Political Animal
Blog
One news story in the past week that hasn’t gotten as much attention as it deserves is the defeat of Dennis Kucinich in a Congressional primary. His old seat had been eliminated, forcing him to run against incumbent Democrat Marcy Kaptur in a new district. That we’ve lost such a stalwart progressive champion is quite bad enough; that he was defeated by an anti-choice Democrat during a time when reproductive rights are under such ferocious assault is even worse.
But what really rubs salt in the wound is the unmitigated glee with which his defeat has been celebrated by so-called liberals; for example, see this smug little piece by Abby Rapoport in The American Prospect, and this particularly nasty “preemptive eulogy” by the latest generation of New Republic wankers.
Glenn Greenwald and Digby say most of what needs to be said about the distressing tendency of many left-of-center types to eat their own, but I have a few things to add. Kucinich’s main sin, according to the Church of the Savvy establishment liberals who had it in for him, was his “weirdness.” And sure, some of Dennis’s New Age rhetoric and beliefs were pretty goofy.
But they were also completely harmless. Members of the Christian right like Rick Santorum have beliefs that not only at least as weird, but that are also quite malevolent, particularly where women and LGBTQ folks are concerned. And yet, you never hear their own political comrades-in-arms on the right taking them to task for that kind of weirdness. Conservatives tend to see, correctly, that what matters most is having a good soldier in the fight, and they generally don’t engage in bitchy, self-defeating behavior like attacking a comrade-in-arms because of his or her personal quirks. They realize that that’s a distraction from more important goals and that it hurts their movement’s effectiveness.
Liberals, not so much. I’ve heard establishment liberals go after Kucinich which a ferocity that I could only wish they’d unleash on conservatives — or on Blue Dog Dems, for that matter. There was never any substance to their complaints that I could see, beyond their own personal discomfort with some aspect of Kucinich’s personality — his eccentricity or (in one case I remember) his “ego.” (Like he was the only dude in Washington with an ego? Stop the presses!). The fact that he was a progressive champion who for so many years strongly and consistently fought for working people, against war, and against the egregious civil liberties abuses that have been carried out by presidents of both parties went unremarked. That he was often willing to stand up for unpopular but righteous causes should have made him more valued by his comrades on the left, but for establishment Dem types, this was seen as all the more reason to mock him.
Here’s a prime example: one thing that Kucinich always gets a bad rap for is his tenure as mayor of Cleveland, when the city defaulted on its loans. But what his critics don’t point out is that the reason the city was forced to default is that Kucinich stood up to the banks and refused to sell the city’s publicly owned electric utility, a stance that was strongly in the public interest. It was a courageous act — the Cleveland mafia even put out a hit on him for his trouble. But his courage in this episode is cited by his critics as yet another example of ol’ Dennis just being weird, for some unfathomable reason, rather than standing up for an important principle.
Personally, I’ll always remember the one time I saw Kucinich in action. It was in 2004, during his campaign for president. He came to the University of Chicago as part of some event and gave a speech. He arrived late, and didn’t get there until something like ten o’clock at night. Apparently, he’d been up since five in the morning, campaigning all day long. You’d think that anyone, and especially someone his age, would be exhausted. But it was quite the opposite: the man radiated energy and charimsa. He gave a passionate speech on the importance of fighting for progressive values, especially in dark times — and lest we forget, 2004, the height of the Bush years, was a very dark time indeed in our history. He was nothing less than inspiring, and I’ll always be grateful to him for giving me some hope during one of the more depressing periods, politically, in my lifetime.
The sniping against Kucinich is symptomatic of a deeper dysfunction among progressives and the Democratic party. To the degree we treat perfectly decent and effective progressives like Kucinich with abuse and derision rather than respect, we give ammunition to the other side, and end up doing untold damage to our own cause.
