Kucinich Hits Back At Gibbs: You've Read Liberals Wrong

WASHINGTON — A Democrat whose name was invoked by President Barack Obama's spokesman in an attack on the party's liberal wing says the White House doesn't understand deep public frustration over the troubled economy.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich tells ABC's "Good Morning America" that press secretary Robert Gibbs shouldn't have attacked the "professional left."

Gibbs had said liberals were too hard to please and that they wouldn't be content even with Kucinich, a renowned progressive, as president.

The Ohio Democrat said, "Those of us who call ourselves liberal say we're not going to rest until we get back to a full employment economy." Asked if he would challenge Obama for the party's nomination in 2012, Kucinich, who ran in 2008, replied, "No."

Comments

[hawkny]

10:50 PM on 08/13/2010

Thats it Dennis, hit back! Don't take any shit from this guy...

[rongoat]

06:44 PM on 08/13/2010

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Dennis Kucinich is always right. It may not be apparent right away, but every time he espouses a view that is not in the mainstream of political thought, he is excoriated, and then eventually, he's proven correct. But somehow Kucinich is still painted as some fringe extremist.

[bisbeeornotbisbee]

04:57 PM on 08/16/2010

Rongoat, fanned and faved. He's the person we should have elected...although God knows how any Kucinich-inspired legislation would have ever gotten thru Congress. He's the one politician I love as a politician, year after year after year. What a man!

[bisbeeornotbisbee]

11:49 AM on 08/13/2010

We have power, but refuse to use it. We have allowed ourselves to be cowed for too long. In order to get the Corporatists out of office, we have to have the backbone to actually vote them out of office. We cannot afford to cower and accept the propagandist lie that a vote for the 3rd party is a vote for Repubs. Don't you see how that has "kept us in line"? That has ensured we remain sheeple. We need to school all politicians that we want them to serve the interests of society first, not Corporations. We have the power, if we just use it. There are more of us than there are of them, and collectively, we are far more powerful. We need to wield our power, again and again. The only way the Dems and Repubs will listen to us is if we vote them out of office.

[Marcospinelli]

12:53 PM on 08/13/2010

Over the course of US history, corporations have managed to game our political system, and done it so effectively that the two-party system competes to serve corporate interests while defending that service as, "What's good for GM (corporations) is good for America (We the People)".

DLC Democrats who control the Democratic Party and Republicans are corporate t00Is. Like siblings competing for the attention and approval (campaign contributions) of a parent, Republicans and DLC-controlled Democrats try to outdo each other in delivering for their real constituent, Big Corporations. The trick for them has been to make it seem as if they were really working on behalf of We the People.

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama&Democrats were for strong regulations on banks, Wall Street, investigations, prosecutions, restitution of what has been robbed from the middle class and poor for the past 30+ years, environmental clean-up, clean, sustainable renewable energy (& that isn't nuclear), putting an end to the wars and occupation of Iraq & Afghanistan, affordable, quality universal healthcare (which ObamaCare is not), and more. The DLC-controlled Democratic party gives lip service to these & all populist issues, because like the Republican Party, the DLC works for the benefit of transnational corporations.

Unless & until there is drastic and uncompromising change to our campaign financing system, until corporations are no longer 'persons' and are prohibited from participating in elections and politics, all efforts to reform government are useless.

[Marcospinelli]

12:55 PM on 08/13/2010

And any politician in power who doesn't have campaign finance reform at the top of his or her list, over and above everything else, is a fraud and a t00I of the corporatocracy.

Obama tops the list.

[bisbeeornotbisbee]

11:43 AM on 08/13/2010

Americans need to wake up and realize that just as "We need tax cuts for the wealthy, because there's a trickle down effect and it will create jobs" is a tired old propagandist lie, so is the lie that "A vote for a third party candidate is a vote for the Repubs." Americans havee allowed themselves to be shackled by this bullshit, election after election. It's time we let the Dem and Rep candidates know that we are not going to vote for the Corporatists. Staying home in the election signifies that you are apathetic, and willing to have abuse heaped upon you. Voting for the Corporatist Dems and Repubs tells them that you have no strength to fight Corporatism, and are acquiescent. Only by having the ba//s to vote for a third party will you train them that you renounce Corporatism in toto, and there are more of us than there are of them. To be afraid to vote for a third party candidate is to cower . Vote the Corporatists, of every stripe, out of office in Nov. Throw off the shackles and the yoke of Corporatism. We have to let them know we mean business, and are not going to let them exploit us any more. This is imperative.

