Archive for the ‘Dennis Kucinich’ Category

Dennis Kucinich: To Impeach, or Not to Impeach? That Is the Question

July 30, 2008

Alright – here’s another one of my stories that I’m posting as a catch-up from vacation.

Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) testified before the House Judiciary Committee (chaired by John Conyers [D-MI]), saying, “The decision before us is whether to demand accountability for one of the gravest injustices imaginable.”

Conyers reminded everybody that House rules specifically prohibit “personal abuse, innuendo or ridicule of the president,” so no direct accusations at the president were really supposed to be made, but that was largely ignored.  In fact, the hearing wasn’t an impeachment hearing, but actually was entitled, “Executive Power and Its Constitutional Limitations.”

I’ll briefly sum up the witnesses:

  • Former Los Angeles County Prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi (he tried Charles Manson), author of The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, was obviously in favor of impeachment.
  • Bruce Fein, a Deputy Attorney General in the Reagan administration – one of the smartest men I’ve ever seen.  He’s a Constitutional Law attorney and was just BRILLIANT about anything legal or historic.  The man was like an encyclopedia.  He was also in favor of impeachment, but didn’t let that bias his testimony.  He seemed to be the fairest and the most unbiased of them all.
  • Former Representative Elizabeth Holtzman (D-NY) – she was strongly for impeachment, but didn’t testify much.
  • Former Representative Bob Barr (R-GA), turned Libertarian.  Now their party’s Presidential nominee – for impeachment, but he had to leave early, and didn’t testify much.
  • Ross “Rocky” Anderson, founder of High Roads for Human Rights and former mayor of Salt Lake City – he, didn’t testify much, and had to leave early, also for impeachment.
  • Stephen Presser, from the the Northwestern University School of Law – very smart.  He said that if the allegations are true (that Bush lied to get us deliberately into a war), he should be impeached, but he says he doesn’t interpret the evidence the way that the pro-impeachment people do.  A VERY smart man, but I think his bias stood in the way some.  Overall, I probably agreed with him the most (a cross between him and Fein).
  • Jeremy Rabkin, from the George Mason University School of Law – you could tell he was VERY biased, but he shared the argument that Presser had, regarding the evidence.
  • Elliot Adams, President of Veterans for Peace – pro-impeachment.  I think he left early as well – I didn’t hear much from him. from the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law – He also sat on the Church Committee, and was pro-impeachment, but not the the bias of Bugliosi.
  • Frederick A. O. Schwarz Jr.,

Kucinich’s articles of impeachment have yet to reach the full House, but the impeachment is not expected to go anywhere, and would probably fail in the House.  I’m not sure if the Committee voted on it at all, or not.

Overall, it was a VERY interesting hearing (I saw most of it [about the last 4 hours] the first time, and then the beginning 2 hours when I watched the re-run).  Of course, my sister mocked me for watching C-SPAN on our vacation, but I loved it.  I even had my father watching it.

Here’s my opinion: I don’t think that Bush intentionally lied to get us into Iraq.  On that note, I can’t see us impeaching him.

One of the things that Fein brought up a lot was his refusal to obey Congress and send people to testify (which I think they SHOULD do, as I indicated about Karl Rove).  He brought up some of the wiretapping and surveillance stuff.  And honestly, those are the areas that I could see a real impeachment case come up, NOT over Iraq.

But here’s the problem – we’ve only got 6 more months of Bush in office.  The amount of time and money that would go into an investigation would not make it worth it, because the Republicans in Congress would never vote to impeach Bush.  The Democrats don’t have enough support (just like the Republicans didn’t with Clinton), and I don’t see this to be a wise decision.

If Congress wants to investigate Bush after he leaves office, I say, sure, go ahead!  But I just cannot justify an investigation when we know the outcome of the impeachment.  I’m not taking a side on the impeachment.  I think a LOT of what Bush has done has gone WAY over the limits of the Constitution, but many war-time Presidents have done the same.  I would not be opposed to an investigation into this Administration, but I see an impeachment more of a way to make the Republicans look bad in an election year, than an actual attempt to remove Bush from office.

