Andrea Johnson: Kerry machine won't tolerate a challenger

[redqueen]

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/4683900.html

March 25, 2004

Tonight the Democratic National Committee is holding a Unity Dinner honoring John Kerry. Former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton will be there, as well as all of the presidential candidates. Except one.

Dennis Kucinich.

In a blaze of star-spangled irony, Kucinich was "not invited," according to the Washington Post, or uninvited, according to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) media relations department, because he has not taken himself out of the race for presidency.

"But there is no way Dennis will win the presidency," I explain to a DNC representative. "He just wants the issues that are important to your constituency to remain on the forefront -- withdrawing the occupation, universal, nonprofit health care, and withdrawing from trade agreements, NAFTA and the WTO, that hurt working people."

No matter, was the response. Dennis is divisive. He shouldn't be campaigning.
--------

Interesting points in this editorial. I'm sending a note of thanks to Ms. Johnson. :)

[THUNDER HANDS]

1. can't Dennis do both at the same time?

Withdraw from the race and continue to speak out?

[redqueen]

3. Honestly?

He's barely getting coverage now, Magic Rat. If he dropped from the race, what do you think would happen? Would it increase, or decrease? He's never counted on the media helping to get his message out, but I'm sure he's not foolish enough to think that dropping out of the race will somehow help him get that message out. In fact it would be directly counter to his message. His message is anti-status-quo, and Kerry is running on mostly status-quo stuff.

However, if Dennis's message changed, if he dropped all the profit-threatening, or corporatist-rule-threatening policy ideas in his speeches... IMO if he did all that as well as drop and endorse Kerry... THEN he might get mentioned. But then his message would have changed, so what would be the point?

[KC21304]

14. Absolutely. Dean is doing it.

It's a Unity event for the Democrats supporting the one who will be their nominee. If Dennis doesn't want to support Kerry yet, that is surely his right. Should he be invited to the party for those supporters ? Of course not.

[IrateCitizen]

2. This has been addressed already

Kucinich was clear that he would not have attended the dinner anyway. All this blame over "They didn't invite him!" is pointless.

As someone who donated more money to his campaign than any other in my life, I fully recognize the importance of his message. But the question must arise as to whether many of his supporters have bought into some sort of cult of personality surrounding the candidate at the expense of advocating the saner policies that were at the true heart of his candidacy at the beginning.

[MadHound]

4. No cult of personality here

But I do find it disrespectful, and quite telling actually, that every other challenger was invited, yet Kucinich was dissed. So much for unity.

Of course, it is to be expected. The Dems and the media have ridiculed or blown off Kucinich from the begining of the primary season. God forbid that we have a candidate who is slightly to the right of FDR actually become the nominee, or have any input into the party whatsoever:eyes:

[redqueen]

6. Every other challenger dropped out and kissed Kerry's ring

Kucinich didn't, hence the snub.

Fine. But was Lieberman there? That's what I'm curious about.

[Adelante]

8. Yes, Joe was there

You had to see him shove Wes Clark out of the way to stand next to Al Gore. :D

Lieberman, of course, did drop out, although I haven't heard of him endorsing Kerry. He may have, for all I know. The thing about Dennis is he can't have it both ways - stay in the race and support Kerry. I think he knows this and accepts it, because his message is so important to him and to the country. I don't fault him, I respect him too much and trust him too much. But as far as the unity dinner goes, it was all about supporting Kerry. You can't be running against Kerry and supporting him at the same time. IMHO

[redqueen]

9. Can you be badmouthing him on talk shows and supporting him

at the same time?

That's what Joe is apparently allowed to do.

Interesting, isn't it?

[Adelante]

20. You sure as hell have a point there, redqueen nt

[JI7]

13. yes, it was a fundraiser

for kerry's campaign. if it was something else where candidates were giving speeches about whatever they wanted it would be different, but in this case the entire thing was for the purpose of supporting kerry right now. i personally still would not have had a problem with kucinich being invited and being there. but he didn't want to be at such an event himself as he is still campaigning and said he will support the nominee after they are formally made the nominee which will be at the convention.

[mobuto]

15. Lieberman endorsed Kerry

That was the point of the dinner - everybody there was supporting Kerry. It would have been nonsensical to invite a candidate running against him.