Facebook
Twitter
Gandalf on March 11, 2012 10:56 AM:
Having lived close to Kucinich's district for a number of years I've heard the accusations that he was a whacko by people from both sides but when you ask them just what whacko things he's done they never really come up with anything concrete. Oh of course the default is mentioned as if to say how dare he stand up to the bankers but all in all they never come up with anything specific that he's done unlike the hoard of republicans who despite all evidencs to the contray continue to espouse the beleif that global warming is a hoax. Now I ask you who'are the real whackos?
pillsy on March 11, 2012 10:57 AM:
I don't think this is correct, on two counts. One is simply that Dennis Kucinich was not a good soldier at all. He had a very poor voting record when it came down to supporting key Democratic bills in the House, and this puts him in marked contrast to other genuinely left-wing figures in Congress, like Bernie Sanders. He may have been an effective spokesman for major progressive causes, but that isn't enough to justify holding a House seat, in large measure because he can be an effective spokesman for those causes without being in the House, or indeed holding any sort of elective office.
The other count is that the way the Republican Party is willing to embrace a guy like Santorum, who is a much bigger weirdo than Kucinich, and whose weirdness is deeply entangled with bigoted and extreme political beliefs, is a major flaw in the Republican Party. In my adult life, the one political lesson that's been hammered home by events, time and again, is that the level of unity displayed by the Republican Party is not a good thing at all, not for the GOP and certainly not for the country as a whole. I'm a Democrat for a lot of reasons, but one of those reasons is that I dislike the Republican style of politics, and if the Democratic Party just becomes a left-wing mirror image of the Republicans, I think we'll all be worse off.
Emma on March 11, 2012 11:01 AM:
What pilsy said. And I'd like to add that Greenwald and Digby should see the beam in their own eye before criticizing anyone else, considering the amount of crap they shovel at the President on a regular basis.
jheartney on March 11, 2012 11:23 AM:
Here are a couple of Daily Kos diaries making the case against Kucinich:
Kos on supporting Kucinich in 2008
A diary noting that Kucinich supported teh GOP gerrymander of Ohio
EdgewaterJoe on March 11, 2012 11:28 AM:
I would also add that Kuchinich has been graceless and petty in accepting his loss, and that dumping on Marcy Kaptur is being unfair to a Democrat that has generally been more supportive of Obama than Kucinich.
zandru on March 11, 2012 11:40 AM:
I'm with emma and pillsy. Kucinich talked the good talk - boy, could he talk - and was a semi-regular on Democracy Now. But when it came to producing results, he didn't leave much of a mark, and he typically preferred to vote with the Republicans, because a good bill was never good enough for him.
Remember the months of public Presidential and Nancy Pelosial begging to get him to vote for the Affordable Care Act? He played the drama queen even better than Olympia!
And about his ungraciousness - prior to the redistricting in Ohio, when the word was that his district would be consolidated, his immediate response was that he'd just move to Washington state and run there. Yeah, Ohio needs that kind of guy.
matt w on March 11, 2012 11:52 AM:
It might also be worth noting that Kucinich was strictly anti-abortion until he started running for President.
hells littlest angel on March 11, 2012 11:54 AM:
I don't know of a single serious progressive who is glad Kucinich is gone because of his "weirdness." Speaking for myself, he's just a bizarro-world teabagger -- rigid, uncompromising and self-righteous -- who lost to a far better candidate. Tough shit for him.
Gandalf on March 11, 2012 12:02 PM:
A close examination of the voting record of Kaptur and Kucinich might change the minds of some of you Kucinich haters.
ceilidth on March 11, 2012 12:05 PM:
I checked on her NARAL record: 70%. That included the compromise vote that got us Obamacare. I guess you prefered that we not have that. That's your opinion and you are entitled to have it. I'll take the compromise. Is Kaptur perfect. No way, but neither is Kucinich. If it were my district, I think I'd have voted for her with some misgivings because overall I think he's a bit of a nut case. I know Amy Goodman loves him, but we need people who aren't just grandstanding but governing.
John on March 11, 2012 12:08 PM:
If you hadn't lost me at the very beginning of this post, you certainly would have when you decided to call Kucinich "effective." I will never, ever understand the love affair that some on the left have with Kucinich.