I know I’m going to take some heat from Republicans for saying this stuff, but I’m tired of partisan wars.  If Bush has done nothing wrong, an investigation will show that, but I think that, considering the severity of the accusations, for the good of the country, we do need an investigation.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Geraldine Ferraro Steps Down from Clinton’s Campaign

March 16, 2008

OK, so Geraldine Ferraro (former Congresswoman and Vice Presidential candidate with Walter Mondale; also former member of Senator Clinton’s Presidential election finance committee), in an interview with the Daily Breeze (Torrance, California) last week, said, “If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position.  And if he was a woman, he would not be in this position.  He happens to be very lucky to be who he is.  And the country is caught up in the concept.”  Ferraro also accused the “sexist media” of attacking Clinton too much.

Now, here’s my thoughts on her comments.  Were they out of line?  Yes.  Were they partially correct?  Yes, but because of different reasons than what were behind her comments.  I think that originally (this means back before Iowa), Obama’s race helped him in the media (just like the media helped McCain in New Hampshire once he became the leader in ONE poll.  The media jumped and said – “OH MY GOSH!  HE’S BACK IN IT!!!!!”  And that’s what got him back in the race.  Without the media pouncing on a single poll, he never would’ve become the nominee.  Without the media jumping on Huckabee for doing so well in the debates, he never would’ve won Iowa or even been a contender in South Carolina.).  The point is – the media helps everybody (normally – Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel, and Alan Keyes would be exceptions), and it was Obama’s race and charisma that got the media’s attention.

So, was it his race that got him this far?  Partially, but if he were white, it would have been some other quality.  And I would say that his charisma has helped him out MUCH more than his race ever could.

OK, so Ferraro, in response to a lot of  media attention on her, told the Daily Breeze, “Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says, ‘Let’s address reality and the problems we’re facing in this world,’ you’re accused of being racist, so you have to shut up.  Racism works in two different directions.  I really think they’re attacking me because I’m white.  How’s that?”

She also told  FOX News, “I got up and the question was asked, ‘Why do you think Barack Obama is in the place he is today’ as the party’s delegate front-runner?  I said in large measure, because he is black.  I said, Let me also say in 1984 — and if I have said it once, I have said it 20, 60, 100 times — in 1984, if my name was Gerard Ferraro instead of Geraldine Ferraro, I would never have been the nominee for vice president.”

David Axelrod, the top strategist for the Obama campaign, said that Clinton should sever any ties that she has with Ferraro, saying, “When you wink and nod at offensive statements, you’re really sending a signal to your supporters that anything goes.”  He said that Ferraro’s comment, plus Clinton’s “own inexplicable unwillingness” to deny that Obama is a Muslim, was part of “an insidious pattern that needs to be addressed.”

Senator Obama said that Ferraro’s statements were “patently absurd.”

He told the Allentown Morning Call that “I don’t think Geraldine Ferraro’s comments have any place in our politics or in the Democratic Party.  They are divisive.  I think anybody who understands the history of this country knows they are patently absurd.  And I would expect that the same way those comments don’t have a place in my campaign, they shouldn’t have a place in Sen. Clinton’s, either.

Now, I find this kinda funny.  Axelrod wants Clinton to immediately disassociate from Ferraro, but it took Obama how many years to disassociate from his pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright?

Senator Clinton issued a statement to the Associated Press saying that “It is regrettable that any of our supporters on both sides, because we’ve both had that experience, say things that kind of veer off into the personal.  We ought to keep this on the issues.  There are differences between us.  There are differences between our approaches on health care, on energy, on our experience, on our results that we’ve produced for people.  That’s what this campaign should be about.”

