Kucinich 2012 (is how it'll go down)

[teleomorph]

It will take a leader like Ron Paul to heal the rift before a leader like Dennis Kucinich can most effective.

 

[Xonox]

It will take a leader like Ron Paul to heal the rift before a leader like Dennis Kucinich can most effective.

I don't know too much about Kucinich, except that his foreign policy is similar to RP... If things don't go RP's way this time around maybe I'll vote Kucinich next time

 

[forsmant]

They are economically opposite. The only similarity I see is ending occupation of other countries.

 

[angrydragon]

Wasn't he suppose to hold a press conference today about his drop for the presidential bid.

 

[LinearChaos]

no offense to Kucinich, but I think it would take getting more than 1% of the vote in the Iowa Caucuses before Kucinich can be effective at all....

 

[Chuang-Tzu]

They are economically opposite. The only similarity I see is ending occupation of other countries.

Although Dennis advocates a different road map to solving the problems that plague this nation, he does share many of the same objectives and has fought hard for a more open and fair electoral process.

Here area couple of other big ones for you, the information is readily available on his website:

1. Securing Constitutional Democracy http://www.dennis4president.com/go/issues/securing-constitutional-democracy/

2. Saving Capitalism
"As President, Dennis Kucinich will end America's participation in NAFTA and the WTO. Huge, multi-national corporations ship American jobs overseas, turn a blind eye to human rights abuses and hide behind their lobbyists in Washington."

3. Fighting corporate powers that do not operate in the public interest

 

[Crickett]

Does sound a lot like RP..at least that stuff. I really respect the man, too for trying to complain to the FCC and filing a recount in NH. He is proving the federal systems just don't do what they were designed for.l I really respect the man..

 

[Aratus]

i think kucinich, huckabee and obama have their eyes set
on 2012 if 2008 turns into a john mccain or hillary clinton year.
mitt romney wants to run again... and i think since he's older than
kucinich, huckabee, and obama, this gives him less of a timewindow!!!

 

[Son of Detroit]

I'd move to Canada.

 

[Gadsden Flag]

I'd rather have Giuliani as president than Kucinich. No lie.

 

[ChickenHawk]

I'd rather have Giuliani as president than Kucinich. No lie.

Absolutely. The only time Kucinich cares about the constitiution is when it fits his socialist political agenda. That doesn't happen too often.

 

[s35wf]

I'd rather have Giuliani as president than Kucinich. No lie.

Please take that back Dennis is a honest man. He tried to get bush/cheney impeached. And he's losing his house seat because of it. Guiliani is not only a criminal, a warmonger, but may have had foreknowledge of 911 BEFORE it happened.

Kucinich's domestic policy's do differ from paul and are more socialist; However on foreign policy issues him and Paul are very similiar. If your a true Ron Paul supporter you would NEVER want ghoulani over kucinich. Besides dennis is a FRIEND of Ron Paul!

 

[Son of Detroit]

Please take that back Dennis is a honest man. He tried to get bush/cheney impeached. And he's losing his house seat because of it. Guiliani is not only a criminal, a warmonger, but may have had foreknowledge of 911 BEFORE it happened.

Kucinich's domestic policy's do differ from paul and are more socialist; However on foreign policy issues him and Paul are very similiar. If your a true Ron Paul supporter you would NEVER want ghoulani over kucinich. Besides dennis is a FRIEND of Ron Paul!

2nd amendment.

Enough said.

 

[Dustancostine]

Please take that back Dennis is a honest man. He tried to get bush/cheney impeached. And he's losing his house seat because of it. Guiliani is not only a criminal, a warmonger, but may have had foreknowledge of 911 BEFORE it happened.

Kucinich's domestic policy's do differ from paul and are more socialist; However on foreign policy issues him and Paul are very similiar. If your a true Ron Paul supporter you would NEVER want ghoulani over kucinich. Besides dennis is a FRIEND of Ron Paul!

I am a die hard RP supporter and I would vote for Guiliani before a socialist.

--Dustan

 

[GoApe4RonPaul2008]

2nd amendment. I hold that right to bear arms with high regard. I would never vote for an anti-gun candidate.

 

[christagious]

And you don't think that the Ghoul would try to take away our gun rights?

 

[Signzit]

There won't be free elections in 2012 without Ron Paul.