He's a self-aggrandizing narcissist and a crank. There are plenty of left-wing Democrats in the Housefighting the good fight. We don't hear as much about them because they are actually focused on doing constructive things, not on promoting their own brand.
And attacking Kaptur for being pro-life is pretty unfair, given that Kucinich is about as principled on reproductive rights as Mitt Romney.
Gene on March 11, 2012 12:12 PM:
I'm prepared to cut Kucinich slack for a lot of things, but not for cozying up to Bashar al-Assad months after the Syrian uprising began.
Caffiend on March 11, 2012 12:22 PM:
I'm sorry...My head exploded when you cited the purity-troll Hamwald as bemoaning the tendency of Democrats to eat their own.
FlipYrWhig on March 11, 2012 12:51 PM:
Greenwald and Digby are near the bottom of the list of people with insight into liberals not eating their own. They're either enraged or depressed, respectively, over any political development that doesn't correspond to their world view, with a special interest in cataloging perceived Obama trespasses against The Left Thing.
POed Lib on March 11, 2012 1:27 PM:
1) He is anti-H1B, which is very good.
2) He is forced-birth catholic, which is very bad.
3) He is generally liberal, which is good
4) He is totally ineffective, which is bad.
In the end, it's a wash. Bye, Dennis.
LJL on March 11, 2012 1:29 PM:
Kuchinich as gone to a better place more suited to his talents and ambitions. He is now free to lecture without the hindrance of the Congressional calendar. Judging from his legislative record, he didn't seem to be very good at writing actual legislation, but he enjoyed talking about it. And he talked a lot better than he ever legislated.
TCinLA on March 11, 2012 1:38 PM:
pillsy said: I'm a Democrat for a lot of reasons, but one of those reasons is that I dislike the Republican style of politics, and if the Democratic Party just becomes a left-wing mirror image of the Republicans, I think we'll all be worse off.
So, if you're a Democrat for these reasons, then how do you square this with what you said in your first paragraph, which says the exact opposite. I'm aware that most Americans are so politically-illiterate they can indeed hold two opposing thoughts simultaneously without knowing they are doing so, but with people smart enough to come here, it's just damn embarrassing to see.
Kucinich was a thousand times better than the "good lefties" you appear to favor. I don't know how old you are, but it's apparent you either were not involved politically in 2001-2003, or have forgotten what those days were like for anyone who opposed Little Georgie's Invasion of Poland, er, I mean Iraq. Dennis Kucinich was one of the few people who stood against this, while all the "smart Democrats" like Hillary and Kerry and the rest of the wet-noodle-for-a-backbone "good soldier" types sold us out for political calculations in favor of their personal advancement as opposed to the good of the country.
Dennis Kucinich is one of the few real patriots in Congress, and it is a terrible loss to have him defeated by a scummy DINO like Marcie Kaptur, another of the "calculators."
The rest of you idiots so "offended" by Greenwald and Digby - who actually have principles they think are important, as does Kuchinich - are the kind of "liberals" who are typical American morons: your eyes glaze over when anyone tells you you aren't a citizen of The Greatest Country That Ever Existed. Do you think Obama wouldn't still be the Obummer he was as corporate stooge last year, if the lefties you're "offended" by hadn't made it clear to him that he either gets back to what he claimed to be in the beginning or he becomes a one-term idiot? And he got the message, didn't he? No thanks to you "loyalists."
It's embarrassing to see this place so full of political illiterates this morning.
FlipYrWhig on March 11, 2012 2:21 PM:
Oh, right, I forgot that in the blogosphere progressivism is invariably the result of a lot of talk about not compromising one's principles, followed by a round of credit-claiming for pushing the discussion to the left and a round of blaming for the ones who actually hammered out a coalition between non-liberals (the majority of Democrats, dislike it though I may) and liberals. Masterful. Kucinich and Greenwald are two peas in a pod, committed to the idea that big talk about principle is itself a kind of politics. It isn't. It's masturbation.
eemom on March 11, 2012 2:48 PM:
"that he was defeated by an anti-choice Democrat during a time when reproductive rights are under such ferocious assault is even worse."
