home now. "US out, UN in" we got that. I think we all understand that he is the only person on stage who voted against the IRAQ resolution and he is the only one who will vote against the 89B. Blah, Blah, Blah, anything else, Dennis?

Can we have something else, please?

[ixion]

1. no, I wish Kucinich were doing better, personally...

he's by far the most progressive candidate. If things were different, that is, if there hadn't been a coup by the neocons, I'd be supporting him over Dean.

[no name no slogan]

13. Judy practically IGNORED DENNIS for most of the night

The bias towards Kerry and Gephardt was a bit overstated last night, IMHO. How much more coverage do these guys really need? It's not like they're not getting any in the press as it is, is it?

Dennis was treated in a patronizing manner by the panel and Judy Woodruff. Especially on the labor issue. Yeah, Edwards has a brother who's a union man, Geph has the support of the union bosses,
but Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate who is a card-carrying union MEMBER, as was his Teamster father.

[Pez]

26. i didn't know...

...kucinich was the only card-carrying member of the union. which union?

[no name no slogan]

28. Yup, he is card-carrying union man

He's a member of a union that does the "behind the scenes" work on TV and movie sets-- the camera operators, sound engineers, set constructors, etc. Unfortunately, I can't remember the name right now :P.

[goodhue]

43. IATSE of AFL-CIO

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml%3Fi=20020902&s=kucinich20020828

Iwas born into the House of Labor. My father was a Teamster who drove a truck for thirty-five years. He died with his first retirement check in his pocket, uncashed. He and my mother raised seven children, of which I was the oldest. We lived in twenty-one different places by the time I was 17. Having a job doesn't solve all of a family's problems. One of my first jobs was at the Plain Dealer newspaper in Cleveland. As a copyboy I joined the American Newspaper Guild. Years later, working at TV 8, I belonged to AFTRA. Today I am a member of the cameraman's union, the IATSE of the AFL-CIO.

This is my membership card. I am of the House of Labor and still building. This is my card of membership in the House of Representatives. This card (House) is where my work is. And this card (IATSE) is where my heart is.

[JohnKleeb]

44. I knew his father was a truck driver but had no idea he was a teamster too

[CMT]

2. No

I'm happy to have him there. He has every right to speak out on the premier issue of our day--Iraq. He also does speak out on other issues notably healthcare and jobs being lost due to NAFTA.

[Patriot_Spear]

3. NO- I'm a Deaniac and I want to hear Kucinich...

I suspect what you mainly don't like is the fact that he was right.

[Iverson]

4. who needs civilization?

Hell, it's only shredding the Geneva Convention, the UN Charter, the Bill of Rights.

That is, like, so yesterday, dude. Whatever! (sharp exhale)

:nuke:

[CJIowa]

7. Yes

I believe in all people being allowed to debate. BUT, I really don't see the need to have him nearly jumping up and down to be called upon by the moderator. He makes himself look like Judy on Leave it to Beaver - waving her hand in class to kiss up to the teacher. Mosely Braun and Sharpton at least dig on Bush at every opportunity. Dennis just digs on everyone else on stage and it is getting old.

I did not support the resolution in Iraq, but bringing the troops home would be a disaster for the US and the middle east. We cannot walk away. "Hello, Dennis?!?!?!"

[Patriot_Spear]

9. Would it?

I don't know- it's never been tried.

[pnorman]

37. "I don't know- it's never been tried."

Actually, Reagan did just that in Lebanon in 1983. 250+ Americans lost their lives, in two separate attacks. Reagan declared "victory" and pulled the remaining troops out.

As Al Franken wrote in his latest book ("Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right"): "To be fair, two days after the Marine barracks bombing, Reagan did invade Grenada. Although he cut and ran in Lebanon, which might have been interpreted as capitulation, I think his bold attack on Grenada sent a clear message to violent Muslim extremists: If you attack us, we'll invade a Club Med".

[no name no slogan]

15. But keeping our troops as an occupying army is a good idea?

Face it-- the situation in Iraq will only get worse the longer the US stays there. We are not viewed as "liberators", we are just another colonial force with our boots on their necks.

