As I research the candidates I find that much of the congressman's positions I agree with. However this is a poor move in that it's a no win for blacks, the congressman, and the public in general. It isn't the tough questions, it's the spin sure to come after the debate. Full of deceit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It will be interesting to read some of the comments generated from this story. Undoubtedly, some people will bring out the torches and pitchforks and attack Kucinich for "failing" the progressive movement. Think back to alternet's articles about Obama the months before he announced his candidacy... so many crossed fingers, "we hope he'll run, we hope he'll run we hope he'll run." Now he's running, and guess what (surprise surprise) he's done some things his supporters don't like.

Kucinich gave his reasons for staying in the debate (and let's face it, it's not like he couldn't use the airtime). And then there are the other candidates' reasons: "Oh No! Not Fox! I won't go and participate in a debate hosted by big bad wolf Fox!" Fox is biased? Hell yes it is. Bus so is EVERY OTHER NETWORK to some extent. If you don't think they are, then you've got your head in the frickin' sand. It's not hard to imagine the field day democrats and liberals would have if the republicans decided not to participate in a debate because of the hosting network's liberal bias.

Democratic candidates, here's an idea: Quit preaching to the choir! How about participating in the Fox debate and getting your message out to the tens of millions of people who are loyal to Fox and may have never heard anything about you other than you supposedly attended a madrasa when you were young?

No candidate will be what you want all the time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Indeed, how many african americans watch Fox enough to have an opinion about its "racism"? How many Americans in general watch Fox? Enough to sponsor a debate sure, but FNC is still not the Fox that broadcasts American Idol or CBS with its raft of high rated cop shows.

This is much ado about nothing. If the questioning is anti-black, i.e., "Congressman Kucinich, do you agree blacks sponge off welfare more than whites?", it causes an Imus-type backlash against Fox. Fox does this debate for one reason: they want to be perceived as being in the "big leagues" of tv news. Up there with Katy Couric(or in her case, down there).

A couple of documentary film makers who most black or white viewers have never heard of is not exactly the ABC Washington Post Poll. The spurious claim that the Dems should pull out because "blacks" find FNC racist is laughable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is Alternet trying to undermine Dennis Kucinich while quietly trying to show their support to Barack Obama? Hmm....The left wing loons got Cindy Sheehan out of the picture, perhaps now they're set on going after Kucinich. I might be crazy, but it seems like it to me since this article appears to a "non-issue" puff piece. What do you think?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But of course Alternet doesn't take criticism very well, so this post might very well be deleted...

Just as my post on the Cheney/grandson article was the other day when I criticized AlterNet's new "Rating System' as an unnecessary intrusion into an otherwise well-run public forum.

Way to go, guys. It's hard work keeping a lid on free speech isn't it?

What a brave group of censors you're turning out to be.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Kucinich is one of the few true progressives in the Democratic party. It sure hasn't been Clinton.

I believe the whole nation saw just how "progressive" the Democratic Party really is from the recent vote on Iraq.

Kucinich is generally spot on and has never been afraid to go out on a limb; therefore, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. The fact that this publication would accuse him of "undermining progressives and embracing Fox News" indicates a problem with Alternet, not Dennis Kucinich.

I think that's an unfair portrayal. One that might possibly indicate that it's Alternet that's slipping toward the center and mainstream, status quo politics and therefore undermining progressives.

To date, he and Gravel are the only ones that have been consistent and made a lick of sense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Garrison Keillor was drug through a knot-hole in a non-story by an AlterNet editor a month ago. THAT played really well, too!

Maybe Kucinich is showing support for members of the CBC who found themselves stuck with Fox when no other station would meet the basic terms of hosting their debate.

The bigger issue is why aren't all stations hosting debates so that citizens can really get to know the candidates?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." -Article 19, UN UDHR



ONLY by engaging; conversing with the 'enemy' can one hope to get one's message through.

I have experienced a similar situation as a blogger for Daily Kos who is also a Correspondent for The Peoples Voice; and certain Kossaks erroneously label it a 'hate site'

My diaries have been hi-jacked and I have been personally 'tarred and feathered' by a few knee jerk, fear-filled Kossacks who cannot handle a POV that disturbs their status quo.

IMAGINE the possibilities for GOOD if Kucinich can break thru to the fear-filled neo-cons with the radical message of peace NOT war and diplomacy NOT occupation!


If Kucinich gets air time on FOX, i will tune it in and I haven't done that in years!!!

eileen fleming
http://www.wearewideawake.org/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet should support this debate rather than attacking it. By attacking it you are playing the "politics of one" game - if an organization doesn't agree with you on almost every point, they get attacked. Let's go for a big tent here and support a variety of venues to get each candidate's message out.

It is unfortunate also, that Alternet is using this piece to attack Kucinich, who along with Mike Gravel, are the only Democratic candidates who are forthright in their positions, act on their beliefs and dwell in the real world rather than testing all their positions with focus groups before enunciating them and taking care to make their positions so vacuous and substance free that no one can take exception to them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

For any one that knows or even follows Rep. Kucinich they will know that his message is not about left of right, Democrat or Republican but about creating peace in our nation and world. Yes because of these beliefs Dennis happens to be one of the most progressive members of the house and candidates for president. However, it is wrong for Alternet to attack a man that has often stood by himself to implement progressive values within our nation. Dennis wishes to reach out through the Fox News debate to give his message to an audience that may never reach out to find out what he is saying. To create peace one must be willing to see the "enemy" and engage in a dialogue with them. Otherwise our points of attack are no different than the Bush administrations blind sighted tactics of policy making. I support Dennis Kucinich in his efforts to reach out to the right, without compromising his beliefs. Dennis is begining a dialogue about peace and progressive values, something that the other candidates are surely lacking.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let the record stand.

You guys sure you want to head down that road?

You don't have that much ground to lose anymore.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Make it realistic! It's up to us.

There is a concerted movement to belittle him. One can only wonder why. Hmmm. All corporate candidates will soon look like the mercenaries that they are. He won't sell us out.

This is a time when we can't mess around. I don't care what network Dennis is using to get his message across. He makes more sense than the other creeps.

He doesn't look Presidential to shallow people (Of which there are many), but if he can be broadcast long enough to get his ideas across, he might just get through.

If we vote for the most attractive President, then we are a stupid, adolescent nation and will get punished by fate and history.