The pretense of the voting sham itself, will no longer be necessary.

 

[VoteForRonPaul]

I am a die hard RP supporter and I would vote for Guiliani before a socialist.

--Dustan

You would vote for a warmonger? What should I call this? Hypocrisy or blindness of loyalism? (Please excuse my langauge, just cannot believe what you are saying)

 

[FreeTraveler]

2nd amendment. I hold that right to bear arms with high regard. I would never vote for an anti-gun candidate.

This is, for me, a litmus test. If a politician doesn't believe you can be trusted with the means of self-defense, how can you POSSIBLY trust him to run your government?

An unadulterated commitment to the Second Amendment is the dividing line between a free individual and the sheeple. My apologies to those of you who disagree, but you are wrong to believe otherwise.

From: http://www.lneilsmith.org/

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+2]Why Did it Have to be ... Guns?[/SIZE][/FONT]
by L. Neil Smith
[email protected]

​

Over the past 30 years, I've been paid to write almost two million words, every one of which, sooner or later, came back to the issue of guns and gun-ownership. Naturally, I've thought about the issue a lot, and it has always determined the way I vote.

People accuse me of being a single-issue writer, a single- issue thinker, and a single- issue voter, but it isn't true. What I've chosen, in a world where there's never enough time and energy, is to focus on the one political issue which most clearly and unmistakably demonstrates what any politician—or political philosophy—is made of, right down to the creamy liquid center.

Make no mistake: all politicians—even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership—hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician—or political philosophy—can be put.

If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash—for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything—without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you.

If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims.

What his attitude—toward your ownership and use of weapons—conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?

If he doesn't want you to have the means of defending your life, do you want him in a position to control it?

If he makes excuses about obeying a law he's sworn to uphold and defend—the highest law of the land, the Bill of Rights—do you want to entrust him with anything?

If he ignores you, sneers at you, complains about you, or defames you, if he calls you names only he thinks are evil—like "Constitutionalist"—when you insist that he account for himself, hasn't he betrayed his oath, isn't he unfit to hold office, and doesn't he really belong in jail?

Sure, these are all leading questions. They're the questions that led me to the issue of guns and gun ownership as the clearest and most unmistakable demonstration of what any given politician—or political philosophy—is really made of.

He may lecture you about the dangerous weirdos out there who shouldn't have a gun—but what does that have to do with you? Why in the name of John Moses Browning should you be made to suffer for the misdeeds of others? Didn't you lay aside the infantile notion of group punishment when you left public school—or the military? Isn't it an essentially European notion, anyway—Prussian, maybe—and certainly not what America was supposed to be all about?

And if there are dangerous weirdos out there, does it make sense to deprive you of the means of protecting yourself from them? Forget about those other people, those dangerous weirdos, this is about you, and it has been, all along.

Try it yourself: if a politician won't trust you, why should you trust him? If he's a man—and you're not—what does his lack of trust tell you about his real attitude toward women? If "he" happens to be a woman, what makes her so perverse that she's eager to render her fellow women helpless on the mean and seedy streets her policies helped create? Should you believe her when she says she wants to help you by imposing some infantile group health care program on you at the point of the kind of gun she doesn't want you to have?

On the other hand—or the other party—should you believe anything politicians say who claim they stand for freedom, but drag their feet and make excuses about repealing limits on your right to own and carry weapons? What does this tell you about their real motives for ignoring voters and ramming through one infantile group trade agreement after another with other countries?

Makes voting simpler, doesn't it? You don't have to study every issue—health care, international trade—all you have to do is use this X-ray machine, this Vulcan mind-meld, to get beyond their empty words and find out how politicians really feel. About you. And that, of course, is why they hate it.

And that's why I'm accused of being a single-issue writer, thinker, and voter.
But it isn't true, is it?
​

 

[nobody's_hero]

I was talking with a co-worker today who saw me browsing gunbroker.com for an AR-15. He asked, "What good will a gun like that do anyone?"

Just a note: My co-worker is, by definition, the ultimate wilderness man. He has oodles of mossbergs, remingtons, bolt-actions, and shotguns galore. He doesn't own anything 'tactical.'

I couldn't help thinking to myself:

After being warned by Paul Revere that the British were coming, I don't think the minutemen were interested in going quail hunting.