The resistance attacks against us will not cease with additional manpower or force-- they will only get worse. The situation will continue to decline, and we'll be looking at another Vietnam.

The only way to achieve peace in Iraq is for the US and NATO to GET OUT, and bring in a true multinational force under the supervision of the UN. Any other force led by NATO or the US will just be seen as another occupying army by the people of Iraq.

We are sending soldiers to Iraq to do the peacekeepers job. It's like calling an pasty chef when your plumbing is backed up.

[JI7]

5. no

i support kerry, but kucinich contributes to the discussion in his own ways.

[beyurslf]

6. I like Kucinich too

and I like most of his views, but it just seemed like it was a programmed response to every question. Yes it is an important issue, arguably the most important reasons to distrust Bush. However, I don't most Americans (or most Democrats) are going to vote for a person who articulates one position only. I haven't heard him, in a debate, talk about anything else.

I wasn't saying take him out of the debates; I was saying, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE stop talking about Iraq and nothing else.

[Patriot_Spear]

10. Iraq NEEDS to be talked about...

Loudly and often- As an Army veteran, I'm sick and tired of people ignoring what's happening to our troops over there!

[cosmicdot]

8. where were the moderators leading this so-called 'debate'

I didn't watch ...

there have been several of these "debates" ...

oh, never mind

just shut up Dennis shut up shut up shut up ... how can you focus on Iraq ... like it has anything to do with the Big Picture ...

DENNIS KUCINICH: THE PROGRESSIVE CHOICE
As a candidate for President, I offer a different vision for America, one which separates me from the other candidates. I am the only candidate who will take this country away from fear and war and tax giveaways, and use America's peace dividend for guaranteed health care for all, ending health care for profit. I am the only candidate who will stop the privatization of social security and bring the retirement age back to 65. As President, I will cancel NAFTA and the WTO, restore our manufacturing jobs, save our family farms, create full employment programs. I will repeal the Patriot Act to regain for all Americans the sacred right of privacy in our homes, our libraries, our schools.
(Presidential Debate, ABC News, 5/3/03

Kucinich for President

[clar]

11. (looks furtively over shoulder)

Yes. I like Kucinich, but not in the debates. Wish he projected more like he did on C-Span the other morning.

[DemBones DemBones]

57. I wish he could have enough time to project like he did on C-SPAN

Wednesday. Five (5) minutes for Kucinich compared to fourteen (14) minutes for Dean is obviously not a fair allocation of time. The moderators succeeded in allotting more time to the people they want to be in the "top tier" and keeping Kucinich, Braun, Edwards, and Sharpton down in the lower tier.

[Vis Numar]

12. Jan 2nd

He has to file to run in Ohio for Presidency, is this also the date for his House seat? Hope so.

[AP]

14. The ONLY thing Kucinich could stand to change is the pitch of his voice

Other than that, I think the value of his contribution to the debates is enormous.

[MercutioATC]

20. I actually think he's gotten much better at that...

He used to yell and make funny sounds (remember the deep-voiced "WAAAAAARR" he yelled into the mic at the first debate?)

He's much better now at controlling his voive and not sounding so angry.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

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

[cyclezealot]

17. I have heard him in person four times. You need at least one encounter.

He talks at great length about Iraq,Healthcare,jobs. Those are my three big issues.. DK is very spiritual. His mission is to use his life's struggle to resolve all the conflict both domestic and international.. Having him heard about how his Dept. of Peace would be used to resolve conflict (like is practiced in New Zealand, ie domestic conflict resolution) I would have been very disappointed had he not got to answer the question presented to him last night, where he raised his hand.
You are short changing yourself if you do not go out and experience his views in person. All those who hear are spell bound.No one else will suffice- to get us to work all that hard.
Having heard his speeches, I will say he is so full of knowledge and ideas; I know he finds it impossible to put in all in sound bites, the way we expect in the pre-packaged, ad oriented world.. I know what he wants to say, and it is impossible to package those ideas into maybe 10 minutes stage time.
No DK, I personally would stop watching the debates. I know all too well what the rest stand for. Some are fair, but none stir my soul.