Anyone who totally believes the television's take on politics is a mental and emotional child. That's what TV is geared for.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In my opinion, the democrats should be holding their own "debates" for the networks to cover. Allowing the network (any one of them or all of them intermittently) to control the agenda is just plain stupid. This should be about the parties selecting their candidates, not about the networks presenting a political spectacle for their own exploitive purposes.

On the Democratic side, the party should hold candidate forums where the party sets the context and Chairman Howard Dean (or some other party official) asks the questions that they want addressed by the candidates. If the networks want to broadcast these forums (and they will), the public will get to witness the process. Having some media whore like Bit Hume or Chris Matthews or any other network flunky formulate and ask the questions is ridiculous. Such "debates" devolve into nothing more than sideshows providing chat fodder for the pundits and talking heads who are far more interested in their own exposure and market share than they are in the democraic process.

Over on the Republican side, they can do whatever they want, all their potential candidates stink as far as I'm concerned (with the possible exception of Ron Paul, whom I've watched with interest for years).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why be on Fox News when they are just going to spin everything you say?!

Then I saw Ron Paul on the Fox news debate. It now occurs to me that the best way to prevent Fox News spin is not by avoiding Fox News, but by speaking plainly and directly so they cannot spin what you say. And when they try, it only makes them look like fools.

At this point in time what we really need is a candidate that is immune or highly resistant to spin attacks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I removed Fox News from my cable box so I don't even see it flipping past as I channel surf. I took out all bookmarks having anything to do with Fox from my bookmarks on my web browser. I don't listen to talk radio anymore. If I go somewhere and FAUX News is on, I change the channel or sit facing away from the screen.

All of the candidates and every single lkeft leaning pundit and elected official should simply stop responding to anything that Fox puts on the air or web. Don't do interviews. Don't return phones calls. Act like they don't exist and pretty soon, they won't.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whatever happened to standing up to the playground bully and putting Fox in its place? Spineless Democrats like Hillary run from the fun instead of working to turn the tables on Fox by using Fox for the open stage it is. Any open stage is a good stage if you know how to stand up for your own self. Just like PR, no publicity is bad publicity. All politicians should run to make their points to the opposing audience. It is called a dialogue. What chicken shits the Dems are for running from, instead of attacking their main mimesis, the right wing, personified by Fox News.
Kucinich is the only candidate whose platform has been consistent since before the war. Dennis is as real as any common man can be. Kucinich is Mr. Smith goes to Washington; but he is in the wrong era. Americans claim they want someone like the rest of us but then the media feeds us the standard fare, bought and paid for politician from the Republicrats. Dennis did his Cleveland constituency right when he saved the Cleveland Electric Company from special interests and kept electric rates low for Clevelanders. Dennis has been fighting special interests all his life. He just looks a little like a snarling dog rather than some affectionate face man. Dennis is a small man with a Napoleon complex and the best moral compass of the lot. Dennis is too honest to present the familiar political winning face the TV media ram down our entertainment throats. Pretty is not better. Vote for a Jack Russell Terrier with a Napoleon Complex and a heart of honesty to tear into the Capitol Status Quo. Vote for Dennis Kucinich.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why go to Faux??? Hmm... could it have ANYTHING to do with all other media outlets completely ignoring him????????

He is a member of Congress running for president, folks... not pizza delivery driver in a tin-foil hat. There is a reason he is ignored like said silvery-headed driver.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...a reasoning, functioning brain would watch Faux "News" anyway?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is not my personal opinion of the man, I would sooner he were my U.S. congressmember rather than the Blue Dog Democrat currently representing my district
or president of the United States over any of the corporate whores now in the running. The mainstream media dismisses Kucinich, his opinions and positions practically out of hand. To the MSM Kucinich is a lovable kook not to be taken seriously, along the lines of perennial presidential Harold Stassen.

The fact he receives so little television facetime is undoubtedly his motivation for showing at the CBC-Fox debate. I'm not going to pass judgement on if it is a wise move or not. But I will say that since the proposed CBC debate is scheduled to be aired by FoxNoise, who in the African American or progressive community will watch?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whatever happened to “In your face” politics? Alternet is supposed to be challenging the status quo. Running from Fox is the wrong alternative unless their goal is to establish an AlterFox network that speaks only for the “radical Left” rather than the “radical Right.” Most of us just need the right information to work with and that includes most of the Right Wing. Even they have come around to the facts on the War. Now if any of us on the left were Bible savvy enough to counter their religious insanity we could then establish common ground where foxes, donkeys and elephants all can roam among us. The people rule over the animals and that includes cunning Foxes.
Alternet is smatter than that. Put the gloves back on and step into the ring. So what if you do not have home court advantage. You can not always play on your court. It does the spirit wonders to win on the road. Fox News is nothing more than another brawl fought in somebody else’s backyard. Stop running from the bully and show us an alter way to fight the beast; it’s only a Fox. AlterNet can duke it out with Fox and should welcome the opportunity. A political debate is not the same as going on the O'Riley Show. Hello!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How about almost every other corporate owned media outlet? While it is true that Fox is the worst, most outlets aren't much better. Even PBS has been shown by Media Matters to have almost 4 times as many conservative viewpoints than liberal! I don't need to watch a Republican debate-I'll NEVER vote for any of the a-holes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Curious about other Don Harzen editorials, I reviewed previous AlterNet articles of his, starting with a piece published in 2000 titled, “Pothead Al?”

Asserted the article’s introduction, “Al Gore may be in marijuana hot water. A new biography of Gore, which Newsweek magazine was going to excerpt in their January 18 issue, claims that Wooden Al smoked considerably more dope than he has publicly admitted.”

Karl Rove had to have loved that tantalizing beginning but not the other intros for Hazen’s archived articles. “Wooden Al” comment aside, every summary I scanned would have made progressives cheer.

So why did Harzen attack Dennis Kucinich? I couldn’t help wonder.

For the answer, I read today's article several times, looking for clues. While I found none based on facts, Harzen’s bias against Fox News came through loud and clear. Obviously from his high and mighty point of view, any progressive politician who would dare enter enemy territory, such as the Fox News TV network, for a televised debate is some kind of turncoat.

Did it ever occur to Harzen that Dennis Kucinich is exhibiting courage -- an admirable trait, in my mind, that most Democrats in Congress lack?