[2lib4oh]

11:32 PM on 08/13/2010

By third party,do you mean the Tea Party?That is so not a real choice.The Republicans have infiltrated the group and are trying to take it over.You can't possibly believe that Ralph Nader and Sharon Engle have that much in common.
There are great differences between Democrats like Ben Nelson and Sheldon Whitehouse.Its important to know that difference least you lump all Democrats into the same pie as corporatists like Nelson.Some of us know the difference.If you don't ,no wonder Gibbs is frustrated.I am frustrated too.

The Progressives who have worked hard to maintain the Democratic ideals of Jefferson and the Framers will be disappointed in those who would throw it all away in a hissy fit.

[bisbeeornotbisbee]

02:05 AM on 08/14/2010

I am positively NOT for the tea party! Please! What ever gave you the idea that I thought Nader and (I think you mean) Angle have anything in common? There are Dems who have a reputation as being liberal. Check their voting record, and you'll find a different story. Although they are no longer in the Senate, look at Biden and Clinton. Mr. Nose Up the Wall Streeters and Insurance Co., and Ms Hard -Core I Never Saw a War I Didn't Like But My Daughter Will Never Serve Clinton. No, they're no longer in the Senate, but surprise: they're in the White House. Hillary was a big supporter of NAFTA, etc. It's the Corporatists that brought this country down, regardless of their political affiliation. I'm not throwing anything away in a hissy fit. I do not wish to see Corporatists continuing to rule this country. You might like Goldman Sachs, the pharmaceuticals, the health care insurers, etc., but I don't. I'm a progressive who is tired of kowtowing to those who kick me in the teeth. I'm not going tom vote for Corporatists any more. You can if you want. But don't come crying to me when Wall Street et alia is always put first.

[Jim bob]

01:47 PM on 08/15/2010

Meanwhile, if we follow your lead, we're going to wind up with a Republican majority in congress and a republican white house. Other than the pull of dialectics, please explain to me how that helps, and if the long-term balancing act is necessary, how exactly do we survive the climactic upheaval that having more republicans for more time will bring? So we reject corporatists and get corporatists. It has to do with class consciousness, and we haven't got it yet, and won't, as long as propogandists are allowed to operate with impugnity in or midst.

[bisbeeornotbisbee]

09:04 PM on 08/15/2010

So, what's your solution, jim bob? I am not being snarky. I honestly don't see how electing Corporatists is going to get us out of a Corporatist-run nation. They control all 3 branches. How can persisting to elect Corpratists change that? It's like Einstein said, the definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over, and expect different results. How is electing Corporatists not insane- unless you like Big Business and Wall Street to rule over us, and continue to give tax breaks for the wealthy, and continue deregulation.

[HowdyDoody]

10:18 AM on 08/13/2010

Gibbs really scrood up. That said, there are some totally off the wall left groups that have caused more problems for us than they've solved.

Dennis Kucinich and Move-on.org and most others don't belong in that group, but IMHO Firedoglake and David Sirota do.

[Marcospinelli]

12:58 PM on 08/13/2010

Dennis Kucinich and Move-on.org and most others don't belong in that group, but IMHO Firedoglake and David Sirota do.
================================

That's not who Gibbs' meant by "professional left".

The interview with Youngman (http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/113431-white-house-unloads-on-professional-left), Gibbs takes a blunt view of the administration’s critics from the left:

==“I hear these people saying he’s like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested,” Gibbs said. “I mean, it’s crazy.”

The press secretary dismissed the “professional left” in terms very similar to those used by their opponents on the ideological right, saying, “They will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we’ve eliminated the Pentagon. That’s not reality.”

Of those who complain that Obama caved to centrists on issues such as healthcare reform, Gibbs said: “They wouldn’t be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president.”==

In remarks later made to Huf fington Post’s Sam Stein (http://www.huf fingtonpost.com/2010/08/10/robert-gibbs-clarifies-pr_n_676934.html), Gibbs later qualified the remarks as “inartful” and Gibbs's Deputy Secretary Bill Burton clarified that Gibbs defined the “professional left,” as cable TV commentators [*cough*MSNBC*cough*].

[HowdyDoody]

02:18 PM on 08/13/2010

Hey, I did not say that Gibbs was right in any way. He should never have mentioned Kucinich, who happens to be a hero of mine.

But I saw some left wing agitation in my state that left me angry and disappointed. We used to complain about Bush never listening to anyone but the right wing, taking the rest of us for granted. He never gave one inch to us. He now has an approval rating of low 20's. Obama is President of all the people, and he seems to know that. He can fire Gibbs, for all I care.

But under the absolute worst of circumstances, Obama came into office blindsided by this economic total meltdown and has had to face a Republican group that panders to racists. He got healthcare done. Social Security has had to be changed A LOT since it passed -- it was inadequate. But it passed! Healthcare passed!

I for one am sick of the carping.