[diamondsoul]

23. 10 minutes hell, Cycle, get this...

I counted the minutes while watching the reply- the average time for Gep, Kerry, Dean and freakin' LIEBERMAN was 7 minutes, care to guess how many Kucinich had?

Less than 4 minutes total speaking time.:mad: :grr: :argh: :nuke:

*on edit, I know in one of my previous posts to you I came of a bit snobbish, and I want to make clear I'm just disgusted with the marginalization of Kucinich. I WISH he'd gotten 10 minutes of time.*sigh*

[JohnKleeb]

39. No wonder

sigh
I agree
and people wonder why I have lamented and tell about my fuse getting worse.

[no name no slogan]

45. Here's "THE REST OF THE STORY"

This is a press release from DK's campaign. Interesting to note how much time each candidate got.

=================================================================

How Many Minutes Each Candidate Received

For Immediate Release: October 10, 2003

CNN’s Democratic presidential candidates’ debate last night was held with
the stated intention of providing the candidates equal time. According to the
Hotline (National Journal), here are the results:

Candidate Amount Of Talk Time During the Debate

Dean 14 min 07 seconds

Kerry 12 min 31 seconds

Clark 10 min 36 seconds

Gephardt 10 min 02 seconds

Lieberman 9 min 26 seconds

Braun 8 min 39 seconds

Sharpton 8 min 28 seconds

Edwards 8 min 00 seconds

Kucinich 5 min 09 seconds

At the debate, Congressman Kucinich stood out, expressing some of the
clearest and sharpest distinctions between himself and other candidates, and receiving applause for his comments. It is safe to assume that his impact would have been even greater had he been given more than 36 percent of the time given to Gov. Dean.

Kucinich pointed out that he is the only candidate who voted against the War on Iraq one year ago today.

Kucinich challenged the other candidates to oppose spending another $87 billion on the U.S. occupation of Iraq, and no one accepted the challenge.

Kucinich advocated creating a cabinet-level Department of Peace to promote nonviolence in domestic and international affairs and to make war archaic.

Kucinich presented the outlines of a plan he has just released to bring US troops home from Iraq, end the war profiteering, and allow the United Nations to facilitate Iraqi self-governance.

Read the Plan: http://www.kucinich.us/statements.htm#100903

For more information: http://www.kucinich.us

For Rep. Kucinich's Schedule: http://www.kucinich.us/schedule.htm

=====================================================================

NOW will people understand why we may sound "arrogant" at times, and why Dennis was continually trying to speak?

IT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT LETTING OUR VOICES BE HEARD. I for one am FED UP with the coverage (or lack thereof) Kucinich has been getting by the "mainstream" press and the so-called "liberal" press. If I come across as angry, it's out of frustration.

For the first time in THIRTY YEARS, we have the chance to markedly change the direction this country is headed. Not just a little, but A LOT. We can truly pursue an international agenda of PEACE, insure EVERYONE in the country, roll back the power of the large multinational corporations, and institute an economic policy of FAIRNESS.

But we can't do that if we are not allowed to speak. That is all we are asking for: equal time for us to get our message out.

[roughsatori]

18. No I'm not tried (sic) of Kucinich in the least

I am tired of misspelled Titles of Threads.

[Padraig18]

19. I like having DK in

DK is the candidate who 'keeps everyone else honest', so to speak. He reminds us that we're all DEMOCRATS, and he provides a voice for those who are further left in our party. He also manages to trash the hell out of *, which I think is a GREAT thing! :)

[diamondsoul]

21. Horse-feathers!

Kucinich talks about more issues than most of the rest, but ONLY when he's given the opportunity. He isn't rude, and he tries hard not to take up more time than he needs or is entitled to, more than can be said for some of the others.

Universal healthcare- there's something else. Universal Education through College, there's something else. A Department of Peace, there's something else. Worker's rights, there's something else.

Oh, and some of us don't find the strong position toward ending an unjust occupation to be the slightest bit boring, no matter how many times it is covered. At least he's consistant about it, again, more than can be said of some.

