When Cynthia McKinney lost her seat in Georgia I declared that Black Protest Politics was dead. Kucinich, though not black, is also a bell weather to that particular fact. In the last presidential election the banner was "Anyone but Bush." So called progressives became beholden to the concept of "electability." They weren't voting on the issues they were voting on the apparent ability of the candidate to beat Bush. They settled on Kerry. We see how that went.
It is said that insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results. Again this cycle so called progressives are again seeking the "electable" candidate. This chase puts to a lie the desire for "change" that so many are claiming they are for. Clearly anyone who enters the White House is going to be a change. But so called "progressives" like their Republican counterparts are stuck on "electability " and so the candidates who are clearly not bought and espousing serious policy changes are far and away down the polls. Why?
So called Progressives, especially those white ones that post regularly on Alternet and Kos, are mad at Kucinich over two things. His change of heart over abortion and his "Anyone but Bush" endorsement of John Kerry in the 2004 race. That's all. These high and mighty so called "Progressives" saw fit to make Kucinich "pay" for his "mistake" and now they have their pound of flesh. I hope it was worth it.
If the Libertarian in Republican clothing could out fundraise his opponents, then I'm asking what they hell happened to the supposed "change seekers" out there?
True this election cycle has been like one very long run of American Idol, and I mean that literally because you do realize that those that run the show have the final say regardless to what the "voting" audience says. The media went out of it's way to make a mockery of both Paul and Kucinich yet anyone who was astute saw what was going on. When Kucinich was barred from one of the debates I was thinking that the right thing for the other candidates to do was to bow out of the debate over that. At least it would show their dedication to fairness and democracy, but they didn't so I knew right there who and what they were about. I thought it was even worse for Obama simply because he had kept saying all this stuff about no more "politics as usual." Apparently that doesn't include the politics of media control. But hey what does THAT matter?
But at the end of the day the very people who claimed to be for real "change" simply did not show up money wise or vote wise. It says much about where the country is too. Democrats are on some "anything for the White House" race, and Republicans are trying their best to scare themselves into another Republican administration.
But anyway, after the announcement expect the so called "progressive" sites and blogs to go on about Kuciniche's Ohio problems or how he wasn't a serious candidate or how there was some media conspiracy. But the reality will be there clear as day for anyone to see: Americans don't want change, they simply want to feel good. And as for the Democratic party, consider it terminally infected by corporate interests. I suggest real "progressives" jump ship immediately and form some kind of national party that will have the organization and funds to run their own debates, advertisements, etc. and start grooming candidates with debate skills.