Until Harzen explains his motive behind the attack piece, he’ll be the one undermining progressives, not Dennis Kucinich.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fox is no place for Kucinich as they will eat him alive after he leaves. Kucinich says and believes what is good for Americans. His wanting to ban guns is political suicide and a solution to nothing except making sure criminals are the only one's with guns. (Off the subject a bit) These "presidential candidates" are a sorry bunch. They want more war, more military, more war "budget", healthcare run by their sugar daddies...big pharma, insurance companies and robber barons.
I am an old US Marine and have spent forty years researching and fighting for peace and justice and it is exhausting, frustrating, and I sure get pissed off to the max! Cindy Sheehan quit and Bush and our government killed her son and caused her and others massive suffering over lies and greed. What a disgrace! America is being ruled by fascists or as Musolini called them "corporatists. We have a corporatocracy and capitalist rulers taking over the planet. It is time for a worldwide people's revolution which will tell the corporations and AIPAC and the rulers that we are in charge and if they want to do business they will behave.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dennis Kucinich has been more on-target to the Progressive agenda, not to mention at the top of the moral heap in public service in his career, so where does Alternet get off in trashing him before the fact? DK has taken the Faux News talking heads to task every time I've seen him on their miserable excuse for a news network and he remains remarkably consistent in his ideals, principles and political views - so if anyone can make an impact on some of the bobble-headed lemmings who watch and believe what they hear from the Faux fatheads, Dennis can. Give the man a chance Alternet, he's not let us down yet. The guy has bucked this corporate-controlled government throughout his career and for the past four years has diligently and faithfully followed a progressive agenda for the betterment of the average American in his pursuit of the Presidency in the face of media blackout and boycott (remember he was deemed "unelectable" six months before an '04 primary vote was cast) so let him choose his own path and see where the chips fall before blasting him and discrediting him like the rest of the closed-minded media does. You missed the boat on this one, alternet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not participating in the FOX debate is akin to self-imposed censorship.
I applaud Mr. Kucinich's decision and I wish him good luck.
Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee, Dennis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't come down on Kucinich for accepting the invitation. Don't come down on Obama and Company for refusing the invitation. Ask the Congressional Black Caucus why it is partnering with Fox on this debate. Perhaps, as another poster suggested, Fox News was the only network willing to air the debate - or maybe they got a better deal from Fox News. I've sent an email to CBC to find out why. Until I get an answer, I personally will refrain from any judgement. But I will say, I've read Kucinich's reasoning, and it makes me like the guy even more than I already do. He's the real thing and I wish we could see more of him in the news.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I find it fascinating that many of the folks here are falling into the trap of Fox's frame in order to defend Kucinich. Kucinich who I like to think of as idenitfying and pushing back on corporate influence in politics, quitely defends it when it comes to the CBC. The piece on the front page of last Sunday's NYT connects the dots, helping to explain why CBC members (through a combination of self-interest, group protectionism, and corporate influence) are selling out the interests of Black Americans.

This isn't about debating Fox on their network (which isn't what happens in a presidential debate). And no one seems to be talking about the bigger picture. In the '03 Fox/CBCI debate, the commentary that followed declared all the candidates unelectable except Al Sharpton--"at least he's entertaining...but we have to remember Tawana Brawley" (or something to that effect), i.e. he's an untrustworthy thug.

Fox is a propaganda outlet that has regularly and consistently attacked Black people (see foxattacks.org). Many folks on this site are perhaps not in places where you would hear our voices, but the overwhelming majority of Black people hate Fox--we see it as racist. As an African-American, it's tragic to see a Black institution cozy up to them and give them much-needed validation when their brand is suffering.

Kucinich is doing something very insulting and problematic. To get himself airtime, he's willing to take the talking points of Black political leaders who have been bought and declare himself a white defender of Black interests, while completely ignoring the clear and visible chorus of editors from traditional Black newspapers, Black bloggers, Black radio show hosts, and thousands of everyday Black people.

To see folks jump on the Kucinich support bandwagon tells me that many of you are unwilling to see a good guy doing really bad. And your doing so further marginalizes Black voices. It's beyond disappointing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If we want to change this country for the better, that's going to mean engaging people with whom we disagree. Yes, Fox commentators are likely to say disparaging and biased things before and after the debate. But maybe, just maybe, some people who otherwise would never be exposed to what Kucinich has to say will hear him. And maybe a few people will start to change their minds.

That's the way to peace.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I agree that Fox "news" is actually propaganda. However, how does that distinguish it from CNN, ABC, NBC, or CBS? As I recall, the whole bunch of them pretended that the 2000 election was fair in order to get their man into the white house. Then they pretended there were WMD to get their war. Then they pretended that the war wasn't racist. Then they pretended that we're "there to help" and "fight terror". Then they pretended that we weren't trying to steal their oil.

And so I must conclude that no candidates should do any TV debates, and no viewers should watch. In fact, why not extend it to simply "turn off your TV", I already did. I get better information going to their voting records, forget the posturing for the cameras.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Get over yourself you freakin' whiner! Seriously!

Kucinich is THE progressive candidate out there, the only guy on the national stage with a real liberal agenda!

Blaming him for giving "legitimacy" to Fox News? is a distraction. It represents the fragmentation of the left that we would spend any time at all on something like this!

We need to work together, not undermine our own over crap like this! Get your priorities straight!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Go Dennis! How else will the ignorant masses hear what the other side has to say without being interrupted in mid-sentence by Bill O'Reilly? And Fox is not the only bad guy when it comes to bias and coverage ---I read that ABC pulled their correspondent off Kucinich's last campaign because he dissed Ted Koppel during the last primary debate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As in Hillary (in reality a front for Bill II) and Clinton sidekick Obama.

Once again until we get this straight - The US has two ruling right wing parties:

A conservative status quo party saturated with the neocon ideology called the Democratic Party, plus a few powerless and deluded progressive hangers on (this latter including Kucinich). They just refinanced a criminal genocidal war to destroy a country and its people. Note that types like Lieberman are radical rightist oddballs in this party;

A radical right party "of ideas" (read, ideology) and (reactionary) "change" called the Republican Party, plus a few powerless paleos like Buchanan (or now Hagel), this latter now appearing quite moderate compared to the mad neocon ideologues that dominate BOTH parties.

Happily the Repubs have gotten their political knickers all in a bunch (hear the Newt screech!), threatening the moorings of the whole "Reagan settlement" established in the 1980's. So they are bringing Clinton/Obama back for the rescue, to maintain the status quo.

Thre is no organized left/progressive political presence. The US Left adamently refuses to organize such a presence in the form of a political party.

