I’ll vote for that which I belive in! Kuicnich 2008! w/poll

It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don’t want and get it.  – Eugene Debs

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/E…

Eugene V. Debs was a great labor leader at the turn of the 19th and early 20th centuries.  He was born in Terre Haute, Indiana and lived there much of his life.  He ran several times on the Socialist Party of America ticket for President, receiving 6% of the vote in 1912, as well as 913,664 votes (3.4 percent) in the 1920 election, which he ran for from jail, having been convicted under The Espionage Act of 1917.

Here’s a quote from Mr. Debs:

It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don’t want and get it.

What did Debs mean by that?

Well, at least on almost every other Democratic oriented blog I read, that would mean nominating someone who can win the greneral election in 2008.  I suppose this is as legitimate a reason to vote for a candidate as any other, other than the possibility that the ‘electable’ candidate may fashion his or her campaign to whichever way the political wind happens to be blowing at the time.

Me? I’m for voting for the candidate who supports what I belive in.  When I hear from candidates and their supporters that something isn’t achievable, and that as such we should settle for something that is slightly less onerous that what we have currently, I shudder inwardly.  I shudder because I know that most of the writers at the various blogs are well educated, thoughtful and reasonable people.

And, yet, those reasonable writers seem ready to vote for the ‘electable’ candidate rather than a candidate who represents what they believe in (clearly, this is not true of everyone, including supporters of candidates other than Dennins).

Here are some of the thing I belive in:

1) An end to the Iraq occupation and bringing the troops home, not redeploying them in the region.

2) Universal Health Care, not Universal Health Insurance.  As I read the blogs, it’s apparent that most writers support a single-payer system.  There’s only one candidate running who supports a single-payer system.  The rest think that their non-single-payer systems will eventually get there.

3) A green economy (based on solar and wind technologies) and rebuilding our infrastructure.  This is clearly the way to go, unless you really like nuclear power or coal.  The infrastructure issue is  not going to go away.  Cities, such as Indianapolis (near where I live) have around $1 billion in infrastructure updates that need to be done now.  They’re building a football stadium instead.

4) A return to bilatreral trade agreements, rather than the regional free-trade agreements such as NAFTA.  NAFTA’s been a failure for the vast majority of people in this country.  The corporations have taken advantage of it to move much of our manufacturing base out of the country (not that the trend wasn’t there before NAFTA, but it has excellerated because of it’s provisions).

5) Securing our rights under the Constitution.  There’s only one Democratic candidate who voted against the Patriot Act and it’s extensions.  The current administration is brazenly criminal in it’s disreguards to our rights under the Constitution. I want a President who will give back those ill-gotten powers to the people of this country.

You get the idea.

For me, there’s a clear choice amongst all of the candidates.  It’s Dennis Kucninich.  He supports what I support.  His record of public service points toward the fact that he will work for what he belives in.  I am also a born and bred Hoosier (we came up from Kentucky in the same group as Lincoln), and am proud of the various humanitarian leaders we have set forth upon this country.  I’m proud that Eugene V. Debs was a Hoosier, and I’m proud to be able to say that I agree with him:

It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don’t want and get it.

As always, now more than ever,

Go Dennis!

http://dennis4president.com

Choose Peace!

Originally posted here: http://www.dailykos.com/story/…

Is the Pony/Pie/Hide rating system too cutsie?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

5 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. Debs was right in so many ways!

  2. this is the kind of unthinking sloganeering that bothers me.

    Here are some of the thing I belive in:

    A green economy (based on solar and wind technologies)…

    Solar and wind are fine but are intermittent.  No one wants electricity only when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing.  There are means of storing power now and better will be available in the future.  Maybe someday they may even be economical.  For now, despite very fine uses, solar in particular is relatively trivial in power generation.

    I am particularly enthusiastic about geothermal that generates far more power than wind or solar despite enormous obstacles placed in its path alongside very hefty upfront capital costs for the “free” energy but there may be better.

    Wood.

    Biomass generates far more power than all other green energy sources.  Today waste wood is shipped to Europe and Asia to generate power while we prefer to burn coal and talk of the illusion of clean coal.  Is it maybe not better to burn waste wood in power plants than to have fires like those in Southern California that burn up homes and people along with the wood?

    Beyond that wood has even now been converted to a liquid oil and can be converted to ethanol.

    It is the routine sloganeering that bothers me some.

    Just a thought for you, friend, and I hope Kucinich does very well collecting votes.  I would still like a bit more thought behind proposals.

    Best,  Terry

    • feline on December 24, 2007 at 3:59 pm

    is taking priority over candidates’ positions on issues for so many.

    Election discussions have been framed by corporate media for so long, that thorough and thoughtful discussions on Democratic blogs are influenced by that framing.

    I like this saying: “A conclusion is the place where you got tired of thinking.”  The presumed electability factor knocks several candidates out of the discussion early in the campaign, making it easier for analysts to stop thinking about all of the issues and options.  It’s a tool of convenience, not Democracy.

    Electability is subjective and suggestive, and can serve as a self-fulfilling prophecy for journalists and bloggers who like to paint with a very broad brush.  A candidate’s electability often varies greatly according to democraphics – think how many times pundits have been surprised by local results and the popular vote.  The electability factor’s strength comes from our electoral college system, conglomerate media, and to some extent the early primaries.

    I’ve seen thoughtful bloggers elsewhere being accused of ignoring political nuance – which I find ironic.

    From what I’ve read, Debs was a thoughtful leader – his analysis, commentary, and actions were appropriate and greatly needed.

    We need that kind of leadership and thoughtful analysis now.

    I’m planning on voting for Kucinich in my primary, though I am going to continue to observe the candidates and their positions on issues between now and then.

    I’m very grateful for Docudharma, where honest analysis is encouraged.

Comments have been disabled.