Senator Obama later said, “I think that her comments were … ridiculous. … I think they were wrong-headed.  I think they are not borne out by our history or by the facts.  The notion that it is a great advantage to me, an African-American named Barack Obama, in pursuit of the presidency I think is not a view that has been commonly shared by the general public.  Divisions of race, gender, of region are precisely what has inhibited us from moving effectively forward to solve big problems like health care, energy, the war on terror.

On Wednesday, Ferraro sent her letter of resignation to Senator Clinton, saying, “I am stepping down from your finance committee so I can speak for myself and you can continue to speak for yourself about what is at stake in this campaign.  The Obama campaign is attacking me to hurt you.  I won’t let that happen.”

She then told CNN that the Clinton campaign did not ask her to resign and that her and Clinton are still on good terms.  She said that she was “absolutely not” sorry for what she said, and that “I am who I am and I will continue to speak up.”  She went on to criticize Obama and his campaign for attempting to keep her from exercising her First Amendment rights.

So, to summarize, I think that Ferraro was out of line (but what she said was partially true), but there is a HUGE double standard in the fact that Ferraro was so criticized by the Obama campaign who has up until recently ignored Reverend Wright’s comments.

I think both candidates need to put this behind them, or the infighting is going to tear down their party more (big shame).

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Final Mississippi Primary Results: Obama & McCain Won

March 14, 2008

OK, I know they’re a little late, but I got kinda busy, so here are the official uncertified Mississippi primary results with all of the precincts reporting:

Democrats:

  1. Obama 255,809 60.80% 19 delegates
  2. Clinton 155,686 37.00% 14 delegates
  3. Edwards 3,894 0.93%
  4. Biden 1,784 0.42%
  5. Richardson 1,365 0.32%
  6. Kucinich 895 0.21%
  7. Dodd 731 0.17%
  8. Gravel 587 0.14%

And the Republicans:

  1. McCain 113,074 78.91% 36 delegates
  2. Huckabee 17,943 12.52%
  3. Paul 5,510 3.85%
  4. Romney 2,177 1.52%
  5. Thompson 2,160 1.51%
  6. Giuliani 945 0.66%
  7. Keyes 842 0.58%
  8. Hunter 414 0.29%
  9. Tancredo 221 0.15%

Now, can anybody help me understand what exactly happened in Noxubee county?  These results are correct – a friend called the county clerk and verified them, but they had no clue what went on here either:

  1. McCain 181 44.04%
  2. Thompson 47 11.44%
  3. Tancredo 40 9.73%
  4. Romney 37 9.00%
  5. Paul 34 8.27%
  6. Huckabee 24 5.84%
  7. Keyes 23 5.60%
  8. Hunter 16 3.89%
  9. Giuliani 9 2.19%

Again – those are some WEIRD results – the only county in Mississippi that McCain didn’t at least get 70% in.  If we have a resident of Noxubee, I would LOVE your input!

Done Reporting/Counting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Final Florida Primary Results and Updated Delegate Count

February 1, 2008

OK, the final results are in from the Florida Department of State, and here are the totals for the Republicans:

Date State Candidate Votes % Delegates RNC Delegates Total Delegates Delegate Count
29-Jan Florida Huckabee 260,209 13.48% 0 0 0 31
  Romney 598,226 30.98% 0 0 0 68
  Thompson 22,419 1.16% 0 0 0 0
  McCain 695,746 36.04% 57 0 57 97
  Paul 62,356 3.23% 0 0 0 6
  Giuliani 283,360 14.68% 0 0 0 0
  Keyes 4,010 0.21% 0 0 0 0
  Tancredo 1,558 0.08% 0 0 0 0
    Hunter 2,820 0.15% 0 0 0 0

And here’s a chart of the current delegate count (I’m assuming that Giuliani’s 2 will go to McCain, but until that becomes semi-official, I just won’t count them.  Here’s what’s changed: I took away Thompson’s 3 delegates from Iowa and Wyoming, and Hunter’s 1 from Wyoming.  Thompson lost 2 from Nevada and Giuliani lost 1 in Nevada and Maine, while Romney and McCain gained 1 in Kansas.  McCain also gained 1 in Idaho.