[lams712]

22. Sorry, but NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

DK needs to keep pounding it in the fact that he opposed this debacle from the start and that he is standing up to the Bush administration, UNLIKE MANY, MANY OTHERS onstage at the debate last night.

[Flying_Pig]

24. No. I am more "tired" of people who can't spell.....

:evilgrin:

[Pez]

25. how can you get tired of him when they don't let him speak?

he's had his thunder stolen by people who were less than honest about their opposition to the war... so what if he brings it up? his iraq vote was more than one vote-- it says a lot about who he is, and what he will base his presidency on. p-e-a-c-e. peace. and concentrating on fixing what's wrong with america first, to make us stronger as a nation, so when we actually do go out into the world we can somehow sustain our position. at the moment, we are kind of stretched thin.

[GreenPartyVoter]

27. frankly

I am tired of him being ignored.

[kimchi]

29. Amen, GPV

Kucinich speaks the truth. I'm "tried" of everyone trying to shut him up.

[dpbrown]

30. Amen, seconded

Single-payer, universal health care should be a bread-and-butter Democratic issue.

Abolishing the Death Penalty should be a bread-and-butter Democratic issue.

Reining in the Pentagon now that the Cold War's over, making it accountable to the taxpayers and cutting its budget 15%, eliminating Star Wars and demilitarizing space should be a bread-and-butter Democratic issue.

And getting out of NAFTA and the WTO if they're unable to adequately protect workers' rights and the environment should be a bread-and-butter Democratic issue.

Why is only one Democrat campaigning on these issues?

Why are we being sold a bill of goods by other Democrats that these issues will never pass, when the right-wing has been able to shove its creepy agenda down our throats?

Why are we being told to "get in line" in the middle, when the right-wing has proven it can be successful getting its people to line up on the faaaaaaaaaar right side with the neocons and fundamentalists?

What is it going to take to retake this country for the populism that people crave?

I don't care if Dennis Kucinich is polling at one-half of one percent, he's still the only candidate talking about real, traditional, liberal Democratic values.

I'm a menace for Dennis!

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[Lydia Leftcoast]

31. It bugged me to no end

that they never asked him about areas that he's strong on: health care, unions, Social Security, and small business. They hardly asked him about any areas, strong or weak. I don't blame him for trying to get the moderators' attention, since that's probably the only way he was allowed to answer any questions at all.

It's in the interests of the Big Boys to make him appear to be a one-issue candidate.

[Padraig18]

34. I am, as well

Sadly, under last night's format, it wasn't "The Dem Candidates Debate", it was "It's All About Candy Crowley". She wouldn't shut the f*** up and let ANYONE speak! :eyes:

[JohnKleeb]

35. amen and no I am more tired of him not being given a chance

This is his message, he knows they are in danger and wants them out.

[Freddie Stubbs]

32. His debate performance is being rewarded by his rise in the polls

[Padraig18]

33. Which poll?

The last poll I saw had him around 2%.

[JohnKleeb]

36. Thats a mock pad

You know this thread annoys me. I for one dont go around suggesting that "your candiates name here" shouldnt be allowed to debate.

[beyurslf]

38. Read more than the subject line

I didn't say he shouldn't be allowed to debate. I said he talks about the same topic over and over and never gives any other opinions.

And I don't even know what a "flame war" is.

[JohnKleeb]

40. not you

I wasnt talking about you, I was talking about what Fred said. He talks about other things too, I know for fact. So bey I wasnt talking about you at all.

[diamondsoul]

41. It depends on where you look I think.

There are a number of less well known polls where Kucinich comes in frequently at the top of the list, and he has been rising from that 2% in general public polls, too, they just aren't reporting it much.

[surfermaw]

46. Edwards my favorite but

Dennis has heart, and universal health care is needed..Go Dennis

Keep the lid on folks, it is Bush we should be going after, Dennis is ok, when we have so many in the debate, we get more coverage.

[pruner]

51. the only polls Kucinich is rising in are unscientific internet polls

that being said, though I'm a Dean supporter, I like have Dennis in the race.

