Republican CNN YouTube Debate Review

As a Democrat and someone who is interested in politics I watched this Republican CNN YouTube debate with little emotion invested, but I wanted to see if CNN made improvements to this debate since the Democratic debate. The show--I mean debate started off with introductions of all the candidates. After the introductions Anderson Cooper took the helm and told the audience that 2,000 more YouTube videos were submitted for this debate than the Democratic one. Not a surprise to me. Given the fact that the Democratic YouTube debate was the first one of its kind I think Americans might have felt a little unsure about what it would be like, but after seeing how easy it is to upload a YouTube video I think that might have been a factor into why there was an increase. Ron Paul supporters could have made up that difference also. After laying out that stat Anderson Cooper played a video montage of videos that would not be played like from snowmen, aliens, talking dogs, and anything else that would make Mitt Romney's hair stand up in fear. Let's not forget that many of the candidates refused to participate in the debate for this very reason causing it to be canceled and re-scheduled to 11/28. To me this ruined the entire concept of the debate itself that users submit questions that come from left field. After Anderson Cooper said that these videos would not be seen the audience cheered as if this was a great thing. And then Republicans wonder why they are seen as a party that doesn't support artistic freedom.

(No debate play-by-play...sorry)

After this "debate" finished it felt like democracy just got kicked in the nuts. The format was nothing different, or better than the Democratic debate. In fact I thought this debate was even worse. Very few "curveball" type questions were picked, and most of the questions sounded like they would just be asked in a "regular debate". Time wasn't equally distributed so this debate was no different than others.

The YouTube concept was good, but failed miserably. With CNN picking the questions it defeated the whole purpose of a debate that was supposed to be owned by the people. CNN defended this decision by saying that they didn't want candidates to know what questions were coming so the most popular questions were shelved for stale ones. You would think in the times we live in today CNN/YouTube would be able to put together a system to make sure the popular questions are asked while shielding them from the candidates. We can't ignore the fact that Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani played a prominent role in fixing this debate to their liking, but we can't give CNN a pass for being a spineless media network.

I could go on and on about the flaws of this debate, but most of them are already evident. The Democratic YouTube debate was a flop, but the Republican YouTube debate was floppier.

Dre

DailyKos Disrespects Dennis Kucinich

You read the headline correctly. Last night I was on DailyKos and I noticed a diary slamming Kucinich titled "Dennis Kucinich: Great Ideas, but still a damn bozo". Usually I only visit DailyKos to read the diaries and recommend the good ones, but this was one I had to comment on because it was just plain disrespectful and many of the comments were also. For a while I have had problems with DailyKos, but never felt the need to vent my frustration up until last night. Rather then retyping everything I'm just going to quote what I said. You can find my comments near the bottom of the page under the name "TrueProgressive".

Me:

Kossacks; Democrats taking Kucinich for Granted

I've lost respect for the Kos community because I always thought this site was to fight for progressive Democrats. Markos himself said that the reason why he made this site was to be an alternative to mainstream media. To an extent it is, and to an extent it isn't. What does Kos and the MSM have in common? Obama, Edwards, and Hillary all the time. It's sad.

I don't believe Kucinich will ever change his positions, but I bet we can find some hypocrites in here who support Obama. Isn't Obama the same guy who's running on an image of working together and finding a common ground with Republicans? But if Kucinich tries to do that it's a bad thing. Makes no sense. Keep in mind Dennis never said he would change any of his positions.

Now I have to read about Democrats wanting to kick him out of the party. The fact is Democrats are taking Dennis Kucinich for granted. So Dennis Kucinich gets no credit for being against the Iraq War from the beginning? So Dennis Kucinich gets no credit for supporting a single-payer health care system? So Dennis Kucinich gets no credit for standing up with a backbone and supporting impeachment when the people want it?

My question to all of you Kucinich haters is...If Dennis Kucinich leaves Congress which Democrat will replace him as a Democrat who stands up for the people? He's done more good than bad in his time in Congress. He's taken unpopular positions that were right, and I feel he's irreplaceable at this point.

If we ever lose him from Congress I bet that over time we will regret it. Stop and think about that.

A response:

whether he stays in Congress

is up to the people of his congressional district. But I don't want him to be president.

Anyone can espouse progressive ideas. But it takes much more courage and political skill than Kucinich possesses to actually get those ideas enacted into law.

I don't see that Kucinich risks anything by his outspokenness. He has a fairly safe congressional seat, which he can return to when he loses the primary. He can promise the moon, knowing he'll never be called on to keep his promises.

This is a political blog. Expect people to have diverse and passionate opinions, and expect them to say things in the heat of anger. Not everyone thinks your favorite candidate is the best, and they may have perfectly valid reasons for supporting someone you think is less liberal.

