GOD DAMN THESE DEMOCRATS!

With few exceptions, these Democrats are totally fucking worthless. Kucinich tries to bring up his Cheney impeachment measure--again--and Hoyer fights to table it. Meanwhile, the Republicans try to stymie Hoyer and force debate on Kucinich's resolution.

I swear to the Lord Jesus...how can these weak, compromised Democrats like Pelosi and Hoyer not impeach Cheney? And/or Bush? I mean, besides the fact that they're weak and compromised?

Bush and Cheney are war criminals. They are peace criminals. They are criminal criminals. They are liars and profiteers and torturers and murderers. There's simply no way around it. And I don't say that only because they're Republicans--there are plenty of Democratic war criminals, too. I say that because it's true.

Ron Paul Revolution

So Ron Paul just got $4.2 million in 24 hours. I've always said I'd never, ever, as long as I live, vote for a Republican, but I'd make an exception in his case. I don't agree with everything the man says, but he is unequivocal in his opposition to the Iraq war and foreign intervention in general. He's the only candidate I'm aware of that knows and will talk about the scam of the Federal Reserve.

He is real--you could have a beer with him. And learn something.

I just want an antiwar candidate that I can vote for that actually has a chance of winning. I love Dennis Kucinich--even if he did see a UFO. Kucinich's UFO story is a lot less crazy than Rudy Giuliani's 9/11 "heroism" story.

But anyway, Kucinich didn't just raise $4.2 million in 24 hours. I wish he had. Kucinich did try to impeach Cheney. Paul didn't do that. So credit where credit is due--they both have their strengths. But Paul's got the dough-re-mi.

Paul/Kucinich '08

I wonder who Paul would choose as a running mate. What current Republican could he pick that would bring voters to his side but not compromise his positions? If there is such a person, I can't name him.

So why not get Kucinich? The party-line crossing story would be huge. They could be the ultimate antiwar ticket, running for the unity of the country. They don't agree on everything, but does that ever happen? I mean, look at Bush and Cheney. Bush is a homophobe and Cheney's granddaughter is being raised by his lesbian daughter and her life partner. They seem to have made out all right--for a couple of war-mongering demons.

But I digress...Kucinich and Paul have similar positions on a lot of issues. Why not highlight those and the press angle could be this: the guy who raised $4.2 million in one day and the only guy who had the nuts to impeach Cheney are running together, even though they're from different parties.

You couldn't stop the press from talking about that shit, yo! Unless you were their corporate paymasters...

WHY KUCINICH IS A BADASS



Kucinich proved almost 30 years ago that he has the massive balls it takes to stand up to the corporatocratic privatizers that want to create an "ownership society," all right. One in which they're the owners and we have to pay through the nose to get what was rightfully ours to begin with.

I wonder why more parallels weren't drawn between Gray Davis' recall and Kucinich's recall which, like Hugo Chavez, he survived. And again, like Chavez, the corporatocracy put out a hit on Kucinich (see above). But they didn't get him!

Why I'm glad I didn't vote for Lieberman (and Gore) in 2000

Because of this nonsense:

''I think we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq,'' Lieberman said. ''And to me, that would include a strike over the border into Iran, where we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training these people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers.''

Yet Lieberman insists that we're making progress in Iraq, so we have to stay there. What an immoral, warmongering jackass.

GRAVEL AND KUCINICH

Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich kick ass. I just read one of my favorite blogs and the proprietor had the following to say:

Dennis Kucinich and Gravel are just annoying. Yeah, I get it, some of you like Kucinich. And that's nice. Joe likes his dog Boomer too. It doesn't mean he should be on stage with the real candidates. Kucinich has zero chance of winning, as does Gravel - they shouldn't be on the stage taking time from the serious candidates.

What the fuck is this guy's problem? Aravosis, I mean. They "shouldn't be on the stage?" They aren't "serious candidates?"

What has Hillary Clinton ever done compared to Mike Gravel? Gravel was in the Army in the 50s. He entered the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record. He filibustered against renewal of the draft--by himself--and Nixon was forced to let it die. What has Hillary Clinton ever done that's even remotely comparable to any of that? For that matter, what have Obama or Edwards done that are remotely comparable to any of that?

For Pete's sake, Clinton and Edwards both voted for the Iraq war. Gravel is unequivocally against it and the imperialist/neocon/corporatist agenda that fueled it. Clinton and Edwards now say they don't like the war, but they still favor the imperialist/corporatist agenda.

Kucinich

Kucinich voted against the Patriot Act. He voted against the war in Iraq. He is also against the imperialist/corporatist agenda. For Christ's sake, he's introduced articles of impeachment against Dick Cheney.

Gravel and Kucinich have more principle, conviction, and good ideas than the rest of the Democratic candidates put together. They are serious candidates, but of course they have no chance of winning if major liberal blogs like Americablog insist on parroting the mainstream, corporate media tactic of following the horse race. What the hell is the liberal blogosphere for if not to promote candidates that actually stand for what we say we want?