What is Digg?Sponsored by Threadless
The Threadless Holiday Sale view!
threadless.com - Threadless.com's Black Friday sale is full of awesomeness. $9 all day long.
139 Comments
- muymalgal, on 01/20/2008, -11/+77the only thing about this story that i feel is suprising, is,.....just how INCREDIBLY AFRAID they are of what would happen if Denis WERE given the opportunity to run.
- hamhat, on 01/20/2008, -7/+60Do not let the media/courts choose the leaders of the nation.
- aslave2thegrind, on 01/20/2008, -6/+58The ***** meter just went off the charts, and I'm not even a Kucinich guy...I like Paul, who placed 2nd in the Nevada primary, but this is just unbelievably and undeniably...*****.
- pintomp3, on 01/20/2008, -1/+37party oath? wtf? his loyalty is to the country, not the party.
- Meekus, on 01/20/2008, -1/+30Its is entirely too rare these days when I can call a politician a good man. I believe Kucinich to be a good man.
- Sphike, on 01/20/2008, -3/+31Media = Fourth branch of Government.
- deadmoo, on 01/20/2008, -2/+26The Green Party should ask Kucinich to seek their nomination. Gravel could be his running mate. I think both of them are closer to the Green Party ideologically. Democrats have lost their way.
- jumbobrian, on 01/20/2008, -1/+24Dugg for:
"Kucinich and singer-supporter Willie Nelson..."
Any article that mentions Kucinich and Willie Nelson in the same sentence has my support. - newsfrommars, on 01/20/2008, -3/+23again?
- spyd3rweb, on 01/20/2008, -0/+19Vote for the candidate, not the party.
- inactive, on 01/20/2008, -2/+18It's a popularity contest. Democracy. Informed decision is almost always kept out of the process. So this shouldn't be a surprise in our sad system. But it should definitely be seen as shameful, and extremely depressing.
- madisonskyline, on 01/20/2008, -0/+16I refuse to vote for the lesser of the two evils. Kucinich is a badass. I'm writing him in, damn it. Who's with me?
- Frostman3D, on 01/20/2008, -0/+15I'm an American, not a "party member" I support who I think is the right man or woman for the job, and I'm damn sure not going to let ANYBODY decide who I support, nor should Dennis Kucinich.
- zephc, on 01/20/2008, -0/+15Political parties are inherently flawed as they promote groupthink via voting along party lines, instead of on a per-issue or per-candidate basis.
- inactive, on 01/20/2008, -4/+19As Americans, even if you hate Kucinich I ask of you to ***** protest this *****. This is not about Dennis Kucinich but freedom of speech, he has a right to be at that debate. They want you to vote for who they like, this is an outrage people. And its bitter irony to the fact that people think they are bringing justice to countries like Iraq when there seems to be a lot lacking in America.
- rosullivan, on 01/20/2008, -1/+15I'm a life-long Texan, a "reformed" former conservative voter, and I vote EVERY chance given, so I've earned the right to say this: ***** the DNC, those cowardly bastards. ***** the RNC, too, for backing Rick Perry, and ***** career politicians who want to keep giving away my hard-earned tax money to the upper 1%.
- pintomp3, on 01/20/2008, -1/+14no, he didn't throw his supporters behind obama. in a very specific example, he told his voters that obama is a good 2nd choice. in caucuses in iowa where he wasn't going to get the minimum 15%, he told his supporters to switch to obama. of course the corporate media reported this as "kucinich endorses obama" and blocked him out from the rest of the debates.
- pimpofpixels, on 01/20/2008, -1/+12Ahh Kucinich. He's principled and honest and therefore he can never win.
This is a perfect example.
He disagreed philosophically with a rule, and he wasn't willing to lie about it. Hence he's removed from the ballet.
It's amazing he's lasted in politics for so long with such old fashioned values. - alvinrod, on 01/20/2008, -1/+10Which just goes to show that the Democrats are just as corrupt as Republicans when it comes down to it. Stop voting for these crappy parties and switch to a third party that represents you. More than likely you'll find that they better represent your positions than the two major parties do now. Unless I really like the candidate that either party pushes forward, I'm voting third party just to show these ***** I'm not putting up with their crap any more.
- pintomp3, on 01/20/2008, -0/+9anything involving elections for public office should never be "private"
- frostpoint, on 01/20/2008, -0/+9The Texas Democratic Party is not required to make their policies abide by the constitution. The Supreme Court was right not to intervene. Sure, the whole thing is flawed, but direct your anger at the Texas Democratic Party, not the courts or media.
- vwvan, on 01/20/2008, -3/+11i went to a Hillary rally, half of us sat in bleachers, watching the other half eat steak and shrimp.
i went to an Obama office, asked for specifics, they just had blank looks.
Kucinich, i just wanted him to be part of the process, he has been denied that right. that pisses me off. - inactive, on 01/20/2008, -3/+11not even remotely the point
- jdevilz, on 01/20/2008, -1/+9It's unfortunate Kucinich can't get any type of backing for his presidential bid because I like his views...and it's unfortunate that people only think he's in the race to build his ego (his wife should give him plenty to brag about)...but the best thing about Kucinich's unrelenting nature is that he's going above and beyond to expose the fraud that has become our election processes. He's got my vote on February 5th.
- HiKevinRose, on 01/20/2008, -4/+12How the ***** can ANYONE deny ANYONE ELSE the ability to run for President? Why do candidates even have to be on a particular party? The ***** media should be giving them money and air-time because they are the candidates which makes them news, period.