Your screenname indicates you think that you're a true progressive--and that, by implication, others are only pretending to be progressive. That mindset is one reason I don't look favorably on Kucinich.

Me (response to the above):

It's about Respect; Kos doesn't respect Kucinich

I don't think Kucinich will lose in his primary, but that was more directed to those who want to kick him out of the Democratic party.

It's not about Kucinich taking "risks" with being outspoken. It's about him taking the right position at the right time. Kucinich can't force politicians to vote with him. He's had his single-payer health care bill, and his bill to withdraw from Iraq for YEARS. Don't blame Dennis for others not wanting to sign onto that, or for Nancy Pelosi not wanting to bring it up for a vote. Which Democrat running right now took the right position on the Iraq War from the start with votes to prove it? Dennis Kucinich. At what point do we start to respect at a candidate who has a clean record on many Democratic issues and stop supporting candidates with smears on their record? I'd like to know. It's about respect.

Listen, I never said I had a problem with diverse political opinions. Maybe I have terrible luck, but before he introduced the impeachment resolution I don't recall seeing ANYTHING on Kucinich. Maybe once in a blue moon. I thought this was a website that supported Democratic candidates. I'll be fair. I haven't seen much on Biden either. I have problems with someone like Markos who goes on shows and talks about Kucinich like he's crazy which isn't much of a difference from the mainstream media. It starts from the top down.

About being progressive...I don't think every other candidate is pretending to be progressive. I just think some are more pure than others. Just from this comment it shows me you are just trying to dig for reasons not to support Kucinich. If you don't agree with his positions that's a reason not to support him. I can respect that. But if you agree with his entire platform like many Obama supporters do and not support Kucinich then that is mind boggling.

I've got some problems with Kucinich also, but none those have to do with his positions or ability to stand up for the people. It's more along the lines of him being "too nice" and not criticizing the other candidates(by name) enough, and not running a more effective campaign.

That diary was supposed to be about criticizing Kucinich for talking up Ron Paul (which I don't necessarily have a problem with, but ill talk about this later), but it ended up as a diary full of insults towards Kucinich. You will see above that I'm criticized for not liking diverse opinions, but my criticism is exactly that! Not enough diverse opinions! So my question is....Am I overreacting? Do others feel the same way I do about DailyKos becoming too mainstream? Anyone else fed up with with Hillary, Obama, and Edwards all the time on DailyKos?

Thanks for reading,

Dre

[UPDATED 11/27 6:12pm]

new response to me:

you have a fundamental misunderstanding

of politics. It's very easy to espouse progressive ideas. It is extremely difficult to enact one's ideas into law in any form that one finds acceptable. Politics, despite the public's impression of it, is hard fucking work if you're serious about it. It takes time, effort, and the ability to compromise and eat a lot of shit.

Any congressman can introduce a resolution for impeachment. Anyone. It takes zero courage or effort to do that. But it takes much more work to figure out sensible, realistic policies, communicate one's ideas effectively to the public, and to build political support for one's proposals. Kucinich is either unwilling or unable to do any of those things.

Like it or not, Pelosi's the Speaker of the House. Kucinich should respect that fact. But he didn't meet with her to try to persuade her this was the right thing to do, he didn't build a coalition in support of his resolution, he didn't check to see whether there was sufficient support for impeachment in the Senate. He just sent a big fuck you to Pelosi by putting out a resolution that has zero chance of accomplishing its stated purpose. It's simply irresponsible to introduce a bill that has no chance of passing and waste everyone's time.

Your word choice--"pure"--is once again telling. This isn't a contest to see who can say the "purest" and most progressive things. We elect those who have the best chance of getting a reasonable number of our proposals enacted. Our system of government was set up to make radical change very difficult. No one, not even our most visionary and politically skilled presidents like Lincoln and FDR, got all the changes they wanted. Kucinich, who isn't nearly as talented as those men were, has very little chance of making any real change.

I agree with many of Kucinich's positions. But he is neither a persuasive spokesman for his ideas, nor is he capable of getting them enacted into law, and so I cannot support his campaign for the presidency. That he is strident and abrasive towards anyone who disagrees with him is further reason why I don't want him as president.

Back in Business

My apologies for not having written anything on this blog for a while, but I've been busy with other things.

I Support Dennis Kucinich

You will notice on the side a logo for the Dennis Kucinich campaign for President. From this point up until the 2008 Election I'm going to be writing some blogs about Dennis. That's not to say that I won't talk about other subjects, but don't be alarmed if you see a bunch of blog posts about Kucinich in the near future. I apologize to any readers that have accepted my style of being straight down the middle on everything, but because the media is against Dennis Kucinich I have to take matters into my own hands and try to make change.

Dre