It is really as simple as that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

For the time blacks have been allowed to vote in this country, history has shown that the (white) political process doe's not address the needs of blacks and never will. If their is no history that one can display as an example of this process producing black communities that are self sufficient and productive as far as the group setting is concerned, why continue to put faith in such a thing? Those who put their faith in the following are brainwashed and will continue to be taken advantage of for the rest of their pathetic lives.


Successful Black Politicians:

The individual success of some blacks who are involved in the political process is unimportant and should not be used as an example of success because their loyalty is to whites and not the up-liftment of their people. The National black caucus was established by the white elite for the purpose casting off the illusion that they represent the concerns of the masses of blacks while in reality their purpose is to drown out the cry's of their own people in return for the few crumbs their white superiors will throw their way. The only true success is in the group and not the individuals.

Dennis Kucinich:

Dennis Kucinich is not important, blacks have bigger and more relevant things to worry about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sigh - I am starting to doubt the sincerity of most journalists.

There's just no way a so called progressive journalist isn't digging up the same shit we informed readers are. This article is just another example of 'information' spun to a readership BELIEVED to be ignorant of the Truth. Is it just me, or is there an alarming number of journalists abandoning their conscience, Patriotism and DECENCY by withholding the Truth from us? In the USA the messengers of Truth for the people are supposed to be working FOR the people. To twist it and spin it and turn it into something it's not is something the media does in FASCIST countries.

Sharks have taken over not only our government (right down to the local level and including the Democratic Party !!!!), but also our media. To say we are being betrayed isn't actually accurate. A predator doesn't betray its prey. It's survival of the fittest and he with the most money wins. Welcome to the New Century folks. Looks like we're right back where we started.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As a Kucinich delegate from 2004, I know from experience on the ground three factors completely absent from this article.

1. There are actually viewers of Fox News that are unaware of the network's bias - believe it or not. These folks will have heard the Fox perspective ad nauseum and may actually have the opportunity to hear SOMETHING ELSE through Dennis' participation in the debate. Imagine for just a moment the novelty of Kucinich's ACTUAL ideas being given play on Fox, these viewers actually seeing the man they have heard repeatedly misrepresented - speaking truth to power...

2. Likewise the devoted Fox viewer would be exposed to a perspective that would counter the regurgitation that Fox spews normally, and Kucinich does have a way of truly speaking to folks "where they are" that the "top tier" candidates lack. In my interaction with conservatives, there is an honoring of rational thought (though rational thought based on false information is often a problem) - and Dennis makes very good arguments for his platform that time and time again seem to resonate with people that many "liberals" would think are unreachable.

3. The "top tier" candidates will ALWAYS avoid debating, this time it will be about Fox, next time it will be about fill in the blank. Clinton and Obama have neither the desire or ability to reach out to EVERYONE. Their message is very carefully crafted to reach a select audience - to win over their audience without really having ANY dialogue with the audience. Dennis DOES actually listen to and speak on behalf of the people. Appearing on Fox is another opportunity for him do do so - an opportunity that the top tier has neither the desire or ability to pursue.

On that note, enjoy the Koo-sin-ich video below and feel free to share it with everyone that hasn't yet heard about Dennis:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZoftTki1MU

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Today, the White House announced that Paul Wolfowitz’s replacement at the World Bank would be Robert Zoellick, Bush’s former trade chief and number 2 State Department diplomat.

AOL News described Zoellick as a “seasoned veteran of politics both inside the Beltway and on the international stages known for pulling facts and figures off the top of his head. He also has a reputation for being a demanding boss.”

Not surprising to me, AOL faild to mention that Zoellick is a Wolfowitz clone, fellow PNAC member and pre-9/11 advocate of regime change in Iraq.

Zoellick is also disengenious. I wrote about him in my 2004 narrative nonfiction book, George Dub-ya Bush, THE PHONY FIGHTER PILOT, this way:

Shortly after George W. took office, Bush hypocrisy about smoking spilled over into his administration policies regarding the American tobacco industry’s major thrust to expand its international markets.

Clinton had impeded their efforts to export death by inhalation with trade restrictions. However, when South Korea imposed tariffs on cigarettes to reduce their importation because of the health hazard, President Bush complained about the added cost imposed on U.S. cigarette makers and ordered the fees rescinded.

His trade representative, Robert Zoellick, insisted that Dub-ya just wanted to make sure U.S. products were treated fairly. Zoellick also contended that it was a policy “most citizens agree with.”

Oh, really? Mr. Zoellick. Where’s the proof?

There is no proof. Statistically in our country, nonsmokers far exceed those who engage in the self-destructive habit. Thus, once more, we have an example of the Bush administration deceiving us by stretching nonexistent facts into what appears to the truth.

End of extract.

Should Robert Zoellick ever become the subject of a Harzen editorial, I would bet my next 12 Social Security checks that the PNAC connection will be ignored.

Why am I making that assertion? Because in nearly 200 Harzen archived articles going back seven years, PNAC was never mentioned, much addressed as a subject for discussion

Harzen came close in article titled, “The Right-Wing Express,” posted on Feb. 7, 2005. In the editorial, he referred to Paul Weyerich and Irving Kristol as “key conservatives" in the raising of funds for rightwing Republican candidates.

Weyerich and Kristol are neocons, not “conservatives.” Weyerich, in fact, is a PNAC member and Irving Kristol, the father of neoconservatism, influenced his son Bill who founded PNAC. If you’ve never heard of PNAC, an acronym for the “Project for New American Century,” don’t ask Don Hazen.

He had the perfect opening in a December 17, 2001, article titled, “Future Tense: A Path Out of the Nightmare of 9/11>.”

Stated the intro summary, “Paranoia has gripped America since 9/11, hijacking social progress and undermining freedoms. AlterNet.org's executive editor charts a sensible way to move beyond the fear and build a strong and secure nation.”

Why didn’t Harzen tells his readers that well before 9/11, PNAC published a position paper calling for regime change in Iraq which would be supported by the American people if they suffered a “catastrophic and catalyzing Pearl Harbor-type event" (PNAC's words). Thus, to Bush and his neocon cabal, 9/11 was an excuse to attack Iraq, not a cause -- their prime motivation for generating national paranoia. But Harzen never made that damning revelation. Why? I have no idea. Ask him.