[diamondsoul]

53. Thanks for the kind thoughts, Pruner.

So considerate and supportive of you, got any proof of that? You've seen every poll taken across the country?

You like having Dennis in the race so you take every POSSIBLE opportunity to discourage his supporters. Great way to keep him in.:eyes: :puke:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

54. I don't know how wide the support for Dennis is

but it is very, very deep. I predict that he will surprise the pundits in Iowa.

[goodhue]

42. blah, blah, blah?

What?!? He barely had a chance to speak much less rattle on. Maybe you support Dean and did not appreciate the attack on the $87 million that Dean all the rest (except the good reverend) appear to favor? Perhaps one could be critical of his tone and feel that he is a pesky nag for consistently speaking the truth, but criticizing Kucinich for talking too much makes no sense.

----------------------------------------------------------------

How Many Minutes Each Candidate Received

For Immediate Release: October 10, 2003

CNN's Democratic presidential candidates debate last night was held with the stated intention of providing the candidates equal time. According to the Hotline (National Journal), here are the results:

Candidate Amount Of Talk Time During the Debate

Dean 14 min 07 seconds

Kerry 12 min 31 seconds

Clark 10 min 36 seconds

Gephardt 10 min 02 seconds

Lieberman 9 min 26 seconds

Braun 8 min 39 seconds

Sharpton 8 min 28 seconds

Edwards 8 min 00 seconds

Kucinich 5 min 09 seconds

[peaceandjustice]

60. Does Dean support the 87 billion appropriation?

I haven't heard that. Do all the candidates? I didn't see the debate and have only caught one article on it, and that article and this thread seem to indicate Dean voiced support for not completely withdrawing the troops, which isn't the same thing.

[goodhue]

63. yes

Only Al Sharpton and Dennis Kucinich have expressly stated that they do not support the $87 billion. The rest of the field all support doing what they state is the responsible thing. They often avoid giving an outright yes to the question and instead deflecting with talk of irresponsible tax cuts or misleading reasons for the war but when pressed they have now all stated that they support the appropriation. Kucinich challenged Dean on this point duiring the debate. Here is the transcript of that portion:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5841-2003Oct9.html

KUCINICH: I would like to say that it would have been good if Senator Kerry and Congressman Gephardt, both have been articulate in criticizing the president, had actually voted against the resolution that took us to war.

It'll be a year anniversary on October 10th that the bill came to the House.

Now, we had a chance to tell the president no. We had a chance to cancel unilateralism and preemption by saying no. And while it's very well and good to stand here and say we should have done that, I submit that the reason, going back to Jeff Greenfield's question, the reason why people don't trust the Democrats is because our Democratic leadership stood with the president in the Rose Garden and now stands on this stage and attacks him for the war.

I'm saying that war was wrong from the beginning. We should get out of Iraq now, because we're standing there on a lie, we should bring our troops home, that's the bottom line.

Mr. Dean has said that he believes -- he says what he believes. I want to ask him, do you believe in spending $87 billion to keep our troops in Iraq? Because I don't. Do you?

DEAN: I get to answer the question?

WOODRUFF: Yes.

DEAN: I believe if the president is serious about supporting our troops in Iraq that he has to say where he's going to get the money from, and that means he's got to get rid of $87 billion worth of the tax cuts that went to Ken Lay and his friends at Enron.

KUCINICH: Would you fund keep the troops in Iraq?

DEAN: Yes.

KUCINICH: You would?

DEAN: If the president was willing to pay for it.

KUCINICH: I would say bring our troops home, Governor.

DEAN: You can't do that. And I'll tell you why.

KUCINICH: We have to bring our troops home. They're targets right now.

DEAN: Can I tell why I disagree?

KUCINICH: Yes, finish.

DEAN: First of all, let me tell you what I agree with you about. And in all due respect to John and Joe and Wes and John Edwards and Dick Gephardt, maybe you thought the war was a good idea and maybe you thought it wasn't a bad idea. It wasn't a good idea.

The problem is that we empowered the president to run roughshod over us in the last election because nobody stood up to him on the October vote. If you all had voted no, we could have gone out and made our case to the American people. But instead you didn't vote no.