What a ***** ***** country we live in. I hate this kind of crap. - hollyminkowski, on 01/20/2008, -3/+11Kucinich is a good man...and this is a damnable shame :-(
- DebbilsAdvocate, on 01/20/2008, -1/+9It's a little disturbing though, and just more evidence that the Democrats are no different than Republicans, demanding your loyalty if you want to partake in democracy. Every vote counts, as long as you vote the way they want you to.
- frontporsche, on 01/20/2008, -2/+9My respect for Kucinich just went up again. Now Kucinich and Paul are at the top of my list, Hillary and Huckabee at the bottom.
- captoftheworld, on 01/20/2008, -3/+10All can say is... WTF!?
- grakker, on 01/20/2008, -3/+10Huh? I support Kucinich. But just because he says to support another guy doesn't mean I will. I looked at the candidates voting records and was a little dismayed that Clinton did better than Obama. I will vote for Kucinich in the primary.
- inactive, on 01/20/2008, -3/+10Nobody is afraid of Kucinich running. Read the election laws - if you have an issue with how they read and how they are carried out, you should press for them to be changed.
- pands, on 01/20/2008, -1/+7thatsa pretty great gimick with the cute lil icon and every thing
- nosecohn, on 01/20/2008, -0/+6What's notable about this whole thing is how his own party, which he's been a member of for many years, doesn't want anything to do with him. They're refusing to put him on the ballot because he wouldn't sign a loyalty pledge? What is this... high school???
And when NBC excluded him from the debate earlier this week, it really should have been the Democratic party suing to allow him back in, not Kucinich himself. At the very least, they should have withdrawn their support, as the New Hampshire GOP did when Fox excluded Ron Paul.
Kucinich is closer to traditional Democratic party positions than any other candidate (except maybe Gravel) and they only want to distance themselves from him. Even him contributing his ideas to the public debate is unacceptable. - pintomp3, on 01/20/2008, -1/+7the democratic party has become a watered down version of the republican party. progressives are trying to take back the party by backing people like donna edwards in maryland. they tried with ned lamont, but the republican party threw their entire weight behind lieiberman. challenging democratic incumbents and replacing them with real progressives, they may be able to swing the party towards the progressive side and bring some real change. it is too soon at the presidential level, entrenched democrats and the DNC will not back someone like kucinich.
- pintomp3, on 01/20/2008, -0/+5once elected? his duty is always to the country. as should be all of ours.
- InspectorGadget, on 01/20/2008, -0/+5Pick one. Every generation exaggerates their own significance. Lincoln-Douglas debates come to mind, for one.
- LloydBentsen, on 01/20/2008, -0/+5no, 2nd.
- ToastyMallows, on 01/20/2008, -8/+13I'm so confused, this country is going backward and the sheeple don't feel like lifting a finger to stop it.
- whataboutdave, on 01/20/2008, -4/+9The DNC is its own entity and can decide the rules for its contests. That said, the point is moot. Obama and Clinton are miles ahead of all other Democratic candidates.
- mysteri0usdrx, on 01/20/2008, -2/+7That is neither witty nor poignant. Go away troll.
- 629951, on 01/20/2008, -2/+6If it's "our country" Why is it "you people stop it"?
Stand up and be counted yourself and do something!! - diggn_it, on 01/20/2008, -1/+5Anyone who uses "sheeple" needs to put DOWN the bong, get a job, and shut the ***** up. This has been a public service announcement from The People Who Actually Read the Story And Realized That Obviously He Can't Be On The Democratic Ballot If He Did Not Agree To the Conditions Associated With It. thank you.
- masprema, on 01/20/2008, -0/+4like we the people elected GWB.
- Richandler, on 01/20/2008, -0/+4You point out an important point. The democrats aren't even really part of the government. They are a seperate entity and don't have to answer to anyone until their members are elected to office.
- rnwen2750, on 01/20/2008, -0/+4I think the meaning of the capitalization went over your head.
- StarWarsFan, on 01/20/2008, -0/+3Kucinich is a true American hero.
- macman2k, on 01/20/2008, -0/+3These kinds of oaths are becoming more and more popular among the political parties. Recently the Virginia Republican Party changed the rules to require all voters to sign an oath stating that "they intend to vote for the eventual Republican nominee in the Presidential race, whomever that may be".
These kind of tactics lock all honest individuals out of the primaries because the whole point of primaries is to filter out Republican or Democratic candidates whom you could not support in the general election. I know many Kucinich and Paul supporters who could not honestly or ethically support anyone else in their party (even if they have been a life long Republican or Democrat). No one can know in advance who will ultimately win nor how they will win their parties nomination (popular vote, vote fraud, super delegates, or assassination of the competition).
These political parties are attempting to say they have one platform and all of their candidates support it, when the reality is that Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul are diametrically opposed to the vast majority of the positions of the media-selected front runners. Allowing these parties to force these kinds of oaths means that there are only two candidates who can run, "Mr. Republican" and "Mr. Democrat", and that their platforms are decided by the elite party members. The population loses all control over the platform of the parties. When you are forced to chose between Hitler or Saddam democracy becomes a farce.
Even though I disagree with Dennis on many of his big-government, socialistic programs, he is the ONLY Democratic candidate with enough intellectual honesty to know that he cannot make a pledge to support an unnamed individual and that to do so he would have to compromise his own integrity by promising to support candidates that promote positions he abhors.
Dennis also rightly points out that such a pledge would sign away his right to free speech during the general election and his right to run as a third party. How long will the masses yield to these dishonest political parties?
Lastly, no one should be required to take an oath to support any individual for any reason! A mans loyalty is to the truth and his God. These oaths are the foundation of the "rule of man" instead of the "rule of law". Such oaths are used by kings and dictators, not by representatives in a constitutional republic! -
Show 51 - 100 of 144 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is