Raphaelle
01-30-2007, 08:21 AM
Interesting report from RichM:
(Disclaimer: Let me say in advance that I realize that my criticisms of Dennis may not make everyone here happy. Nonetheless, I'm laying it out there, in the spirit of "call 'em as I see 'em." )
On Saturday evening, after spending the day at the march, I went to see DK speaking at San Francisco's First Unitarian Universalist Church. Dennis was the featured speaker; also appearing on stage were his wife Elizabeth, the mother of Lt Ehren Watada, & Congresswoman Barbara Lee. Sean Penn was there too, but when forced to appear up on stage, he simply said hello to everyone, explaining that he had just quietly arrived by plane from DC, & had hoped no one would notice him(!) Both the Kuciniches and Penn had spoken at the DC protest on Saturday morning.
There were 2 things about the event that I felt unambiguously positive about: the energy of the crowd (which was pulsating & electric, and filled with frank loathing for Bush); and Lt Watada's mother, who spoke honestly, passionately, and with great dignity. I found her a very admirable & impressive person. It's easy to recognize, when listening to her, at least one source of her son's courage & principles.
The crowd & event organizers had hung up quite a number of banners with slogans like "Impeach Bush!" The church's minister (or maybe it was the labor organizer?), who spoke briefly, pointed gleefully to these, and the crowd roared its approval. Then it was announced that the reports from DC indicated that upwards of 500,000 had marched, exceeding all expectations. With that bit of news, the joint was really rocking, by the time Dennis & Barbara Lee arrived.
When Dennis finally spoke, there were several respects in which I found his remarks rather disappointing. He took a question about his stance on impeachment, and basically tried to defuse the hall's enthusiasm for it. His position was that although the Bush administration has in his view committed serious crimes, he felt that starting a push for impeachment now, would dilute the energy that needs to be directed at ending the war. He hastened to add that he's not really opposed to the idea of impeachment, but simply feared this "dilution of energy" problem. He also said that impeachment could wait until after the war has been stopped, because "there is no statute of limitations on these kinds of crimes."
Furthermore, his remarks contained too much of this New Age-y BS. Like many people, I was there to hear what he had to say about impeachment and the war; I don't need to hear too much New Age philosophical jargon. He way over-did that stuff, and I sensed it made the crowd, who was way ahead of him, edgy & impatient.
Then, about the war: his 12-point plan (detailed on his website kucinich.us) depends centrally on moving an international peacekeeping force to Iraq, to guard against further bloodshed. I understand the theory behind this, because the US has deliberately provoked a civil war (a point Dennis did not make), as part of its strategy to divide & conquer. Thus it is indeed possible that if the US were to suddenly withdraw, the Shiites (60% of the population) might proceed to slaughter many of the Sunnis (20%). However, if the plan depends on raising an international force, it could founder on that ground alone! That is, even in the exceedingly unlikely event that the US Congress might be prevailed upon to force a US withdrawal, if this were contingent on raising an international force, it would still fail, because no other countries might be willing to toss their soldiers into the cauldron.
Finally, Dennis said nothing about the fact that virtually everyone in his own party, except for such stalwarts as Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters & Lynn Woolsey, is against the idea of withdrawal, and instead are talking about alternative strategies for "success" or "victory" in Iraq. He contented himself with upbeat talk about the resistance of his tiny little antiwar faction, but said nothing about the other 97% of his party. This subject is far too important to be simply omitted or skipped over in this fashion.
Another disappointment was his needlessly nasty treatment of a woman in the crowd who asked the first question during Q & A. She said she had looked into the Congressional Record in January 2005 to see whether or not he had spoken on the floor of the House in opposition to certifying the Nov '04 presidential election. She felt that he, as congressman from Ohio, should have protested against the fraudulence of the Ohio 2004 vote. She said she was unable to find evidence that he had spoken out about the possibility of electoral fraud, and that this had greatly upset her.
This woman was not a particularly confident public speaker. She was unsure of herself, frightened of asking a question in public, and was also not really hostile to Kucinich. Rather, it seemed that she had very much believed in him, believed he was a champion of truth, and was mainly just asking for some reassurance.
The way Dennis handled her question was defensive & unpleasant. He demanded, "Well, would you now like to tell the audience how I voted on the matter of certification?" She replied she didn't know. He then demanded the same question another 2 or 3 times. I was simply at a loss to understand why he found it necessary to beat up on her like this -- it seemed he was deliberately trying to humiliate her for not being fully equipped with total information on the subject. Finally he relented and proudly answered his own question, saying that he had voted against the certification because he felt the Ohio vote had not been honestly conducted.
On balance, I felt this was not a particularly confidence-building appearance. Dennis did say unequivocally that the war was really being fought for oil ("We're not fooling anyone in the rest of the world about that"), and showed he truly opposes the war. That's a lot better than you get with almost any other US politician. However, in many respects, IMHO, there was reason to feel disappointed. Based on this appearance, one could hardly doubt that when the eventual Dem nominee is put forward in about a year from now -- and it's going to be Hillary or Obama, or possibly Edwards -- Kucinich is going to fall in line and back the party nominee again, just as he did for Kerry.