KUCINICH: You said no, and that's not true. I led the effort. Do you want to correct that statement?

DEAN: No, no, I didn't mention you. I didn't mention you.

Now if I can explain what my position on Iraq is, it's this. Now that we're there...

WOODRUFF: Could you make it brief so we could let...

DEAN: I'll try to make it as brief as I can.

Now that we're there, we can't pull out responsibly. Because if we do, there are more Al Qaida, I believe, in Iraq today than there were before the president went in. If they establish a foothold in Iraq, or if a fundamentalist Shiite regime comes in, allied with Iran, that is a real security danger to the United States, when one did not exist before when Saddam Hussein was running the place.

[JohnKleeb]

66. hmmm

Good job by Dennis by not letting Dean infer that he supported the resolution. I hope the Governor knows that the congressman led the charge with Nancy Pelosi.

[Tinoire]

47. Sure... How about some Republican style flag waving instead

and talk of how great everything is in this country.

Let's just pretend there's no war going on. Let's just pretend these are normal times.

Yeah, let's shut up Kucinich so our consciences don't bother us anymore.

[blm]

49. ZING!

Go get 'em, tigress!

[Tinoire]

50. lol... Guess my anger's showing ...

I think I need to stay away ffrom DU this week-end...

'Arnold 'winning' is bad enough without reading this kind of garbage. Thanks for making me smile!

[JohnKleeb]

52. heh

Yes lets shut up the heart and soul of the race ;) and not give a chance.

[AP]

48. Tired after only 5 minutes? You must have ADD.

How could you be tired of a guy who gets no coverage?

[LWolf]

55. Tried? I tried to listen to him,

but his 5 minutes went way too fast.

We as a nation need to hear more, much, much, more of what Dennis has to say.

He is correct about getting the UN in and the US out, and I am so grateful that he is steadfast in standing up for this issue.

If you haven't heard him say anything else, you need to find other sources. He is actually easy to access. I've met, had one-on-one conversations, and listened to him speak in person twice now. If you haven't done that, you have no idea what you are missing. And the media would like it to stay that way.

Meanwhile, if you want to hear him talk about other things, try:

http://www.kucinich.us/thisisthemoment.htm

http://www.c-span.org/search/basic.asp?ResultStart=1&ResultCount=10&BasicQueryText=Dennis+Kucinich

http://www.kucinich.us/speeches.htm (Look for the mp3 of "Imagine.")

[diamondsoul]

56. I sent a polite critique to CNN tonight

after getting the precise time count.*sigh* Polite in language anyway, but I came down hard on Woodruff and the fact that Dennis didn't get rebuttals that should have been offered to him, while others got rebuttals brought on by the moderators themselves. I signed it with a closing "...registered voter pleading to be fully informed."

And I really, REALLY hate it when Dennis gets upset. He deserves better treatment.

[peaceandjustice]

59. hmm.

Will getting the U.N. in get the U.S. out? I can't imagine any other country will want to send troops into Iraq if the U.S. completely withdraws. I suspect the U.N. will require not just a leadership role in Iraqi reconstruction for their involvement and placement of troops but a large U.S. commitment of money, soldiers, and civilians.

Not that that wouldn't be preferable to the status quo. And I'm not tired of Dennis Kucinich in the debates or primary. I don't know if I could vote for him in the primaries because I oppose the Department of Peace and that seems to be a lynchpin of his campaign. But I'm glad to read, on his website, that his universal health care wouldn't involve government-run hospitals or clinics. I'd like to see more criticism of the pharmaceutical companies, who are price-gouging and just as much to blame as the insurance companies.

I saw this referred to elsewhere on the thread and will ask in a reply-post there too as well, but does Dean support the 87 billion appropriation? His remarks seemed to me to only indicate he's against withdrawing troops, not that he supports the 87 billion.

[LWolf]

61. Interesting points!

I don't believe that "US out" means that we won't have a presence. Just not a presence as occupier; that the authority for restoring Iraq would rest with the UN, and that we would be one of a team of nations working on it. This is just my take; getting us out as occupier, invader, director, and spoils controller.