Republican Delegate Count as of 1-31-08

And here’s the Democratic Primary results:

Date State Candidate Votes % Delegates Superdelegates Total Delegates Delegate Count
29-Jan Florida Obama 571,333 32.89% 0 0 0 158
  Edwards 249,945 14.39% 0 0 0 62
  Clinton 865,099 49.80% 0 0 0 232
  Richardson 14,891 0.86% 0 0 0 0
  Dodd 5,432 0.31% 0 0 0 0
  Biden 15,599 0.90% 0 0 0 0
  Uncommitted 0.00% 0 0 0 0
  Kucinich 9,537 0.55% 0 0 0 0
    Gravel 5,264 0.30% 0 0 0 0

And here are the changes made to the delegate counts (I’ll take Edwards’s delegates away after his delegates either repledge themselves or unpledge themselves – kinda waiting on a possible endorsement): Obama gained 2 in California and 1 in Massachusetts, while Clinton gained 1 in New Mexico and 1 in the Virgin Islands.  Obama gained 1 in Maryland and Rhode Island, while Edwards gained 1 in Texas.  Obama gained a final pledge from Vermont.

Democratic Delegate Count as of 1-31-08

Done Reporting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: ::

Florida Primary Results as of 11:00 P.M.: McCain, Clinton Win

January 30, 2008

OK, here’s my last update for the night.  As of 11:00 P.M., here’s the Florida primary results:

For the Democrats with 94% reporting:

  1. Clinton 832,635 50%
  2. Obama 552,421 33%
  3. Edwards 242,294 14%
  4. Kucinich 9,272 1%

And here are the results for the Republicans with 94% also reporting:

  1. McCain 675,961 36%
  2. Romney 581,740 31%
  3. Giuliani 274,943 15%
  4. Huckabee 253,233 14%
  5. Paul 60,388 3%
  6. Thompson 21,734 1%
  7. Hunter 2,697 0%

No delegates will be awarded to the Democrats, since they broke DNC rules.  57 delegates will be awarded to McCain, since Florida is a winner take all state (that’s half of the original 114, since they broke RNC rules).

Giuliani is expected to drop out and endorse McCain, which practically ends this race unless McCain kills kittens on live TV.  What now becomes important is McCain’s running mate.  Since McCain isn’t exactly a spring chicken, he’s going to have to pick a VERY likeable VP candidate, so that people can say, “If McCain dies in office, do I want ________ running the nation.”

Finally, I’d just like to say that although McCain isn’t on my list of favorites, I’d vote for him before any pro-choice anti-war Democrat.

Back in September I said that McCain was dead, but “Mac is back.”  But I’ll still hold out for a Super Tuesday miracle.  With that, good night, and good luck.

Done Reporting,

Ranting Republican

P.S., for a good laugh, see the comments here: http://inkslwc.wordpress.com/2008/01/29/florida-primary-results-as-of-915-pm-mccain-wins/ and http://inkslwc.wordpress.com/2008/01/29/florida-primary-results-as-of-800-pm-called-for-hillary/.  And let me assure you that I’ve been called much worse than a “sack of shit waste of my air.”
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: ::

Final Results from the South Carolina Democratic Primary

January 27, 2008

OK, all of the numbers are in, so here’s the final count from the South Carolina Democratic Primary:

Date State Candidate Votes % Delegates Superdelegates Total Delegates Delegate Count
26-Jan South Carolina Obama 295,214 55.44% 25 1 26 152
  Edwards 93,576 17.57% 8 0 8 61
  Clinton 141,217 26.52% 12 2 14 230
  Richardson 727 0.14% 0 0 0 0
  Dodd 247 0.05% 0 0 0 0
  Biden 694 0.13% 0 0 0 0
  Uncommitted 0.00% 0 0 0 0
  Kucinich 552 0.10% 0 0 0 0
    Gravel 241 0.05% 0 0 0 0