[Adelante]

19. Thanks

I wasn't sure.

[redqueen]

5. Cult of Personality?

You wouldn't be making any insinuations about me, I hope.

I know that this was the subject of a huge flame war. I posted this because, as I said in the OP, the author brings up some interesting points. I noted the difference in message in the flame war thread as well -- the difference between the DNC's claim and Kucinich's.

As uncomfortable a subject this is at this time, it does not warrant burying our heads and pretending there aren't problems with the party.

Once the convention is done, you won't have to worry about considering alternate points of view anymore, as Dennis will no longer be trying to convey his message independently of the nominee.

[sangh0]

17. What interesting points?

You've mentioned that there are "interesting points" in this article, but you have yet to identify what they are. Instead of addressing the issues/points this article raises, you are focusing on the persons of DK (and why he was not invited) and other Dems while complaining about how others are "burying their heads"

DK is a good who has said he has no problem not being invited. Dk is a good man who is trying to get people to pay attention to the issues. Why don't you, as a supporter, try to emulate him, and concentrate on the issues, and not on the various people like Lieberman, McAuliffe, the DNC, the DLC, etc?

You are raising an issue (about DK not being invited) that your candidate is not. Why would you distract from the issues your own candidate wants to raise in order to focus on an issue your candidate is not concerned with?

DK doesn't care about the Unity Dinner, so why do you? Isn't the DK candidacy about something more than a dinner?

[redqueen]

21. I can only post four paragraphs

I just picked the first four.

It's not so much the dinner that's the issue. There are a few issues about this which bother me.

Firstly, it's the stupid way the DNC chose to go about uninviting Dennis. Don't you think it's odd that Dennis said he chose not to go, but that the DNC chose to inform the media that he was not invited? Do you not see that as a massively stupid thing to do? Maybe it's just me, but IMO - and especially in light of the way the votes have gone in the last GE and midterms - alienating the supporters who are leaning the furthest towards Green Party is just about the dumbest thing I've seen them do this election -- besides that laughable flash ad, that is.

I mean consider it -- I wholly understand that the DNC won't be taking many of the planks Kucinich is putting forward, and that's fine. That's not likely to make Kucinich's supporters and other lefties happy, but that's business right?

But this is different -- this is something completely and utterly meaningless. They could have chosen to let the 'Kucinich chose not to go' thing stand, but they didn't. This action has the potential to actively alienate those whose non-Dem votes would have helped massively in the last two elections. Why risk that? Over something so meaningless?


One other point she brings up is the militarisation of this country, but since most don't care I won't even bother going into that unless someone else wants to discuss it.

[IrateCitizen]

23. Like I said, cult of personality

As much as it galls me to take sangha's side in an argument, I must in this instance -- because sangha is right (which is DOUBLY hard for me to admit). ;-)

redqueen, I'll post this excerpt from Chomsky that Vladmir pulled out on another thread:

Activist movements, if at all serious, pay virtually no attention to which faction of the business party is in office, but continue with their daily work, from which elections are a diversion -- which we cannot ignore, any more than we can ignore the sun rising; they exist.

Read it several times until it begins to sink in.

Then, ask yourself a simple question. By consuming yourself with this "unity dinner" so much, ARE you really concentrating on the ISSUES that you profess to hold so dear? Or are you instead allowing your energies to be consumed with your admiration for one PERSON who, from a public pulpit, has professed support for the issues in which you believe?

Battles on issues will ALWAYS be won at the grassroots. Having elected officials speaking out on them certainly helps, but that is not where the efforts for victory should be ultimately directed. By concentrating SO MUCH on the candidacy of this one man, you are removing energies from being directed in a manner that might actually help spread them a bit wider through the grassroots rather than simply preaching to the choir.

[redqueen]

25. I can only reiterate what I've said in other posts on this thread

the issue here is the stupidity of the DNC in how they handled their 'uninvitation'.

They just added fuel to the fire with their answers to the journalist who wrote this editorial.

Not to mention the ridiculousness of having Joe Lieberman there -- I can't find the transcript now as I can't remember which show it was -- but he was on this past weekend, IIRC, on talk shows badmouthing Kerry. But that's just a side point.

