It’s fairly obvious that some powerful entity in the Democratic Party establishment wants Gravel eliminated
One would hope that as the lies become outlandish enough, they are no longer believed. Instead, perhaps Goebbels was right: Tell a big enough lie, for long enough, and the people will believe you.
January 12, 2008 at 10:19:38
by Farrell Winter
To read the entire article:
An interesting if minor side note: someone claiming to be part of Mike Gravel’s campaign phoned CNN following the Iowa prayer circle – I mean vote – to say falsely that the former Senator had dropped out of the race.
Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, who did drop out, each received more votes than Gravel, who got no votes at all. Why didn’t this same mysterious person claim that Kucinich, who likewise got no votes, also dropped out?
Is it because Kucinich will endorse the eventual Democratic nominee, while Gravel has hinted that he may not? Is it because Kucinich has a future political career to consider, while Gravel at age 78 wants to leave a legacy behind?
In this case, the legacy of a national referendum process, empowering American citizens to make laws along with the Congress.
Is it because Kucinich did not challenge Hillary’s vote for the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment,
authorizing the U.S. to go to war with Iran,
while Gravel did so challenge her (and publicly at that)?
At this juncture, let us not forget the winner in Iowa. Obama did not vote for this amendment. In fact, he couldn’t be bothered to show up and vote at all. However, he has previously expressed his support for using nuclear weapons against Iran – as has Edwards.
As excellent as Kucinich is, he doesn’t describe the Iraq fiasco as Bush’s oil war, as Gravel does. He does not speak of U.S. imperialism, as Gravel does. Kucinich is the best of the worst, a tolerable fly in the ointment of Democratic Party business-as-usual. Gravel represents a definite threat to this status quo.
It’s fairly obvious that some powerful entity in the Democratic Party establishment wants
Gravel eliminated
Comments
Hillary's tell ...
Submitted on January 18th, 2008 by PurityofessenceInteresting that in thanking all the other democratic candidates after her Iowa loss, even going so far as to mention Kucinich, Hillary Clinton left out Mike Gravel. I think it was an interesting "tell". It speaks to her anger at being dressed down by the former senator over her vote on Iran and also to her push to having him excluded from any further debates. Gravel's slap down of Hillary provided a very slight opening to the other candidates and it is certainly something that she is still pissed about...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npzN3dZR6JM
Do you think the public will ever wake up?
Submitted on January 26th, 2008 by mfp218I'm tired of the best government money can buy and I'm tired of being manipulated by television spots that mud sling. Is it possible that Americans will wake up and smell the coffee and realize they are being tricked? Will the public ever display any sense of intellegence and start taking an effort to research the "unknowns" in order to get more than what they are telling us?
I like Mike and plan to support him inspite of the fact he has little notoriety. I'm sick of Hillary and Obama and if Mike and K Man drop out, I'll have to go independent. Am I really the only one who thinks this way?
It appears to me everyone that makes the debates are simply puppets. We are getting to be a nation of crazy people all bickering about the inconsequential and avoiding the real issues all together. Hang in there Mike and maybe the public will wake up.
You are so right. The first
Submitted on January 18th, 2008 by georgannYou are so right.
The first time he infuriated her was when he called her on Bill's fictional surplus. I was suprised he made in any debate after that. The Clinton's play hard and dirty.