Kucinich Watch: Does America Deserve President Dennis Kucinich?

Barbara Joan Baxter
He's a short guy with funny ears, and a (smirk) vegan, for god's sake. He believes in world peace (make that whirled peas, smirk smirk). So right away he loses the votes of those who require their presidents to be tall, telegenic, enthusiastic consumers of the Great American Coronary-Inducing Diet, and Rambo junkies.

Kucinich wants to impeach Dick Cheney, and after him, George Bush. Shouldn't everybody? Incredibly, he's found only a few cosponsors for his impeachment bill. The disappointing House speaker Nancy Pelosi, desperate to appear as if she's taking the moral high ground, declared that there are more pressing issues to focus on, thank you very much, than rid America of a criminal administration responsible for countless deaths and a huge federal deficit. Well, she didn't say the second part, but she might as well have. And to think Clinton was impeached not so long ago just for lying about having sex with a consenting adult! How innocent and far away that seems now.

Kucinich talked for an hour in the House about how criminal the Iraq "Hydrocarbon Law" is (what a bore, huh?). This law would privatize Iraqi oil and give most of the profits to private oil companies like Chevron, Shell, Exxon, and BP as a benchmark for America withdrawing from the country. Who, except those companies and all those who stand to profit hugely-including members of the present administration-should not be outraged by that and try to stop it? Instead, Kucinich has been dismissed as a conspiracy theorist, even though it's all there in black and white for anyone who will take the time to read the document (few have, apparently).

Remember the flimsy Bush excuse of going to war with Iraq because it was involved in 9/11? Or the one about WMDs? Which later morphed into the need for regime change and democracy when the other excuses didn't wash? Kucinich bought none of it; he never even voted for the war in the first place. How many Americans are aware that Saddam offered to resign as leader of Iraq and go into exile just before the war started, but wasn't taken up on it because that would have ruined the Bushie plans for stealing their oil?

Kucinich is against the continued funding of the war, reasoning that if the Dems really wanted to successfully oppose it without appearing not to support our soldiers, all they had to do was NOTHING (i.e., offer Bush no bill to veto in the first place). As Kucinich stated on Democracy Now, "You want to help the troops, bring them home." Which is a simple, elegant solution that the dim Dems didn't even consider.

Kucinich is one of only three candidates to accept an offer from the Fox network and the Congressional Black Caucus to debate the other presidential candidates (along with Joe Biden and Mike Gravel) in September. The excuse offered by the other, more prominent candidates for their non-appearances is that Fox isn't nice enough to blacks. Yeah, like all the other networks aren't skewed politically too.

So why is this truth-telling runt who eats tofu instead of meat and believes in peace even running for president? It's really quite astonishing. He's much too decent to be a politician, let alone the CEO of the United Corporatocracy of America. And he can't seem to win for losing. He married an attractive young woman and was immediately accused of doing it just to make himself look better (The fact that Elizabeth finds him attractive is never even discussed). Whenever he comes up with another smart idea, the naysayers complain that he's engaging in shameless self-promotion. Well, duh. Since when is self-promotion a no-no for presidential candidates? Or is it only allowed if you're one of the "real" candidates, like Hillary or Barack? And then there are the liberal voters who admit to really admiring the little guy, but then sigh and mutter something to the effect that of course, he doesn't have a chance in hell of getting elected, so why bother supporting him? With that attitude, they're right.

Kucinich is far too smart and way too honest for the likes of the American people, the majority of whom, in my opinion, have no clue what's good for them and are becoming more accommodating to political corruption every year. As long as they can keep tabs on the tacky lives of Paris, Lindsay and Britney, tune into their favorite reality shows, and text message to their pals, they don't have time to hear about their country going down the tubes.

Published by Barbara Joan Baxter

Barbara Joan is a freelance writer/editor/publisher/webhead and the proud guardian of ten dogs and cats. Books of poems and a memoir are in the works.  View profile

4 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Ardeth Baxter8/1/2007

    Alyce, Giving up on the impeachment process is the ultimate desperate political act. You might as well just shoot our democracy between the eyes. Yes, there would be problems with impeaching Dick or impeaching George or both. But so what? Are we supposed to allow these thugs to get away with whatever they want because George might pardon himself? I'm as cynical as the next person about our damaged country, but we can't give up. As for Kucinich and others accepting the debate invitation on Fox, I support them. Every TV network has political issues, even PBS. Are the candidates supposed to just forget about debating because of that?

  • Alyce Rocco8/1/2007

    Fox news is perceived to have attacked black America. I don't watch television but did review the You Tube videos posted by angry citizens. They also lied about Senator Obama. The other candidates are showing, by action, that they will no longer tolerate biased media. Fox news is likened to the Enquirer tabloid and not to be taken seriously. By accepting to the debate, those candidates show they are out of touch with everyday people of all colors, who are sick of media lies. Or that they condone balant racism and smear campaigns.

  • Alyce Rocco8/1/2007

    Because of the Republican held and unbudgable Congress it could not be done. But let us imagine for a second that the procedure was completed. Who is next in line of command? Someone GWB handpicked for the job. In addition, GWB is known to use his supposed "executive power" and would just pardon himself and remain in office. He also fired Supreme Court Justice's and replaced them with people who would do his bidding. Perhaps the other members of Congress know this and are simply biding time until they can rid the White House of his clan.

  • Alyce Rocco8/1/2007

    If he can not even garner support among his peers to impeach how can he lead a nation? Feingold introduced legislation to censure which was the start of the impeachment process and it went nowhere. Cynthis McKinney also introduced legislation to impeach both Bush and Cheney, but she is no longer in office. People wiser than me on the process, say it is too late. Kucinich has to argue for his bill by first get "permission". After doing the arguement process, which can go on forever if anyone wants to "fillibuster" a vote is taken. Then it is passed over to the next house for the process to start over again.

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.