Always knew in my gut that he was a little prick.
(Disclaimer: Let me say in advance that I realize that my criticisms of Dennis may not make everyone here happy. Nonetheless, I'm laying it out there, in the spirit of "call 'em as I see 'em." )
On Saturday evening, after spending the day at the march, I went to see DK speaking at San Francisco's First Unitarian Universalist Church. Dennis was the featured speaker; also appearing on stage were his wife Elizabeth, the mother of Lt Ehren Watada, & Congresswoman Barbara Lee. Sean Penn was there too, but when forced to appear up on stage, he simply said hello to everyone, explaining that he had just quietly arrived by plane from DC, & had hoped no one would notice him(!) Both the Kuciniches and Penn had spoken at the DC protest on Saturday morning.
There were 2 things about the event that I felt unambiguously positive about: the energy of the crowd (which was pulsating & electric, and filled with frank loathing for Bush); and Lt Watada's mother, who spoke honestly, passionately, and with great dignity. I found her a very admirable & impressive person. It's easy to recognize, when listening to her, at least one source of her son's courage & principles.
The crowd & event organizers had hung up quite a number of banners with slogans like "Impeach Bush!" The church's minister (or maybe it was the labor organizer?), who spoke briefly, pointed gleefully to these, and the crowd roared its approval. Then it was announced that the reports from DC indicated that upwards of 500,000 had marched, exceeding all expectations. With that bit of news, the joint was really rocking, by the time Dennis & Barbara Lee arrived.
When Dennis finally spoke, there were several respects in which I found his remarks rather disappointing. He took a question about his stance on impeachment, and basically tried to defuse the hall's enthusiasm for it. His position was that although the Bush administration has in his view committed serious crimes, he felt that starting a push for impeachment now, would dilute the energy that needs to be directed at ending the war. He hastened to add that he's not really opposed to the idea of impeachment, but simply feared this "dilution of energy" problem. He also said that impeachment could wait until after the war has been stopped, because "there is no statute of limitations on these kinds of crimes."
Furthermore, his remarks contained too much of this New Age-y BS. Like many people, I was there to hear what he had to say about impeachment and the war; I don't need to hear too much New Age philosophical jargon. He way over-did that stuff, and I sensed it made the crowd, who was way ahead of him, edgy & impatient.
Then, about the war: his 12-point plan (detailed on his website kucinich.us) depends centrally on moving an international peacekeeping force to Iraq, to guard against further bloodshed. I understand the theory behind this, because the US has deliberately provoked a civil war (a point Dennis did not make), as part of its strategy to divide & conquer. Thus it is indeed possible that if the US were to suddenly withdraw, the Shiites (60% of the population) might proceed to slaughter many of the Sunnis (20%). However, if the plan depends on raising an international force, it could founder on that ground alone! That is, even in the exceedingly unlikely event that the US Congress might be prevailed upon to force a US withdrawal, if this were contingent on raising an international force, it would still fail, because no other countries might be willing to toss their soldiers into the cauldron.
Finally, Dennis said nothing about the fact that virtually everyone in his own party, except for such stalwarts as Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters & Lynn Woolsey, is against the idea of withdrawal, and instead are talking about alternative strategies for "success" or "victory" in Iraq. He contented himself with upbeat talk about the resistance of his tiny little antiwar faction, but said nothing about the other 97% of his party. This subject is far too important to be simply omitted or skipped over in this fashion.
Another disappointment was his needlessly nasty treatment of a woman in the crowd who asked the first question during Q & A. She said she had looked into the Congressional Record in January 2005 to see whether or not he had spoken on the floor of the House in opposition to certifying the Nov '04 presidential election. She felt that he, as congressman from Ohio, should have protested against the fraudulence of the Ohio 2004 vote. She said she was unable to find evidence that he had spoken out about the possibility of electoral fraud, and that this had greatly upset her.
This woman was not a particularly confident public speaker. She was unsure of herself, frightened of asking a question in public, and was also not really hostile to Kucinich. Rather, it seemed that she had very much believed in him, believed he was a champion of truth, and was mainly just asking for some reassurance.
The way Dennis handled her question was defensive & unpleasant. He demanded, "Well, would you now like to tell the audience how I voted on the matter of certification?" She replied she didn't know. He then demanded the same question another 2 or 3 times. I was simply at a loss to understand why he found it necessary to beat up on her like this -- it seemed he was deliberately trying to humiliate her for not being fully equipped with total information on the subject. Finally he relented and proudly answered his own question, saying that he had voted against the certification because he felt the Ohio vote had not been honestly conducted.
On balance, I felt this was not a particularly confidence-building appearance. Dennis did say unequivocally that the war was really being fought for oil ("We're not fooling anyone in the rest of the world about that"), and showed he truly opposes the war. That's a lot better than you get with almost any other US politician. However, in many respects, IMHO, there was reason to feel disappointed. Based on this appearance, one could hardly doubt that when the eventual Dem nominee is put forward in about a year from now -- and it's going to be Hillary or Obama, or possibly Edwards -- Kucinich is going to fall in line and back the party nominee again, just as he did for Kerry.
Always knew in my gut that he was a little prick.