That the writer of this post is apparently ignorant of Kucinich's own history as an anti-choice Democrat is just, well, rich.
Sad to see Benen's old stomping ground infested with fact-challenged purity trolls.
Ckelly on March 11, 2012 3:10 PM:
Tc is exactly right. Progressives need to stand firm for their ideology not give in and hammer out some moderate conservative " center right" Romney-esque policy
SecularAnimist on March 11, 2012 3:59 PM:
Kathlee Geier wrote: "But what really rubs salt in the wound is the unmitigated glee with which his defeat has been celebrated by so-called liberals ... sure, some of Dennis’s New Age rhetoric and beliefs were pretty goofy."
Actually, it rubs a bit of salt in the wound that you disparage Kucinich's "rhetoric and beliefs" as "goofy" without apparently feeling any need to justify that aspersion with examples.
What I think is really more important is that many "so-called liberals" do not in fact embrace the actual liberal positions that Kucinich has fought for.
Instead, not unlike Ditto-Heads who embrace whatever bit of the corporate agenda is branded "conservative" on any given day by Limbaugh and Fox, they embrace whatever is branded "liberal" on any given day by Team Obama.
Thus, fighting for once "liberal" ideas like single-payer, or a public option, or Medicare expansion, becomes "goofy" -- while a 30-year-old Republican proposal, the individual mandate to buy insurance from for-profit corporations, becomes the "new liberal" position.
Barbara on March 11, 2012 4:49 PM:
Kucinich was anti-choice (no doubt he viewed as part of his prized eclecticism/eccentricity that he thought made him "special") until he wanted to run for larger office as a Democrat. He is just another male Dem who views women's interests purely through the spectrum of his own. No thanks.
Robert on March 11, 2012 5:13 PM:
tc is exactly wrong. He isn't promoting a political party, he is promoting a religion and he thinks he is the head priest. Calling those who disagree 'stupid' or 'traitors to the cause' is a bullshit ego trip.
Andrew J. Lazarus on March 11, 2012 5:25 PM:
Unlike leftists Bernie Sanders, Barney Frank, or even Barbara Lee, Kucinich accomplished absolutely nothing as a Representative. Nor, I might add, did he ever win any awards for Plays Well With Others. He comes across as insufferably self-righteous, and his refusal to congratulate Kaptur (or to endorse her) is even more evidence that for Kucinich, it's all about—Kucinich!
The choice was not between ObamaCare and single payer. The choice was not even between ObamaCare today and single payer next time. Politics is the Art of the Possible which makes him a failure as a politician.
Matt on March 11, 2012 5:29 PM:
I think it's past time we realized that the "pragmatist/idealist" debate, a.k.a centrist/left-wing, moderate/progressive, conformist/free-thinker, team-player/lone-wolf, sellout/purity troll, capitulationist/naysayer, accommodationist/contrarian, chickenshit/brat, dailykos/mydd, Obama/Clinton, Kerry/Dean, Gore/Bradley, Clinton/Souljah, New Republic/DemocraticUnderground.com, DLC/MoveOn, Greenwald/Shields dichotomy...
...is a false distinction and useless for any practical purposes regardless of which side you fall on.
Failing that, perhaps both "sides" could acknowledge that Kucinich, at least, is one of the many hundreds of special cases that don't fit at all neatly into the latter box. He's as much at home in any particular subset of the Democratic Party as, say, Ron Paul is for the Republicans. Which is to say, you can with perfect honesty paint him as an extreme fringer who ought to have been booted from the party decades ago, or as just a mildly quirky version of the status quo.
I'm not trying to be the Sensible Centrist here. There is no center because there isn't that much of a fundamental difference, regardless of how flattering to one's sense of party loyalty a good civil war can be.
Jason on March 11, 2012 5:36 PM:
Project much there Robert? That sounds exactly what you neoliberals are doing. It's funny these so called liberals call Glenn and Digby "purists" all the while scorning anybody who doesn't lap it up for Obama. C'mon, you couldn't get more hypocritical if you tried. You guys define "purist." If anybody steps outside of your comfort zone to promote real progressive policies, or to call out those who're enabling the party's move to the right...you all flip. You want a purist mindset (aka Groupthink). Challenging the status quo and Obama is out of the question for you guys, it's pathetic really. I'm disgusted with today's liberals and their ignorant partisan loyalty to the democratic party.
Picachu on March 11, 2012 5:56 PM:
Don't you get it??? ANYONE who stands for principle over pragmatics is marginalized as quirky or nutty. Americans are soooo corrupt that anyone standing for anything other than immediate financial gain is seen as the weirdo.
Cha on March 11, 2012 7:46 PM:
"Caffiend on March 11, 2012 12:22 PM:
I'm sorry...My head exploded when you cited the purity-troll Hamwald as bemoaning the tendency of Democrats to eat their own."
That is Orwellian. What in the hell has happened to Steve's former blog???!!
I couldn't care less about Dennis' "whackiness"..it's his "Fecklessness", Kathleen. Angry Black Lady gets it exactly right on Balloon Juice..
http://www.balloon-juice.com/2012/03/11/its-not-kucinichs-wackiness-its-his-fecklessness/#more-97496
FreakyBeaky on March 11, 2012 9:18 PM:
Yeah, god forbid anyone should stand for anything; or that a political party would have, you know, some ideas. It's playing well with others that counts. There is sometimes a difference between right and wrong, and DK was on the right side of that when it came to trivial matters like war and peace.
His previous anti-choice position, for example, is problematic - but less attractive than Kaptur's CURRENT anti-choice position? NOW? I think not.
His ACA position - eh. ACA is a bandage, not a major fix. It's nice not to just bleed out, but it would surgery to actually fix the problem would be nice. Maybe it will buy us time to get a real fix. Maybe, on the other hand, it will never take effect. If it doesn't, the people who will notice will be massively outnumbered by those who won't.
The reason establishment so-called "liberals" despise DK is because their job is to be attack dogs for the corporate state against anything to the left of THEM.
Janet on March 11, 2012 9:38 PM:
Wow. I really hope this post is an outlier for this blog post-Benen. All we need is another Greenwald adherent. i hope this poster is a short-timer.
Doug on March 11, 2012 9:58 PM:
I've said it before, but it apparently needs repeating: the word "progressive" is derived from is "progress", which is defined as forward movement.
As best as I can discover, throughout his Congressional career, Mr. Kucunich disdained "forward movement", preferring an "all or nothing" path that accomplished exactly - what?
Well, he DID get three Post Offices renamed and Kasimir Pulaski granted Honorary Citizenship. Of course, Pulaski's been dead for something like two centuries, but I'm certain he appreciates the efforts of Rep. Kucinich.
He also talked a lot and apparently many here are willing to settle for that. I'm not. I'd rather have someone who talks less, but actually moves this country in the right direction; even if it isn't as far or as fast as I'd prefer. If it were left to Rep. Kucinich NOTHING would be done unless it had his 100% approval. Good Lord, even Presidents don't expect that!
Anyone calling themselves a "progressive" and who refuses to accept legislation that, while less than perfect legislation, still moves us towards our goal and especially when that legislation is all that can be passed, is NOT a progressive. They're either a glory hound or a purist; possibly both.
THAT'S why, beakyneaky, this "liberal" despises Kucinich. He's wasted 18 years of his life accomplishing zilch. He's spent that time furbishing his "progressive" credentials at the expense of actual progressive causes.
I can sum up my attitude towards Rep. Kucinich and his "devotion" to progressivism with one word: Pfui!
Stephanie on March 11, 2012 11:47 PM:
Yeah, how dare people not be wearing sackcloth and ash over the guy that voted against SCHIP, Cap and Trade, the Hate Crimes Bill and Financial Regulation and said Ron Paul of "fleet footed black men" fame would make an awesome vice president because an eagle needs two wings to fly.