A couple of changes to the delegate count: Obama received a pledge from South Carolina; Clinton received 3 from Arizona, 2 from California, and 1 from Colorado.  Edwards lost one in Massachusetts (unless it was my error in awarding him one before) and gained 1 in Missouri.  Obama received 1 in New Mexico and Virginia, while Kucinich lost his only delegate which was in Ohio (since he dropped out).  Clinton gained 1 in Texas and Obama 1 in Mississippi.  Both Edwards and Clinton received a delegate from Pennsylvania, and Clinton received 1 from Kentucky and Puerto Rico.

Here’s a chart of the delegates:

Democratic Delegate Count as of 1-27-08

Done Reporting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: ::

Prediction for South Carolina Democratic Primary: Obama Wins

January 26, 2008

OK, according to my calculations of polls released up through today (so that’s polling done through the 25th), here’s what the results of today’s South Carolina Democratic Primary SHOULD be:

  1. Obama 43.704%
  2. Clinton 33.792%
  3. Edwards 22.363%
  4. Gravel 0.140%

Margin of Error: 4.044%

Here’s my personal prediction:

  1. Obama 44%
  2. Clinton 32%
  3. Edwards 22%
  4. Others 2%

Remember, this is a caucus, so Obama will do a little better than he would in a caucus.  I think Kucinich supporters may still vote for him just out of principle and Gravel will get some – that accounts for the 2%.  It’s practically over for Clinton unless she can win in Florida (which she probably will) and build enough momentum for Super Tuesday (which she probably won’t) (not that I ever had any faith in her candidacy).

Done Predicting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: ::

Dennis Kucinich Surprisingly Drops Out of the Presidential Race

January 25, 2008

In a surprise move Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) has decided to drop out of the Democratic nomination race.  The move came as he is facing a tough primary for the Democratic nomination for his House seat.  The former mayor of Cleveland and 6-term Congressman has 4 opponents going into the March 4th primary.  Joe Cimperman, one of his opponents and a Cleveland City Council member, has accused Kucinich of being a “part-time Congressman” who has been more concerned about pursuing the Presidency than being a Congressman.

This is all coming right after Kucinich posted “An Urgent Personal Appeal” on his Congressional election website.

Kucinich now plan on introducing a movement to impeach President Bush, similar to the movement that he made to impeach Vice President Cheney last year.

Is Kucinich a “part-time Congressman”?  Perhaps.  But I think the Congress accomplishes more when he’s gone than when he’ introducing motions to impeach people who we KNOW won’t get impeached.  Stop wasting the Congress’s time, Mr. Kucinich and introduce a real bill.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: ::

Final Results from Nevada and South Carolina

January 21, 2008

Here’s the results of the Republican side from yesterday, first the results from the Nevada caucus  (where the “Votes” category refers to state delegates) and then the South Carolina primary:

Date State Candidate Votes % Delegates RNC Delegates Total Delegates Delegate Count
19-Jan Nevada Huckabee 3,616 8.16% 2 0 2 31
State Delegates Romney 22,649 51.10% 18 0 18 68
  Thompson 3,521 7.94% 2 0 2 8
  McCain 5,651 12.75% 4 0 4 40
  Paul 6,087 13.73% 4 0 4 6
  Giuliani 1,910 4.31% 1 0 1 2
  Hunter 890 2.01% 0 0 0 1
   
  South Carolina Huckabee 128,908 29.91% 5 0 5
  Romney 64,970 15.08% 0 0 0
  Thompson 67,897 15.76% 0 0 0
  McCain 143,224 33.24% 19 0 19
  Paul 15,773 3.66% 0 0 0
  Giuliani 9,112 2.11% 0 0 0
    Hunter 1,035 0.24% 0 0 0