P.S. If you’re curious about PHONY FIGHTER PILOT and would like read a sample chapter, visit my promo website, PhonyFighterPilot.com.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

into a corner. They will have two so-called marginal candidates. So what will they do? Go ahead and hold the debate . . . and, in effect, promote at least one who is their complete antithesis. They will have to go through the motions and will have only Kucinich and Biden as fodder for their "fair & balanced" analysis. Fox viewers will be forced to at least hear Kucinich's positions and Fox will not have other candidates to cover and justify the normal practice of ignoring what he says. I hope the other Dems stay out of this event and force Fox to use time and resources to cover two candidates that their viewers would normally never be aware of and without supplying Fox with their desired prey -- Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. If Fox has only Kucinich and Biden on which to focus their inaccurate and skewed coverage, what will they do? It could be another Fox "spectacle" that I (still) won't watch.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The sad truth is no one takes Kucinich seriously. And sadder still, there are very good reasons why they don't. He has some good points, sometimes, but other times he's got some crackpot ideas that wouldn't work even if more than 8% of the country would support them. Then, it's hard to pay much attention to his good points when he's belting out "16 tons" in a public forum like a drunken leprechaun.
Now let's assume for a second he was politically savvy, charismatic and experienced-- he's too short and he looks funny. I know, I know, lash out at me for being shallow, but it is a fact, evolutionary or cultural, maybe both, that people won't vote for short people (name one short president). In order for anyone to notice him he'd have to be all three of the things I suggested we assume he is (none of which is true). He seems like a nice guy, with some good ideas, but he's also the weird uncle that can embarrass you at Denny's at 3am.
As far as Fox Noise, it's just another example of where Kucinich doesn't get it-- everyone but the far right should be avoiding Fox like the plague **because it's not real news**.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am a Liberal and Alternet is my home page, so read on. I wish that Alternet would monitor its writers to do a better job. Flaming headlines do more harm than good. It is obvious, to me, that the author of this article had a deadline to meet and didn't bother doing any research.

Go to http://www.cbcinstitute.org/event.htm and you will see that the CBCI sent out requests to all the major media and only CNN and Fox replied in the affirmative.

If you read their three info pages, you will see that the CBCI decides the format and panelists. Who gives a damn what Fox (or for that matter, CNN) says after the debates. I don't watch the post-debate analyses because that is where all the anti-Liberal, anti-Black, anti-Candidate spin goes on. Do you think Rush Limbaugh and the other "mouths" of the regressive right-wing will have anything worthwhile to hear?

Listen to the candidates during the debates! If you don't like what they say or probably what they do NOT say, then get off your couches, call their headquarters and demand an explanation on your issue.

Right now, I am supporting Obama because his speeches give me hope that we can bring back good government. I am supporting Kucinich because he's the only Democratic candidate who gives substance to the issues in real-time, without a script and without a pollster to tell him what to say.

Do you think that might be why the major media don't want to support the CBCI debates? Fox is very right-wing and CNN isn't far behind but at least they are giving the lesser candidates (everybody except Obama and Clinton) exposure that the major media refuse to give them. Why not complain to the major media and Congress about providing comprehensive coverage over the PUBLIC airwaves instead of questioning the motives of Kucinich? Shame!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

http://kucinich.us/node/4560

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

James Rucker and “progressives” take the position Al Sharpton adopted when Imus invited him on his show. Sharpton refused, observing he didn’t want to be Imus’ “enabler”.

The absurdity of the Sharpton/Rucker stance is revealed if one imagines a Pinochet enthusiast inviting a spokesman for Allende on his radio program following Allende’s overthrow. “No thanks,” the latter replies, “I’m not interested in ‘enabling’ you.” Or imagine a Nazi talk show host receiving that response from a Jew asked to appear to argue against anti-semitism/fascism. It is a Rightist, not a Leftist, reaction.

Why do “liberal progressives” embrace this illiberal position? Marx gave an answer more than 150 years ago. He proposed we humans are all self-interested. (“Individuals seek only their particular interest.” ”It is natural necessity, the essential human properties however estranged they may seem to be, and interest that hold the members of civil society together; civil, not political life, is their real tie.”) The “self-interest” uniting members of every community, Marx contended, is the desire to keep what they already have; to “reproduce their social existence.”

Insofor as a productive order remains viable, he reasoned, able to realize the indicated objective, everyone reflexively accepts the consciousness of the elites who dominate the order. However, insofar as an order can no longer sustain everyone, devastated members of a community begin contemplating its replacement, to formulate a revolutionary consciousness. Those whose interests are only moderately threatened (whose social existences can be sustained if the order is modified rather than replaced), just as defensively urge the elites are “misleading” everyone; that if people will reject the establishment’s fantasies and heed their “objective analyses,” everything will be okay.

Marx railed against the reformist liberals of his time, proposing they treated “truth” as though it exists “out there” independent of our experiences and interests. “The question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory, but is a practical question,” he retorted. According to Marx, just as the individuals who dominate a productive order spontaneously create and disseminate a system-protective conciousness, so too, finding their social existences modestly threatened, liberals just as spontaneously formulate a plan for modifying the system, rather than replacing it. Rejecting materialist analyses, they insist on the over-riding importance of ideas. Wrote Marx: “Since, according to their fantasy, the relationships of men, all their doings, their chains and their limitations, are products of their consciousness, /they/ logically put to men the moral postulate of exchanging their present consciousness for human, critical or egoistic consciousness, and thus of removing their limitations. . . . They forget . . . that they are in no way combating the real existing world when they merely combat the phrases of this world. . . . All forms and products of consciousness cannot be disolved by mental criticism, . . . but only by the practical overthrow of the actual social relations which gave rise to this idealistic humbug . . . not criticism but revolution is the driving force of history . . .”

That today’s “Leftists” proffer, sometimes in poor Marx’s name, the idealist logic he energetically rejected, argues that, however inadequate our capitalist productive order may be, it is not sufficiently drained of viability to produce a revolutionary consciousness. For the moment, we’re apparently stuck with Sharpton/Rucker progressives who put out system-sustaining justifications for going along, while screaming loud complaints.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is a sin to kill any being.

Monks were arguing about a Fox.

The Number 2 Monk Don Hazen, held up the Fox and said,
"If any of you can speak a word of Truth,
I will spare the Fox, otherwise I will kill it."

No one on Alternet could answer,
so Hazen killed the Fox.

Later in the day the Number 1 Monk Dennis Kucinich returned to the monastery.
When #2 told #1 what had happened,
Kucinich took off his shoe, put it on his head, and walked off.

The killing of the Fox was at once a sinful-act and
a Buddha-act.

This is why this debate can be used transmorally as a decisive act--rendering power to those who know how to use it.

An enlightened politician is able to use evil freely for the ultimate good.

Let's see if Kucinich can do this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This essay is absurd. Dennis Kucinich has been a visionary and a progressive leader for decades. He certainly shouldn't turn down the chance to have a platform just because FOX news is the platform. Rather than worrying about Dennis "undermining progressives," Mr. Hazen should focus on the other presidential candidates and the media elites who are undermining democracy. Mr. Hazen, please find something more constructive to write about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Kucinich is a true progressive. The editors of AlterNet, to me, have the same status. They have proven that for a long time. So should progressives be able to discuss tactics? I hope so. Appearing on Fox or not is a tactic. It is not a defining position of the progressive worldview. The Congressional Black Caucus decided to go on. So has Kucinich. I'm going to wait and see what Dennis says and does in that event before judging the tactic. Meanwhile, let's support our AlterNet editors and support Kucinich. And let's be free to agree and disagree on tactics without resorting to name calling, blaming and other forms of dividing ourselves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

First :Review the status of the CBC..according to a recent Alternet article:
The Congressional Black Caucus is Dead
Posted by Guest Blogger at 2:35 PM on May 25, 2007.
The Truth:With the exception of John Conyers, Maxine Waters, Barbara Lee, and Bobby Scott, the rest of the CBC have no principles. ....it's still up...check it out AND the hyperlinks therein. Kucinich's decision is a stark but not surprising reminder of one of the most truculent and resilient aspects of the white racist supremacist mindset: 'It is second nature for we whites to speak with dispositive not- to- be-questioned authority on behalf of blacks with regards to any and all issues whatsoever of concern to the Black community.' You see this every day right here on Alternet ..whites (WASPS) and jews arrogantly shooting their mouths off in parabolic arches of condescending 'cracker ex machina' pontificating sewage. Go through the typical Alternet 'liberal' post/Kucinich PR release (they read the same) ; mutatis mutandis switch jew or WASP or (white) feminist for black and arab/muslim ,black or male respectively for the self annoited adversarial spokesperson. NEVER HAPPEN..i.e. you're not gonna see a muslim imposing himself upon the jews as 'their' spokesman ...a black TELLING WASPS this is how you should run YOUR communities...and so on....Kucinich in his 5/29/2007 Press release: "This is particularly troublesome because the concerns of African Americans should take precedent over what network is broadcasting the debate," Kucinich said, "There are matters relating to employment, health care, education, jobs, rebuilding our cities, environment and civil rights that all presidential candidates have an obligation to address and debate. Those candidates planning to skip this debate clearly are trying to avoid a forum where there will be hard-hitting questions from people who may not agree with them. But taking questions from all sides is part of politics, and part of being President. I'm running to be President for all people in this country."...Astounding...this arrogant clown at once conjoins at least two false premises....that African Americans
don't have an appropriate level of concern that their issues be
addressed AND that FOX is uniquely situated to provide forum for such expressions ..once 'properly articulated' presumably by Bwana Dennis or some nazithug 'journalist' on FOX.
Cost/benefit analyses conducted within the black community
were virtually unanimous in rejecting the proposed FOX debate
Perhaps one who aspires to be POTUS...should have thought this through a bit more...the costs are plainly enormous to Kucinich who can ill afford to alienate a support base that is
at best marginal to begin with ...the benefit???....... :O)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is a very disappointing article. I agree with those commenters in the forum who are suggesting that this is a "fluff" piece.

To suggest the Kucinich is undermining progressives is outrageous. Kucinich is defining progressives. Obama and Clinton may be the frontrunners for the Democratic presidential nomination, but neither of them rises to the level of progressive. While Kucinich consistently exhibits high, unwavering principles that reflect his progressive beliefs, Clinton and Obama are out trying to raise money--and end up doing whatever they think is necessary to convince people to hand it over. As progressives, we need to get our heads around the idea that we can and should vote for the person who best represents our beliefs, the same way that conservatives do. Most democrats concede too much because they are not ideologically independent; they just follow the crowd.

While we may not agree with Kucinich's opinion to participate in this debate, it is his choice. Apparently, the CBC thinks it is an appropriate forum and Kucinich is attempting to show support to and respect for his colleagues. ('Kucinich said: "... for Sens. Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack Obama to skip the debate simply because it was to be broadcast on Fox was a snub of the Congressional Black Caucus." ') It may be less an issue of Fox than we would like to imagine.

Does anyone think that FNC is going to report to its viewers that certain Democrats are not participating because they believe we "regularly [distort] the truth and [attack] black leaders, institutions, culture, and black people in general"? No, they won't be there because they are afraid, because they cannot defend their position on...." And imagine what might happen during this debate if no one is present who gives a darn about Black people? It's FNC? It's an ugly scene.

That said, Mr. Hazen's article also has a some rhetorical/logical issues in that he first identifies the co-sponsors of the the Fox debate as the CBC ("Congressman Dennis Kucinich has decided to join Delaware Senator Joe Biden as the only Democratic presidential candidates planning to attend a September debate that Fox News intend to hold in conjunction with the Congressional Black Caucus"), then goes on to talk about "Black voters." Perhaps a civics (rhetoric?) lesson is in order. A person's race does not automatically determine who they are going to vote for, nor does an elected official only represent people of their same race. CBC is not synonymous with "Black voters." Conflating the two seems a little disingenuous. And while James Rucker offers salient points about Fox News' attitude toward African Americans, Don Hazen could have offered a quote from someone who supports Kucinich's decision to participate. Isn't that one of our big problems with FNC--their unbalanced reporting?

As someone already commented, sounds like Hazen wants to shine an unfavorable light on Kucinich as a way of bolstering Obama or Clinton.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...our only chance to hear him speak.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What progressives? You mean those insipid third wayers who believe in not rocking the DLC boat is the only way to win. You know, "you can't change it from the outside" types.

Neither Kucinich nor Gravel will get close BECAUSE of those "progressives" who, in the end, are just as sheeplike and malleable as the christian repubs.

