{Empty title} | The Nation

This idea that people disrespect Dennis Kucinich baffles me.

It's a good article, but is it true? Are people so blasé about impeachment that Kucinich's activism in Congress and campaign didn't open their eyes to his presidential platform, which was so vastly better than all the others?

All due respect to the critical importance of this paper in these times, I have a problem with The Nation's often cynical rhetorical snubs and suppositions. They did this with 9/11 Truth, hence I stopped reading it a year ago.

I've neither heard nor read any such "snark" about Dennis's platform or style or integrity. His obscurity was more about his not accepting nor raising a $100 million of corporate graft with which to run some sleazy TV ad campaign to artificially manipulate the brain-dead, ad-addicted, consumerist, electorate. That’s a testament to his vastly greater integrity over Edwards, not the popularity or lack of his positions.

Likely his troubles back home are more about media manipulation of an unthinking, robotically media-controlled anti-intelligent, red-state constituency than anything to do with style, votes in Congress or aptitude. His problems are likely due to the general idiocy of the people, who are ceaselessly convinced by marketing mercenaries and planted smear to vote against their own interest (see "What’s the Matter With Kansas").