And here’s the chart for the current delegate count (just a note, my delegate count differs from CNN’s which many people use because they calculated Michigan’s incorrectly):

Republican Delegate Count as of 1-20-08

And here’s the results from Nevada for the Democrats (again the “Votes” are state delegates):

Date State Candidate Votes % Delegates Superdelegates Total Delegates Delegate Count
19-Jan Nevada Obama 4,773 45.19% 13 1 14 123
State Delegates Edwards 396 3.75% 0 0 0 52
  Clinton 5,355 50.71% 12 2 14 210
  Richardson 0 0.00% 0 0 0 1
  Dodd 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0
  Biden 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0
  Uncommitted 31 0.29% 0 0 0 0
  Kucinich 5 0.05% 0 0 0 1
  Other 1 0.01% 0 0 0  
    Gravel 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0

OK, some changes occurred since Richardson dropped out (Obama gained most, if not all of his delegates – I can’t tell for all of the states – such as California – but he at least got a 15 of Richardsons 19):

Clinton gained a Superdelegate from Iowa and Nevada while Obama gained 1 in Nevada as well.  Obama received a delegate from Alabama while Clinton gained a pledge from American Samoa.  Obama inherited Richardson’s Arizona delegate.  In California, Richardson’s 3 delegates became unpledged while Obama gained 6 and Clinton gained 4.  Obama received Richardson’s Colorado delegate.  In Connecticut, Obama and Clinton gained a delegate while Clinton gained 2 delegates in Delaware.  Obama received another delegate from Georgia, 5 from Illinois, 1 from Massachusetts, 2 in Minnesota, and 3 in Missouri where Richardson lost his delegate.  Clinton gained a delegate from New Jersey and Richardson’s 7 delegates from New Mexico and 1 from Oklahoma became unpledged.  Obama received a delegate from Tennessee and Clinton 1 from Louisiana.  Obama received another delegate from Nebraska, Maryland, and Virginia, while Clinton gained one in Maryland as well.  One of Richardson’s 4 delegates went to Texas while the other 3 became unpledged.  Obama received a delegate from Vermont and inherited Richardson’s one delegate from Pennsylvania.  North Carolina gave a delegate to Obama and Clinton.  And finally, Obama received one last pledge from South Dakota.

So, here’s the Democratic Delegate Count:

Democratic Delegate Count as of  1-20-08

I’ll give some updates on what else is going on in the near future for the elections – but right now I have to do another post on Ron Paul’s new fundraiser.  But I will do an analysis on Duncan Hunter’s drop out.  I think that he’ll probably endorse McCain if anybody.  He seems the closest to him.  Although it won’t do much, it could help Romney out if he can stay competetive through California and perhaps give him the needed 2-3% that will push him into winning.  Who knows – I’ll keep you updated.

Done Reporting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: ::

Analysis of Kucinich’s Lawsuit Against NBC Universal Inc.

January 18, 2008

OK, so on Monday, the Nevada Supreme Court heard the appeal case of Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) against NBC Universal (NBC lost the first case), Inc.  Kucinich was suing NBC for banning him (after inviting him) to the Las Vegas debate.  Kucinich tried to argue the “Equal Time” Rule, but that rule does not apply to cable TV stations such as MSNBC.  Even if it WERE a publicly broadcast TV station, the Democratic party could still bar him from debating.  It’s ultimately the TV station’s First Amendment rights (as well as the DNC’s).

I agree with the ruling here.  I also agree with FOX keeping Ron Paul out of the debate- as much as it hurts Democracy and voters, it’s their choice.  If we forced all candidates to be allowed into debates, you’d have a potential of 21 Republicans (21 were on the New Hampshire ballot) and 21 Democrats.  That’s ridiculous.  The parties need to be able to control their debates.

Kucinich never further appealed the Nevada High Court’s ruling.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: ::


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 288 other followers

%d bloggers like this: