When I worked for Dennis Kucinich’s presidential campaign in 2003, he routinely won the most applause at debates but was minimized or entirely left out of the next day’s stories in the corporate media. This meant that peace, and fair trade, and single-payer healthcare were left out too. At one debate at the University of New Hampshire, Kucinich pushed back.
Ted Koppel of ABC opened the debate with questions about endorsements. The second round of questions was about standing in the polls. The third was about the campaigns’ bank accounts. One had to wonder when, if ever, the debate would touch on, you know, what the candidates intended to do if elected. Kucinich cut Koppel off, saying:
"I want the American people to see where media takes politics in this country. We start talking about endorsements, now we’re talking about polls and then talking about money. When you do that you don’t have to talk about what’s important to the American people."
The applause for this was so intense that the other candidates on the stage started joining in the media bashing. Kucinich had briefly changed the narrative from a horse race to a demand for decent political reporting.
That’s what he should have done on Wednesday when he flipped to support a disastrous health insurance bill. Rather than talking about the legitimacy of the presidency, Kucinich should have talked about the illegitimacy of the current narrative in the corporate media.
The major corporate news outlets, and all the smaller outlets that follow their lead, and all the partisan outlets that obey the White House, have created a false story that was clearly turning Kucinich’s own constituents against him. According to this story, of the dozens of Democrats and over a hundred Republicans not committed to voting for the insurance corporation bailout bill, only Kucinich’s vote mattered, so the blame would go to him if it failed, just as Ralph Nader alone was blamed for Al Gore losing the election that Gore won in Florida in 2000.
Kucinich was to be blamed for denying people healthcare by opposing a bill that makes the healthcare system worse. Now he’ll be credited with helping to provide people with healthcare, even though he’s done the opposite. I think he gave in to the power of a false narrative, and that he ought to have said so. When Kucinich fought with us for impeachment, and John Conyers refused to act, Conyers admitted that his greatest fear was of media hostility. When Kucinich pushes to end wars, other congress members tell us they cannot afford to challenge media nonsense about "supporting the troops." The corporate media now run our government, and need to be called out.
I don’t think Kucinich flipped because of money, either direct "contributions" or money through the Democratic Party. I think, on the contrary, he hurt himself financially by letting down his supporters across the country. I don’t think he caved into the power of party or presidency directly. I don’t think they threatened to back a challenger or strip his subcommittee chair or block his bills, although all of that might have followed. I think the corporate media has instilled in people the idea that presidents should make laws and that the current president is trying to make a law that can reasonably be called "healthcare reform" or at least "health insurance reform."
I don’t excuse Kucinich flipping his vote. I just want to find the right explanation for it. There may be many factors I’m unaware of. But I have no doubt that with real freedom of the press in this country it wouldn’t have happened. This sad incident is not an argument for ending the two-party system. That argument has been made overwhelmingly for many years. We must end that system. Nor is this an argument for campaign finance reform, although we won’t survive long without that either. Nor is this an argument to give up on Dennis Kucinich, since we would clearly have a dramatically better Congress if we had 10 others as good as him. Kucinich’s cave in is most clearly an argument for media reform and for progressive investment in truly independent media.



15 Comments

I strongly suspect you’re right that it was the media, not the money. I was rather shocked at the way that not only the media but the “liberal” blogoshpere jumped on him. It was almost as if someone had given a signal and everyone started throwing rocks at him. It’s truly sad that he caved, however, what he did was cave.
David, you are exactly right:
Many of us here are distrustful of the MSM, but still we consume it. As some here know, I have been highly critical of Lawrence O’Donnell for his constant bleating about the impossibility to do substantive reform. There have lately been discussions here about his “poorly framed” question the other night to Michael Moore, when O’Donnell asked if DK should go “practical” and vote yes.
I frankly couldn’t care less about Larry O’Donnell’s employment picture or the title under which he is commenting. But if we’re going to to have an Op-Ed media rather than actual journalism, then let’s by-god get on with it. Let’s stop even pretending that facts are important, and have guys like O’Donnell come out with guns blazing fully in favor of progressive ideals, rather than commentary that deflates hope – or, when interviewing fellow villagers (and that’s all you are, Markos and Arianna) let’s swear them to uphold those same ideals rather than lob softball questions tailored to suit the particular axe (“reform”) they are seeking to grind.
“I know I have to make a decision, not on the bill as I would like to see it, but the bill as it is. My criticisms of the legislation have been well reported. I do not retract them. I incorporate them in this statement. They still stand as legitimate and cautionary. I still have doubts about the bill. I do not think it is a first step toward anything I have supported in the past. This is not the bill I wanted to support, even as I continue efforts until the last minute to modify the bill.
However after careful discussions with the President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, Elizabeth my wife and close friends, I have decided to cast a vote in favor of the legislation. If my vote is to be counted, let it now count for passage of the bill, hopefully in the direction of comprehensive health care reform. We must include coverage for those excluded from this bill. We must free the states. We must have control over private insurance companies and the cost their very existence imposes on American families. We must strive to provide a significant place for alternative and complementary medicine, religious health science practice, and the personal responsibility aspects of health care which include diet, nutrition, and exercise.
I want to thank those who have supported me personally and politically as I have struggled with this decision. I ask for your continued support in our ongoing efforts to bring about meaningful change. As this bill passes I will renew my efforts to help those state organizations which are aimed at stirring a single payer movement which eliminates the predatory role of private insurers who make money not providing health care. I have taken a detour through supporting this bill, but I know the destination I will continue to lead, for as long as it takes, whatever it takes to an America where health care will be firmly established as a civil right.”
http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=176730
Excellent analysis and thought-provoking!
Kucinich operates in the deepest shadows of anybody in government, I mean the shadow cast by all the others, the limelight gtrabbers, like Grayson. All that money and praise Grayson got for grandstanding in blogspeak on the House floor belonged to Kucinich, I thought. Kucinich had been saying that stuff for months, but who cared? Dennis has never had a prayer, but I always thought he knew it and would stick to his guns on pure principle forever. Look at the limelight he’s in now. Must feel quite alien to him.
David, there are a lot of posts about Dennis today. But this is the best one I’ve seen from the point of view of explaining his switch. I’ve been watching the Media pick up the Dennis as Ralph narrative over the past few days, and especially MSNBC seeming to have executed a systematic campaign against him. It is hard to stand against that, and I do think you’re right in pointing out that it was the decisive factor in his flip.
Recommended. But you are not calling anybody names and swearing eternal damnation against anyone who does not agree with you. Refreshing.
But you should be flaming these millionaire corporate hacks. Their job is maintaining censorship and corporate control of mass communications, with no dissent allowed.
you and me both, thought we could count on him and when that is gone, what hope is there? I am done.
thanks for sharing your take.
I still think he’s one of the most principled reps there are, even if he’s taking the dive.
Have your read this diary by powwow?
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/35655/
A very good analysis yes, but they why doesn’t really matter to me.
The fact is he flipped, and the man I was touting around as the only honest congressman shit all over that title.
I also don’t agree with you that 10 more of him would be good now. If he’s willing to cave in on this he’ll be willing to cave in when we’re back here for claimate change.
What’s to stop him from “supporting the president” then?
While I am disheartened by Dennis Kucinich’s acceptance of the terrible Senate HCR plan, I can’t place all the blame at his feet. The truth is that the Progressive community, if one actually exists, never had his back.
I campaigned for Dennis in ’04 and even traveled with him in the early primary states in ’08. In New Hampshire, people would come up to us, grab a button or two declaring that Dennis was their favorite candidate, and then march off holding their Edwards sign. Or say that they took an online test that told them Kucinich was their ideal choice – but Hillary was a woman so they were supporting her.
By the time we left Nevada it was “I believe in everything Dennis stands for, but Obama might win so I’ll support him.”
Had the majority of these “Progressives” had the strength of their convictions, we might this very day live in a world with two less wars and the forgone conclusion of Medicare for all.
We laugh when the right wing touts a regular guy you could drink a beer with, or proclaims a hockey mom has the qualifications for being vice president. Then we play the “electability” game and trade all our principles for someone who has the personality of a TV game show host.
Let’s be very clear on this: the perfect has never been, and never will be, the enemy of the good. The enemy of the good is the fool who sets his sights low and settles for less. Dennis Kucinich championed single-payer health care from the start. He co-wrote HR676. The sell-outs are the original co-sponsors who dropped out the minute the White House indicated a different direction. These are the turncoats who should be primaried.
I know the Congressman is used to being attacked by the Right. He also understands that the media will ignore or marginalize him. But when the Left piles on as well, options dry up fast.
We all know he’s willing to continue the fight for Single-Payer. Who will stand with him?
Anybody who stands with Kucinich on anything in the future is an idiot.
Backing something or someone else that Kucinich happens to be a tag-along follower supporter of might be an acceptable risk.
But placing any trust at all in this gutless MFer? No thank you.
Long story short: EMANUEL __ENCOURAGED__ his D.I.N.O. SENATORS, to OBSTRUCT the Public Option for weeks and MONTHS on end… but the same “can’t do anything” Big Finance & Insurance industry hatchet man WHIPPED THE HELL out of House Democrats who were slow to bow to his final (“health care”) sellout bill this past week.
Thanks for that, David.
I, too, am disappointed at the courageous Congressman’s being “flipped” by Emanuel’s arm-twisting to support a horrible bill.
What few are reporting, is that Emanuel (and his front-man, Obama) spent ALL of 2009 saying “We Don’t have 61 votes in the Senate… so WE MUST WATER DOWN a health care ‘reform’ bill to ATTRACT ONE LOUSY Repug Senator.
(the massive Dem. Super-majorities of 2008 notwithstanding).
That was Emanuel’s first delay, derail, deny, and destroy tactic.
Once the Democrat’s initial SUPERMAJORITY! enthusiasm and momentum had BEEN KILLED by Emanuel’s “61 votes needed” strategy and watering-down, he next proceeded to ALLOWING the “Conserva-Dems” to GRIND DOWN the “reform” bill even more.
Emanuel artfully used TAG-TEAM OBSTRUCTIONIST “yellow-dog” Dem. senators to accomplish this – MAKING IT LOOK like RANDOM, “conservative principles against socialist health care” (conservatives LOVING “socialized bailouts for fat-cat bankers notwithstanding), first with Max Baucus, then with Ben Nelson, then with Mary Landrie, then Blanche Lincoln, then even “good guy” Kent Conrad, then the despised Senator Joe Lieberman – ALL with EMANUEL’s off-stage DIRECTION and encouragement.
The Washington Post & New York Times (the undisputed “leaders” of the “mainstream media”) duly reported “the chaos” and “principled conservative opposition to ‘socialized health care’” – failing to notice (or report) that Emanuel was STAGE-MANAGING the ‘DINO’ SABOTAGE all along.
The Treacherous Emanuel especially had to activate Lieberman when PUBLIC OPTION support boiled over, including Harry Reid bowing to Liberal activists threats to sit out his 2010 reelection campaign and actually MENTIONING “Public Option” on national airwaves! which forced the treacherous Emanuel to activate his fellow Neo-Con “MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE” Lieberman to deal the coup de grace to the Public Option…
… and EVEN THEN, Emanuel had to TWIST DENNIS KUCINICH’s arm right off, several months later, to accomplish his bloody murder.
Long story short: EMANUEL __ENCOURAGED__ his D.I.N.O. SENATORS, to OBSTRUCT the Public Option for weeks and MONTHS on end… but the same “can’t do anything” Big Finance & Insurance industry hatchet man WHIPPED THE HELL out of House Democrats who were slow to bow to his final (“health care”) sellout bill this past week.
well stated, mcChug….
I must confess, even though I donated to Mr. Kucinich, and thought him the best candidate, I also donated to Edwards, thinking the “populist” message would travel farther with him.
Don’t forget, even “BOY SCOUT” Al Gore, who was so DISGUSTED with Clinton’s narcissism, STUPIDLY bought in to the (insane Neo-Con WashPost & Neo-Con NY Times) notion that JOE LIEBERMAN was “a moral values” “leader”
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2010/030210.html
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2010/022810.html
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/031509.html