His effectiveness was entirely in bringing up left views which he can still do without voting against democratic legislation at the same time
Cas on March 12, 2012 12:01 AM:
"by the latest generation of New Republic wankers."
Yep; hit the nail right on the head...
It is amazing to me that they are calling for the same crap they did in 2003 (war), for which they then apologized for having supported (2004). They don't like Kucinich because he calls the administration on this BS; and on the administration continued, sustained, and increasing trashing of civil rights...
LAC on March 12, 2012 12:35 AM:
You have got to be kidding on kusinich. Grieve that fake? Really? And I wish I could ship a pair of shtfup buttons to digby and greenwald. I am sick of the pair of them.
SO on March 12, 2012 2:37 AM:
Yeah, all you minorities that fell out of love with Kucinich when he said he'd choose virulent racist Ron Paul as his running mate can shut up. Let your betters tell you what a REAL liberal believes.
Rich on March 12, 2012 10:21 AM:
Defenders of Kucinich's early political history neglect to notice/mention that he established himself in politics as a race-baiting city councilman and never healed the breach as mayor. Instead, he completely ignored African-Americans in a city that was nearly 50% Black. His successor as Mayor, George Voinovich, more deftly avoided racial posturing and did much to heal breaches in the city, although many (including me) felt he was too pro-business. Still, Kucinich's administration needlessly alienated all manner of constituencies and operated in an insular high handed manner. His brother Gary, who managed his mayoral campaigns, always struck me as the better pol in the family and he later served on the Cleveland Board of education. The default did allow the city to keep its light plant, but the plant itself became a literal shell, buying electricity from Niagara Falls rather than producing it.
As others have noted Kucinich has been more grand stander than legislator. He's no Barney Frank or Bernie Sanders. He's more like Ron Paul, for whom Glenn Greenwald seems to have a mancrush (for whom he's willing to ignore all manner of abysmal positions). Kucinish's defenders, going back to his council and mayoral days seem unable to brook any criticism of the man, which strikes me as one of the more problematic aspects of his appeal and a strain not unlike what liberals find problematic and genuinely concerning about much of teh GOP field.
June on March 12, 2012 2:05 PM:
There has long been a Ralph-Nader-like bitterness to Kucinich that has turned me off, along with a seemingly same objective to "wound" the Democratic Party, rather than work constructively within it. His concession speech to Kaptur (which I found to be disgraceful) sums up for me what the man has become. I'm glad he's out.
Cha on March 12, 2012 3:58 PM:
Coming back on, since this was at the top of the page, to say I agree with what Janet and June said today.
And, a shout out to June..it good to see you, cybersistah!
cycle guy on March 13, 2012 7:58 AM:
Thank You Gandalf.. That's how the rumor mill works. Plant any stupid idea to get rid of those you don't like, it needs no evidence. Sort of like Ivory works better than Dial Soap.
Gandalf on March 11, 2012 10:56 AM:
Having lived close to Kucinich's district for a number of years I've heard the accusations that he was a whacko by people from both sides but when you ask them just what whacko things he's done they never really come up with anything concrete.
sed on March 13, 2012 4:49 PM:
As someone who used to live in districts represented by both Kaptur and Kucinich, it was no surprise to me that Marcy won. Kucinich had been winning his district, but he had been winning by a smaller and smaller percentage at every turn. I talked to a lot of life long Democrats who were angry that he had futile attempts at running for president (and not focusing on his district) and that he had to be cajoled into voting for the Affordable Care Act. Additionally, Toledo is a more conservative version of Cleveland, but the area between Toledo and Cleveland is more conservative than Toledo. So, it's no surprise that they voted for Marcy, the seemingly more conservative of the two. Marcy can beat "Joe the Plumber", I don't believe Dennis could. I think the district wisely voted for the candidate who could win the general.
cornflower on March 14, 2012 7:03 AM:
I think we feel about Kucinich the same thing we feel about most so-called progressives -- he achieved very little for the progressive cause. Where are we today? Nowhere. Thanks to Dennis Kucinich and others like him. He was completely ineffectual for the cause.