Don't know what Kucinich's logic here is, but if it goes against the DLC, it's got to have some merit IMO.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I might tune in to see if the debate was as insipid as one would expect from FNS, to see who shows up, how Dennis does. I would agree that Fox is scarcely a legitimate news service. I'm a little disappointed in Dennis's argument why the leading candidates should attend. Sounds a bit desperate and undignified. Catty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Reading this artcile made me wonder "Is this Alternet, or is it Fox News?"
Man this artcle really bashed Kucinich very much like the styles of Shaun Hannity or Bill O'Reily

Instead this article should have focused on the delema of chossing to attend a Debate hosted by the Black Caucus, which is aired on Fox news. It makes baseless attcks on Kucinich's character instead of the true substance of the issues for which Kucinich stand for.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

another batch of fresh lies bashing fox news, the last decent news organization left. im sorry but its true, im not talking about their opinion based shows, hanity or o'riely, but their reporting of the news, the events, issues, stories, etc. that people of various ideology, faith, race, age, etc. want to know about. to attempt this feat one must report the goood, bad, the ugly, the pretty, everything the only way to be fair and balanced. there are some people who hate bush, they love the negative stories on the addministration, there are people who dont hate bush, not many, but some so you must report stories favorable to bush, when they come across the wire, or wherever the come from to not rerport both good and bad does not mean your biased, but to not does. which is what most of the other media does. because fox does not bash bush and all republicians 24/7, instead they bash rep. when its time and praise rep. when its time they do the same thing with dem. good and the bad and let the people decide, that the way its supposed to be done thank you. not bash bash bash rep. and anything eles and your part of the vast right wing conspiricy, to quote the clintons.
p.s. fox employes more black people than any other news people on and off camera, also if fox were bigoted or racist sharpton/jackson would be all over them, there not, sharpton appears on fox constantly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dennis Kucinich is not unaware that Fox News stacks the deck against common sense, let alone progressive ideas. Kucinch will take his ideas into the lion's den, if need be, to get his message out. He is also capable of casting many tenets of liberalism in a way that appeals to social and fiscal conservatives. One of his most cited quotes underscores his approach: "You're looking at a guy who believes he can win against a rigged game."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

notice that he only produces CANNED responses. He knows nothing about framing the debate and connecting to the voters. No, I'm not saying that Kucinich should be a "centrist" and lie and spin. Far from it. But perhaps Kucinich may want to understand one thing. Outlets such as Faux News are nothing more than rabid rightwing bases. Kucinich is trying to play a "fixed" game that he has no chance of winning on Faux News. If the game is "fixed", don't play it !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dennis Kucinich is finally showing his true colors. I guess being able to engage in the constant rhetoric, most prevalent with extremists when they have nothing worthwile to say or when they are trying to cover up their bad deeds.
Where was he when the Nevada fight was going on? How come he didn't accuse people of being cowards then? These same candidates have been to the other legitimate forums and have had no problems debating him previously. The only answers appear to be that his inclusive America includes all constituents but people of color, poor people and, whether they realize it or not, a great many of people who consider themselves middle-Americans, as the work of the CBC benefitted others than just Afro-Americans, or he feels that he will have a leg up on the other candidates because FOX has gone after, at least, three of them with a vengeance and doesn't consider him viable enough to spend the time going after him.
Just because the members of the Caucus have forgotten where they come from (this is very apparent considering the legislative votes of some) and how Fox has, more than once, set them up for the Republican Party (one example was the D. C. voucher vote held in the middle of the night while the members were at a FOX function),engaged in continuous lies and bigotry directed, especially, at people of color, poor people and anyone who is not a card-carrying extremist, engaged in continuous propaganda aimed at the public by playing the original mainstream media public relations firm, disrespected the religious faiths and practices of Blacks, given silent screen commentary running with guests they don't like and/or disagree with and participated in the good-ole-boy friendly White house meetings with FOX employees, along with others, to plan and promote how the administration can carry out its rueful and hateful deeds agaisnt Americans who oppose its repressive and deadly policies, and totally disrespect of Afro American institutions and leaders who didn't kiss the derrieres of the administration, its supporters and flunkies.
The only way to nullify the lies of an institution like FOX is to ignore it as a legitimate media source and treat it as the unethical public relations firm that it is.
The majority of people who watch FOX are not normally the type of people who are going to vote for most members of the Democratic party and the members of the CBC know this. This move is not about the election. It's about personalities and self-interest. It appears that America has lost the last organization in Congress with the guts to disagree when things aren't right. That's how profiteering religious vultures were able to garner support from people while making backdoor deals with the devil and righteous religious leaders were ignored or demonized. It's why supporters are re-evaluating their support of this organization. Maybe, of all people, Tom Tancredo was right. They don't need to exist as an organization. Maybe we need to find another group to fight for the real people in this country and give them our financial, emotional and active support.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

These guys are essential because they are educating the public and have the debate that needs to be had. They are addressing issues in ways that build coalitions and movements. The Fair Trade Movement, the Labor Movement, the movement for immigration rights (they are valueable progressive allies), anti-war movement, civil liberties, etc. all can form a coalition against the current fascist tide. It is key to push the Democratic Party Left and make Left discourse acceptable discourse. Right now we are in disarray and out in the cold. If we don't fight we will get Bushism next year with a Moderate face like Chuck Hagel or John McCain. Both these guys are free trade warmongers who oppose the minimum wage and unions. They main difference is that they're not as fast to push religion in your face.

We're a two party system so I say lets start a left caucus within the democrats to push issues like maldistribution of wealth, universal health care, peace, better education, labor rights, fair trade, environmentalism, renewable energy, reproductive rights, and civil liberties. And the real value of guys like Kucinich is educational and a change of discourse. LET'S START HAVING THE RIGHT DISCUSSION. IT REALLY DOES MATTER!! This is the only way to meaningful change and not posturing like so many macho idiots. Let's make '08 count.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I cannot believe that this article was even printed. As a Black American, who has been belittled on this very forum for expressing a point of view that many Blacks share, regarding illegal immigration, I find it laughable that Alternet is expressing concern for Black people. The mere fact that everything about the so-called progressive stance on illegal immigration is a smack in the face to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. That act was supposed to protect Blacks from the Ole Boy system that prevented us from obtaining employment without affirmative action. Today we see employers using day labor sites as a legitimate way to once again avoid those protections Title VII guaranteed. The CBC is a joke they know their time is limited because illegals flock to our neighborhoods not white ones. They are looking at their constituents in the year 2010 (if all goes well with the amnesty bill) not those of us they are supposed to be representing legitimately today. Bravo to anyone who chooses to go in another direction from them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The title is from an old Donovan song...and is excellent advice for all serious candidates-- especially Progressives.

Perhaps Kucinich is making a cynical move, but I doubt it. I think it's a NAIVE, UNDER-INFORMED move. I generally agree with his positions, especially his desire to begin Impeachment Hearings- Yesterday!

