Dennis J. Kucinich and his lovely, tall, beautiful and sexy new wife Elizabeth Harper Kucinich.
Posted on 08/01/2007 7:29:25 AM PDT by rface
Do long-shot presidential candidates Dennis J. Kucinich, a Democrat, and Ron Paul, a Libertarian-turned-Republican, play any useful role in their respective parties' nomination contests?
Clearly, the likelihood of either of these two congressmen being nominated is roughly equivalent to my chances of starting at left tackle for the Ravens this season........
But there is a case to be made for their inclusion, even their necessity, and that case boils down to a single issue in which thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars are at stake: Iraq.
Indeed, when it comes to the war, the sixth-term, 60-year-old Democrat and his 10th-term, 71-year-old Republican colleague sound very similar.
"I have been one of the strongest opponents of military action against Iraq," Mr. Paul said during the floor debate over one recent legislative proposal to start pulling the troops back. "I voted against the initial authorization in 2002 ...... I believe our troops should be brought back to the United States without delay."
At almost every opportunity, Mr. Kucinich also reminds listeners that he was the only Democratic candidate to vote against the war and appropriating subsequent funds to continue it - a statement clearly intended to contrast himself with, if not partially embarrass, his fellow Democrats.
......in a country where majorities think the war was a mistake, has not been worth it, has aggravated terrorism risks for the country and needs to end, is it a bad thing to have two quirky gadflies who hold their colleagues to account for the biggest policy fiasco in decades?
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
Paul/Kucinich ‘08!
And Michael Moore can be their SecDef!
At least he's consistent. And meanwhile, once again the dems will nominate someone who voted FOR the war and then turned against it.
Honorable Ron Paul bump
Don’t worry! There will be no election in 2008.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/07/31/2874/
Ron Paul's consistent anti-Americanism is hardly a recommendation for office.
One might as well nominate Louis Farrakhan on similar grounds.
I wouldn't say he's anti-American. He's definitely a rigid isolationist, and his advocacy of an immediate pullout is irresponsible. I'm just saying that unlike Shrillary, or John Kerry, he's been consistent. It is far worse, in my view, to have voted for the war and THEN advocate anti war positions.
Ron Paul's record is cloudier than that.
He initially supported intervention against Afghanistan and then he changed his mind.
He initially opposed intervention in Iraq, then he drafted a declaration of war against Iraq and then he went back to opposing the intervention in Iraq.
Ron Paul thinks this is all a game.
uhhh hmmmm. Some of my best friends are Mormons....... is that better?
Quirky wasn’t the word I had in mind for either of them.
A trophy wife? No wait, that's Fred Thompson that has a trophy wife.
The munchkins wife is “lovely, tall, beautiful and sexy “ and Freds is a ‘trophy wife”.
Nope, No bias there!
Sounds like this guy has been away from women too long.
moonbattery at it’s finest...
Man, you just make my day as you keep posting this.. I am laughing myself silly..
The real scary part about Paul and this to me is he went back on this based on semantic arguments of the words 'war' versus 'force' because the Constitution grants the power to declare war to Congress.. he took this and basically say the granting of power constituted the specifics as to 'how' it should be worded... Anyone who cares more about playing semantic games with the Constitution over protecting and defending the country it is built on is dangerous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.