[xJlM]

64. He admitted he supports the $87 billion

Had to be pressed by Kucinich, but he finally admitted that the US needs to invest our children's and grandchildren's money for years and years to come (in his opinion). I can't understand what is so hard to understand about this whole issue, unless you simply don't want to admit the truth. But then, I see a whole lot of that here...

[goodhue]

65. Kucinich's plan

http://www.kucinich.us/statements.htm#100903

UN in, US out
Kucinich's Plan to Bring Our Troops Home

The war in Iraq is over and the occupation of Iraq has turned into a quagmire. The US troops have become the targets of criminals and terrorists who are flowing into Iraq for the chance to shoot Americans. The cost of the occupation keeps rising: The President has already asked for more than $150 billion to pay for it. And there is no end in sight. The UN is now in an impossible situation, where most of the members view the war and occupation of Iraq to be a US folly. Under these circumstances, the UN can’t help. The US is stuck, mostly alone, with a costly, unpopular and unending occupation of Iraq. If we stay the course, it will do damage to American security. Iraq was not and is not a threat to the US, yet the demands of an occupation will overstretch our armed forces. And the extended deployment of reserve forces make us vulnerable at home because the reserve call ups include large numbers of firemen, policemen and other first responders who are needed for the homeland defense mission.

People are asking, is there a way out? I believe there is. I am writing to share with you a plan that will get the UN in Iraq and the US out. This plan could bring the troops home by New Year’s day, it will cost much less than the President’s, and it will increase American security.

The President must go to the UN and announce the US intention to hand over all administrative and security responsibilities to the UN. The UN would help Iraqis move quickly toward self-determination.
The UN, not the US, will administer Iraq’s oil revenues. It will be necessary to renounce clearly and unequivocally any interest in controlling Iraq’s oil resources.
The UN will administer contracts to repair Iraq. War profiteering will no longer be practiced by the White House. It will be necessary to suspend all reconstruction contracts and close the US-led Coalition Provisional Authority, because of the suspicion caused by the sweetheart deals that the Administration has given to large American corporations. In its place, the UN would help Iraqis administer funds to employ Iraqis to repair the damage from the invasion.
Bring US troops home as UN peacekeeping troops rotate into Iraq: The goal is to bring all US troops home by the new year, but in any case, to bring them home as quickly and as safely as possible with a planned and orderly withdrawal.

As soon as practicable after this address, the UN Security Council would ratify a new resolution on Iraq that would deploy a multinational force under UN mandate to keep the peace in Iraq while the interim Iraqi government receives UN support and a new Iraqi government is elected. It is my hope that within one month, the first UN troops and support personnel will arrive in Iraq, and the first US troops will be sent home. UN peacekeeper troops and Iraqis who are commissioned as police and military will replace the US (at a rate of two UN peacekeepers for every three US troops). In place of the US-led Coalition Provisional Authority, the UN will open an office to provide administrative support to the Iraqi Governing Council, which will direct the repair to infrastructure damaged by US invasion in the immediate term. In two months, the UN will begin to conduct a census of the Iraqi population to lay groundwork for national elections. At the same time, new temporary rules for the election will be promulgated, guaranteeing universal suffrage on a one-person –one vote basis. During the transition period, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the American and UN force commanders for a turnover period will settle the question of who commands the troops. The MOU will specify who is to be in charge in case an incident happens during that period. These might be local agreements such as have been used before or they might be for the entire area of operations. By the end of month three, all US troops will have returned home.

In month four, a major milestone will be reached when Iraqi sovereignty is established for the first time. A nationwide election will take place to elect representatives to a Constitutional Convention. The Constitutional Convention will have two duties: 1) elect a temporary Prime Minister who appoints a cabinet to take over responsibility from the Iraqi Governing council, and 2) draft a national constitution. Accountability of this Prime Minister is achieved by virtue of the fact that he can be recalled by a majority of the Convention.

In one year, there will be nationwide elections pursuant to the new Constitution, which will install an elected government in Iraq.