My main point is the utter cluelessness of the DNC.

We can just ignore it, but it's at our own peril, IMO.

[sangh0]

27. There was no "uninvitation"

In order to be uninvited one has to be invited to begin with. DK was never invited to begin with. As far as why the DNC said anything about this, it's because they were asked about it by reporters.

And if your point is one about the cluelessness of the DNC, an issue DK has not raised, maybe you should be discussing more relevant (to avg American's, not DK supporters) examples than DK's "uninvitation". Raising the issue of DK's uninvitation does nothing to help the poor, nothing for the victims of war, and it does nothing to raise awareness wrt the issue DK is trying to raise awareness.

I don't know why people who support DK because he is raising important issues would then turn around and distract from those very same issues by raising an issue that DK is not concerned with.

[redqueen]

32. Well that's the story that's out there

and I've already written to Dennis's campaign to try to defuse the issue. Maybe it's just because I'm in Texas, but some (many of) the Kucinich supporters I know are not taking this well at all.

As far as the DNC's idiocy... I thought that was being discussed just fine all along. Just the most recent example being that utterly stupid flash ad. I mean by all means if we want to lose what we are having handed to us once again let's not get riled up about it. I'm concerned though. Really.

And again, this article was not only about DK's uninvitation. The anti-war stuf was in there, but to be honest I've come to realize it's pointless to bring that up here so I didn't. So that explains why I didn't bother bringing up the issue that I knew beforehand would be flamed all to hell instead of rationally discussed by any of Kerry's supporters who might view such a discussion of issues it as an attack on their candidate.

[sangh0]

35. C'mon redqueen. You should know better than that

"Well that's the story that's out there"

Don't tell me you believe everything you read.

Maybe it's just because I'm in Texas, but some (many of) the Kucinich supporters I know are not taking this well at all.

Why are they so upset about this when DK couldn't seem to care less? DK is pushing important issues. Why do his supporters push this Unity Dinner issue when there are far more important issues that people need to learn about?

As far as the DNC's idiocy... I thought that was being discussed just fine all along. Just the most recent example being that utterly stupid flash ad. I mean by all means if we want to lose what we are having handed to us once again let's not get riled up about it. I'm concerned though. Really

Again, "C'mon"!! Take a look at this thread and tell me if it looks like it's about the general idea of Dem idiocy, or if it's more narrowly focused on the Unity Dinner. If your real concern is the DNC idiocy, you are doing a very poor job of communicating that.

And again, this article was not only about DK's uninvitation. The anti-war stuf was in there...

In this thread, you have concentrated on the Unity Dinner. Therefore, you should not be surprised that some (ex. me) perceive that this thread is about the Unity Dinner

[redqueen]

38. I've already said I don't care

The whole thing is just stupid. But like I said maybe it's just because we're in Texas, so they're all just more comfortable jumping straight to a third-party since it's a red state. Maybe I'm perceiving their anger as more intense than it is due to the relative ease with which Democrats here can abandon their presidential candidate and not influence the eleciton either way. These people are ALL about the issues, and see voting for Kerry as negating those issues. Hence the TP votes. Anyway.

I contend that it's not me that's trying to make this all about "DENNIS DENNIS DENNIS" -- others did that on their own. Maybe it's my poor communications skills, maybe it's others' kneejerking based on other recent threads. :shrug:

And yeah, I tried to go back and copy the anti-war stuff but now it wants a registration. bah. Anyway I'm sure it would just erupt into a flame war so what's the point? We've been down that road too many times to count. IOW, it would be *even more* divisive than this is.

[LandOLincoln]

37. I agree, it was an incredibly stupid move, but Terry Mac is

stepping down next January anyway, isn't he?

I didn't want Howard Dean to be president, but am in total agreement with those who are talking him up for party chair. How do we make that happen?

[redqueen]

26. One other point

"Battles on issues will ALWAYS be won at the grassroots. Having elected officials speaking out on them certainly helps, but that is not where the efforts for victory should be ultimately directed. By concentrating SO MUCH on the candidacy of this one man, you are removing energies from being directed in a manner that might actually help spread them a bit wider through the grassroots rather than simply preaching to the choir."