[Marcospinelli]

12:59 PM on 08/13/2010

Gibbs attacked the "professional left" in anticipation of an NBC poll coming out (yesterday) showing a bad drop in his (& Democrats') numbers - http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/wsjnbcpoll-08122010.pdf

There is nothing that Gibbs said that wasn't authorized at the top.

The abzurdity of the charge at all is that when Gibbs tried to walk it back yesterday (in such a c0wardIy way, too, by having a deputy say that Gibbs wasn't talking about the rank and file liberals, but "cable news show hosts", ==coughMSNBC==), he hoped nobody would remember that the Obama administration has had MSNBC's on-air hosts on his side since the beginning. They spend most of their time attacking Republicans and teabaggers and the very few times that they do show how Obama has broken just about every pledge and promise, and continues most of Bush's policies, it's because their own ratings are sinking because the left sees them for the corporate w.h.o.r.e.s they've become. Every single one of them (from Keith to Ed) has fallen into lockstep when the White House says "Ok, back in the cages, little woogems!".

Obama even used Rachel Maddow a week ago to tout his 'accomplishments' for his pitch at the Net Roots convention - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=so-Uuooz-Zo

[Jim bob]

02:06 PM on 08/15/2010

Great post, scary poll--I can see why they want to sit on the fence. But it won't work. I think they need to get Michelle out there campaigning. She's t he only one everybody likes. Good reason, too. Also--the republicans are (traditionally) voting against something--their motive is against democrats, not for republicans (per the WSJ poll)...where democrats are FOR the democratic agenda, and not AGAINST the republican. There's a clue in there for this administration: Be for something and stop being against those who are FOR YOU! Big clue, I would think.

[YouDontWantMeHere]

10:10 AM on 08/13/2010

Hay Gibbs! next time try hummin': ya can't always get what ya want but... ok?

[Jim bob]

02:07 PM on 08/15/2010

Or since we're doing the Stones, how about "time is on your side"? Oh lets just go with Nero. What tune did he fiddle?

[grf67]

08:31 AM on 08/13/2010

Gibbs should be replaced this afternoon. He treats the dems like they are republicans.

[hangthebanksters]

08:27 AM on 08/13/2010

Our current economic situation can be best summed up by the late great always prophetic Bill Hicks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX2jcNlofO4

[patriciacaldwell]

08:24 AM on 08/13/2010

Who are the "professional left"? This group of philosophers reject any compromise as being corrupt. They advocate "pure" politics that turn voters into policy makers. This sounds inflexible, chaotic, and unmanageable to me. Gibbs called out this group because of their lack of understanding of how Washington works.The Progressive wing of the Democratic party are impatient. They feel they have not been personally involved enough. The 24-hour media cycle stirs their anger because they see pundits and media readers ignoring any gains that have been made. Of course, they want their list ticked off PDQ. As long as Republicans think they can prevent progress by voting in lockstep, they'll continue to obstruct. Frustration will build and Democrats, being Democrats, will tear each other apart.

President Obama has tried to involve many people in the decision-making process. When this failed with health care, he submitted his own version that could realistically get passed. He was accused by the right of shoving this down the throats of voters. On the left, he was criticized for not including a public option. Some say he has been hesitant to step into the ring for major policy fights. The question we might raise is whether the public wants to get bills passed, however incomplete they might be, or would the public rather sit quietly and watch a battle with no end or results. It's time to unite.

[HowdyDoody]

10:24 AM on 08/13/2010

Absolutely. If a group advocates absolute NO compromise on anything, or that President Obama must tow the liberal line and disregard the rest of the population, then they are causing more problems than they're solving.

To hold Obama's feet to the fire is a good thing. To constantly carp and try to wrest "power" from the President is another. It is these people that took the Democrats into the wilderness in decades past. Our state had a very difficult primary which may cost us a Senate seat because a couple of groups got involved with totally untruthful smears.

We all have to distance ourselves from the crazy extremists -- teabaggers, and some on the fringe left -- or we'll go down the tubes again as progressives.

[Marcospinelli]

12:50 PM on 08/13/2010

If a group advocates absolute NO compromise on anything, or that President Obama must tow the liberal line and disregard the rest of the population, then they are causing more problems than they're solving.
====================================

For the past 40 years, it's been liberals who have done all of the compromising.

That's how we got into this mess, by being told "Liberals can't win elections, so they had better step aside and let DLC Democrats take over the party and work with Republicans."

DLC Democrats then went and caved to Republican presidents and Republican controlled Congresses, deregulating, privatizing, voting for Bush's tax cuts, the wars, etc.

Obama won on a campaign of CHANGE YOU CAN COUNT ON!

And since he got into the White House, he's continued just about all of Bush's policies (and even done Bush one better).

