Robert Naiman wrote: > > Yeah, I do disagree with that assessment, you won't be surprised to know. > > Dennis Kucinich is a "Democrat."
No. Kucinich is a badge the DP wears on its lapel to confuse issue. Kucinich WILLINGLY offers himself up to perform this service. The only effect he has on the United States is to provide a misleading example in discussions of this sort. In a way, this makes him rather worse than Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Albert, LBJ, and other participants in mass murder. He pretends to know better but willingly lets himself be used to defend these criminals. Shame on him! The difference between him and the criminals who lead the DP will never show up in the life conditions of a single resident of the U.S. It will never lengthen the life of a single victim of u.s. bombing. The difference does not exist except in left apologetics for the DP. Carrol > > Either the political differences between Kucinich and Clinton matter, > or else that critique is not enough. > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Carrol Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Robert Naiman wrote: > >> > >> > >> But just as progressive folks shouldn't be Obamamaniacs, neither > >> should they be the crude negation of that. > > > > Then you disagree with the assessment of Obama contained in the > > proposition, "He's a Democrat, for God's sake"? > > > > I myself have never found it necessary to go further than this with any > > DP politician since Wayne Morse was defeated for reelection. > > > > This of course is dogmatism, but it is also a dogma which has been > > confrimed empirically month after month, year after year, for half a > > century. > > > > Carrol > > _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
