His decision to ask this question is a direct adn transparent way to further marginalize a candidate who is bold, progressive and principled. Kucinich may be a long-shot but his position on issues can help add to the debate and force first-tier candidates to speak more directly to the issues, if moderators would allow it. This, I think, is why people like Dennis and Mike Gravel, et al run. NOT because they believe they have a serious chance to be our next President (although I’m sure they wouldn’t mind!) but because they care about our country, see where the problems are, and want to give Americans a way to see “inside” the machinery, dream bigger, and challenge the corrupt and broken status quo.

What is crazy about wanting to focus on ways to promote peace instead of war? Providing healthcare to the un/under-insured in what we fancy to be one of greatest societies in human history? And a predominantly Christian one at that?!

Most Americans say that want politics in Washington to change but then when someone comes along and offers radically-different solutions/ways of thinking about our problems which are positive and original, we can only make fun of them. Dismiss them via contrived ad hominem character assassinations by insinuating they are nut jobs. Oh the things one could say (but won’t) about his inability to remember important details about his own words and actions during Scooter Libby’s trial….

Russert and pundits much worse then he detract from meaningful dialogue and true governance by the people for the people with these tired propoganda techniques which keep us from getting too close to effectively dealing with the REAL issues.

Most people who have seen such sightings don’t tell it around too much for fear of being written off as nuts. We are so not alone in this universe!

http://notesfmthedump.blogspot.com/