The US owes a moral debt to the people of Iraq for the damage caused by the US invasion. The US will also owe a contribution to the UN to help Iraq make the transition to self-government. American taxpayers deserve that their contributions be handled in an accountable, transparent manner. However, Americans are not required to build a state-of-the-art infrastructure as the Administration is planning. The Administration is ordering for top shelf technology from US corporations for Iraq and paid for by US taxpayers. Sweetheart deals have been awarded with billions of dollars to top corporations and political contributors. That is precisely what corrupts the Administration’s reconstruction efforts today. Instead, Iraqis should be employed to repair Iraq, and US taxpayers should pay only for the damage caused by the US invasion, including compensation for its victims. US taxpayers should not be asked, however, to furnish for Iraq what we do not have here.

The war and occupation in Iraq have been costly in other ways too. One price the Administration has forced the US to pay is America’s moral authority in the world. The Administration launched an unprovoked attack on Iraq, and the premises of the war are proving to be false. This has cost our credibility and done serious harm to America’s standing in the world. After the attacks of 9-11, the world felt sympathy for us. But this war and the occupation have squandered that sympathy, replacing it with dangerous anti-American sentiment in most of the world’s countries. And, perhaps most costly of all, the US occupying force serves as a recruiting cause for terrorists and people who wish us ill.

All we can do now is to make a dramatic reversal of course: we must acknowledge that the continued US military presence in Iraq is counterproductive and destabilizing. We have a choice in front of us: either we change course, withdraw our troops and request that the UN move in, or we sink deeper into this occupation, with more US causalities, ever higher financial costs, and diminished security for Americans.

We need a real change. My plan will bring the troops home by the new year, transfer authority to the UN with provisions made toward a rapid transition to Iraqi sovereignty, and it will save billions over the Administration’s occupation. It will enable the US to think creatively about how the US will deal with threats that come not from established countries with conventional armies (our armed forces are more than adequate to that task), but rather threats that come from networks of terrorist and criminals, who use unconventional means to injure Americans. We must also apprehend the criminals who masterminded the 9-11 attacks on this country, a goal that is hindered by the occupation of Iraq. Lastly, it will also enable the US to redirect scarce resources to rebuild America.

Sincerely,
Dennis J. Kucinich
Member of Congress

[DemBones DemBones]

58. Not me! I'd like Kucinich to have more than 5 minutes to express

his views. I could understand one or two minutes' difference but 14 minutes for Dean, 12 for Kerry, and 5 for Kucinich?

No candidate should be getting twice the time of another candidate in these debates. Every candidate is bringing something to this race.

As for your feeling that Kucinich is saying the same thing over and over, what about Dean always talking about how much money his campaign has raised? He also frequently alludes to being an M.D. and to "how we did it in Vermont" and in the debate he talked about the percent of Vermont children who have health care, etc. Kerry, as before, referred to his experience in the U.S. Senate, to a small business he once owned (his law practice, I assume), and to his experiences in combat in Viet Nam. Edwards once again talked about his upbringing and about his experiences as a trial lawyer who helped people who had been harmed recover monetary damages. I won't name every single person and what he or she talked about but they all replayed their greatest hits. And why not?

It is interesting, as someone pointed out, that Edwards was singled out to talk about unions when Kucinich is a union member. To my knowledge, no other candidate ever belonged to a union and DK keeps his membership because of his strong belief in unions. There are at least three candidates -- Edwards, Gephardt, and Kucinich -- whose fathers were union members and all three support unions. They should all be asked to speak about unions. Better yet, have each candidate talk about unions for X minutes, each candidate talk about his/her health care plan for X minutes, each candidate talk about the Iraq war and occupation and what he/she would do about it for X minutes, each candidate talk about the environment and how he/she would protect it for X minutes, etc. They're trying to do a sort of talk show format and it doesn't work that well. Voters need to be able to compare the candidate's positions on issues.


Bottom line: I find your post confusing. What are candidates supposed to talk about other than their own experiences and achievements and their plans for the country?

[mmonk]

62. No. Why?

I like listening to him (though I think a Dept. of Peace is dreaming a little in that I can see the Republicans trying to make a field day out of that in the general election with their macho garbage).