It can't be easy to campaign + at the same time keep track of every lie, every trick, spin + twisted effort of the NeoCon 'Mafia' that has poisoned our Nation. I've noticed that many well-meaning Democrats fail to see that we cannot afford to play fair with this enemy.
Unfortunately, we must fight their fire with fire. They will not compromise, listen to reason, or surrender a fraction of an inch. Almost by definition, these people are either evil or completely mad... or both...A threat like Hitler in the 30's, worse than Sen. McCarthy.

You CAN'T appease evil or madness, and you must always be on guard against their Propaganda + complex Tricks. Good, compassionate people often have a blind spot: They believe others are like they are-- caring, compassionate, fair-minded. (I know because I learned my lessons in my 20's...+ it nearly destroyed me.) The Dems need to KNOW that this Administration doesn't care about the USA, about human beings outside their elite circle, about democracy, or about our Constitution.

Dems need to see through them + fight as hard as they do-- not for power , wealth, ego, but for the Constitution, democracy, + Human Rights. Kucinich + other Progressives MUST learn to see Bushies + their virulent tools-- like FOX-- as the threat they are. They need to get justifiably angry, + fight back-- hard!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet is fast losing my respect for running cowardly drivel like this. It seems that Don Hazen's argument is driven by fear. He argues from a position of powerlessness disguised as pragmatism. Rather than confront B.S. on Fox News and other media outlets, he would rather candidates stick their heads in the sand or turn tail and flee, justifying their fear using rationalizations on how Fox is irrelevant.

Not only is this cowardice, it is also elitist--Fox News, like it or hate it, still reaches a large segment of the population. Rather than attempting to engage with the Fox-viewing public, Hazen would rather we wall ourselves off among other pseudo-progressives and then congratulate ourselves on our own brilliance and progressiveness. "Trust us liberals, we're so much better than all you conservatives that we can ignore you altogether."

Hazen is just the latest of a long line of intellectuals, going back to José Ortega y Gasset and earlier, who are terrified of the "masses" and seek to keep them disempowered by attacking anyone who dares to speak for them or even speak to them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

After having my curiousity piqued by a comment made by the blogger Promethus6, I compared the comments attached to the articles on this subject at both Alternet and Huffingtonpost. The majority opinion seems to be the same, basically that Kucinich shouldn't be criticized for participating in the Fox/CBCI debate, and the debate should should be engaged by all the Democratis candidates, even on Fox News. Then, I looked up articles Alternet and Huffingtonpost on the Nevada Democratic Party's cancellation of the the debate it was going to co-sponsor with Fox News. Whoa! The majority opinion of the commenters on both articles was completely different. At Huffpo in particluar, the mood was positively celebratory. Can anyone explain to me why the reaction is so different this time? Seriously.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So much focus on Kucinich in the comments (horse racing for hard lefties) and so little on the role of Fox in changing news into propergander.

Let's see from experience what to expect from Fox.

In that lovely Republican debate in South Carolina, some of the questions were dandy fantasies, such as would you support torture if a terrorist was going to nuke the U.S.? It was an incredibly ridiculous moment.

In other news, the questions were often filled with premises that were factually flat out wrong. Then Brit Hume asked Ron Paul why he wasn't a foul Democrat for challenging the Rethug mythology about Iraq. That was lovely too. I don't know why Rudy G. or Brit Hume didn't just flat out punch Ron Paul, it looked like they were about to. Then there was the audience of torture enthusiasts applauding vigorously. Note the graphics and little bios on the candidates that made them seem more like awesome athletes in the Super Bowl than people we should seriously question about why they don't believe in evolution.

Many questions went unanswered, such as the quaintness of the Geneva Conventions, habeas corpus, and wiretaps.

There was absolutely nothing to recommend this spectacle Fox put on. Any debate by Fox will have falsehoods in the questions, smears towards liberals, liberal ideas, facts and reality.

Fox is a collosal waste of time, it is a propaganda outlet, and if any Republican had any integrity they'd boycott it like the Dems are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

1) completely ignorant brainwashed retards who are very very unlikely to embrace someone like Dennis K who clearly is some peacenik weirdo who wants to derail the american dream, regardless of how well he articulates his points

2) lefties who want to see what goes down but probably won't be swayed by the insane discourse that is sure to play out

I'm not sure what the strategy is for DK, but it's hard to imagine he will pick up any supporters or make any real progress.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't watch FOX faux news, but am delighted its audience will have the opportunity to hear Kuchinich and Biden. Actually, rather tempting without the other declared Democratic candidates. More time to discuss ideas in depth and avoid the sloganeering of the front-runners and also rans. Now, if Al Gore were invited and accepted, the Black Caucus would really have a coup, three honest leaders (except for the plagiarism thing).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Cut Kucinich some slack, the only way he could get any coverage from the Monopoly Media is to do a Full Monty on the Capitol steps.

He is short, has no money, is ridiculed by chickenshit DLC Democrats, and the Monopoly Media pretends he doesn’t exist.

On the other hand, this Little Big Man talks sense, speaks the truth and has more balls than a bowling alley.

Give this guy and yourself a break. Listen to what he says, and if you like what you hear, send him a donation.

He has my vote in 2008.

.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Go ahead and debate FOX and Kucinich and all those other red herrings until you're red, white and blue in the face.

The CRUCIAL (and overlooked) question is:

'why isn't the CBC also partnering with networks to present a debate platform for Republican candidates?'

Now THAT would be interesting.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How many conservatives does it take to bring back Outhouses?

Answer two: Reagan and Bush.

The rest of them wipe their asses with their left hand because they eat with their right hand.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think it would be silly for the neo(not)cons to just allow Dennis all that airtime. A shill like this Don Hazen person writes stories to discredit the whole debate. The black community welcomes truth and honesty and if given ample airtime, Dennis will make Biden and everyone else on the docket look like the beholden-to-big-money-interest stooges they are.

Shame on Alternet for airing this "story" in the way it is spun. Perhaps Alternet is a "no spin zone" also? I hope Faux News goes ahead with the debate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Powerful security-state Democrats want Kucinich out of the debates. Why? Because Kucinich speaks discomforting truths about their ongoing support for Bush's "war" (read smash-n-grab assault) against the people of Iraq, and offers a powerful political alternative.

The Democratic party sanctioned "antiwar" charade won't stand up next to the real thing.

So, like Nader in '04, Kucinich has to be marginalized, so the Democrats can, once again, end up with a candidate that doesn't make the Republicans look too bad.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

find something wrong with absolutely everything and everyone. leave kucinich alone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]