What I'm getting from this is that you really don't think his advocating for things like UHC or a living wage are really helped all that much by his ability to campaign. Is that the case? If so all I'll say is that I disagree and leave it at that.

[sangh0]

28. That's not the case

The point is this issue of DK's being uninvited to the Unity Dinner does NOTHING to help promote the issues DK has been raising while distracting attention away from those very issues.

[IrateCitizen]

31. That's not entirely it either, sangha

It's also the factor that by focusing on DENNIS KUCINICH campaigning for these issues, the focus eventually becomes on DENNIS KUCINICH more than the issues at hand.

Therefore, when those issues are raised, they are always raised in the context of DENNIS KUCINICH.

Somehow, I think that we'd all have a lot more success in spreading these issues at this point, if we focused on actually spreading them SEPARATE from the context of DENNIS KUCINICH. This way, when we encounter "mainstream Democrats" who might have a disfavorable opinion of Dennis Kucinich but we might be able to convince to support our positions on ISSUES, we may have a better chance of convincing them. Especially if we even say that we will enthusiastically support John Kerry in the GE, rather than "himming and hawing" about how much of a "compromise" it is to vote for him, and that we'll only be able to do so by "holding our nose".

After all, isn't THAT the way that we really bring pressure to bear on politicians -- by convincing the grassroots to support us?

[redqueen]

33. You know what, I would agree with this... IF

he were no longer trying to get votes in primaries, in order to show the DNC that there really is support for his ideas.

The fact that he is still trying to get those votes, in order to send that message, is why he is still a part of that message.

Once he's no longer in it and trying to get votes to strengthen that message, then it will just be about the issues, with no plea to support DENNIS KUCINICH in a primary by voting or with a donation.

[sangh0]

36. And if you want to help DK win support for those ideas

I think you should reconsider the effectiveness of "Vote for DK so the next time the DNC will invite him to their Unity Dinner"

IMO, "Vote for DK. He's for peace" is a better line. Or
Vote for Dennis because he's right on the issues"

[IndianaGreen]

7. When it comes to what you called a "cult of the personality"

I suggest you look somewhere else than the Kucinich campaign.

Dennis is speaking to the issues I care about. I will vote for Dennis in the Indiana May primary and I could care less about how many dog and pony shows Terry Macauliff puts on the stage.

[sangh0]

18. Dennis speaks to the issues,

so why do his supporters on DU focus on this Unity Dinner when DK does NOT consider it an issue? DK speaks to the issues. Shouldn't his supporters do the same?

[redqueen]

22. The issue here (or one of them, actually)

is the mind-boggling stupidity of the DNC.

Another, not that anyone cares, is the growing militarisation of this country.

[sangh0]

29. No, the issue is the mind-boggling stupidity

of people who support a candidate because he raises issues while distracting attention AWAY from the issues the candidate is raising.

Another, not that anyone cares, is the growing militarisation of this country.

Every second you spend on the Unity dinner issue is a second you don't spend on the issue of militarization. Which issue do you think DK would want you to focus on?

[redqueen]

34. Militarisation, most definitely

And I do, just not here.

I've learned my lesson about talking about how voting for Kerry in the primaries sends a message of the approval of said militarisation here.

[blondeatlast]

12. Well said (and I am a PRAGMATIC Kucinich supporter). nt

[patricia92243]

10. Dennis should be able to run right up to the convention if he wants to.

[mobuto]

16. Of course he should

And he's being allowed to run right up to the convention. But the Democratic Party has its nominee, and its trying to unite around him. It makes no sense to invite somebody running against him.

[blondeatlast]

11. He's campaigning FOR his issues to be represented on

the stage and the Platform.

He should be campaigning, and I think he handled not being invited with the utmost in class.

Both sides did the right thing.

[redqueen]

24. I agree he handled it gracefully.

As for both sides doing the right thing? No, I don't agree.

They chose to hamhandedly risk brushing aside Democratic voters who support Dennis by countering his claim.

Why did they do that? Why are there two versions of reality now?

[Cocoa]

30. Dennis will survive

he probably held his own unity dinner, and his food was probably healthier than theirs.