[Marcospinelli]

12:51 PM on 08/13/2010

During the 2008 campaign, Obama told people that they had to stay involved after the election, that they couldn't just vote for him, go away for four years and expect that he would do what they had hoped. He said that there were powerful interests working against what the people wanted, and if We The People wanted Obama to do our bidding, we would have to MAKE HIM DO IT.

Obama's most ardent supporters forget that those of us who criticize Obama are only doing what he warned us needed to be done. NOT to trust him.

Since the election (and even before, with his FISA vote), Obama has been deceptive, breaking every campaign pledge and promise, conceding the positions of the left (getting nothing in return), and hobbling real Democrats at every turn while making Republicans and Blue Dogs stronger (and harder to beat in 2010 and 2012).

Obamabots are the most immediate problem, as they help him screw them (& us) over. Until Obamabots wake up to these facts, they are their own (& our) worst e n e m ies, and the reason we don't get what we all thought we were voting for when we voted Obama and Democrats into office as the majority power in our government.

[Cindyflo]

12:16 PM on 08/13/2010

Very well said - my thoughts exactly, but I can never put it so well....

[patriciacaldwell]

07:32 AM on 08/13/2010

Identifying oneself as being liberal or progressive or left-of-center means that you vote for Democratic candidates. If you want to bolt from your party because you don't get everything you want on your own time line does a disservice to your country and violates your values. Don't let the rhetoric of the right fool you. There used to be Republicans who thought for themselves and voted to represent the people of their district or state. Those days ended years ago. Think about the future you want for your children and grandchildren, and stand behind our president. He's taking the long view. I trust his head and his heart to work through complex issues before us.

[HowdyDoody]

10:24 AM on 08/13/2010

Fanned and faved!!

[Marcospinelli]

01:03 PM on 08/13/2010

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama&Democrats want what they want. The DLC-controlled DemocraticParty gives lip service to all populist issues (like civil rights protections, restoring habeas corpus, ending the wars, PublicHealthcare, Wall Street reform, environmental & energy issues, etc.).

If the Bush years taught us nothing else, it's that anyone can sell anything to Americans, if you're stolid & relentless in your sales pitch & tactics. It's not that Bush&R0ve were geniuses & knew something that nobody else knew; Bush&R0ve were just more ruthless (clumsy & careless many political graybeards would say) in doing what politicians & the parties had gone to great lengths to hide from Americans.

Obama didn't get to be the first black president, vanquish the Clinton machine (to get the nomination) & the oldest, most experienced politicians in our nation's history (including the Rove machine) by not having mastered these skills. Nor do Democratic politicians (more incumbents than ever, in office longer) not know how to do it. How do you think Democrats managed to keep impeaching Bush&Cheney off the table & have us still reelecting them, not marching on Washington with torches&pitchforks?

Obama&Democrats know how to do it -- They don't want to do it.

The trick for them has been to keep the many different populist groups believing that they really do support our issues, but they're merely inept. And to get us to keep voting for them despite their failure to deliver on any of our alleged shared objectives.

[CaliGrown78]

12:43 AM on 08/14/2010

you are so right!! no pun intended, fanned

[CherokeeGirl]

02:30 AM on 08/13/2010

My mother, who is pretty darn centrist, said she'd vote for Kucinich. That's why they marginalize him to "far left" all the time, they're scared of him and people like him who can actually do a good job for the people. I'm disappointed he won't be challenging the president. Because we can't back off or they will just cave into everything!

[HowdyDoody]

10:26 AM on 08/13/2010

Dennis Kucinich is NOT the far left or fringe left. Robert Gibbs was totally wrong to mention his name.

[bisbeeornotbisbee]

02:19 AM on 08/14/2010

Your mother is damned smart! Give her a kiss for me, CherokeeGirl, and tell her I said hi. XXX000xxx000 to your mom. Faved.

[CherokeeGirl]

01:51 PM on 08/14/2010

she used to give me a hard time for ignoring the news. Now I give her the news. LOL:)

[RitaS]

12:39 AM on 08/13/2010

Hey Gibbs who said' 'liberals were too hard to please' THINK AGAIN..

LIBERALS want this Country to thrive & prosper w/ BALANCE, LIBERALS don't want to see the US sliding to a 2 tiered society that have been the hallmark of 3rd World Countries...

[bisbeeornotbisbee]

02:20 AM on 08/14/2010

Thank you, Rita. F & f.

[padfoot]

12:28 AM on 08/13/2010

I just rewatched Kucinich's speech from the 2008 convention and Mr. gibbs I would throw out Obama in a New York minute if he could be my president

[seted]

12:05 AM on 08/13/2010

Yeah, it's suppose to be right to left.

[godivademaus]

11:59 PM on 08/12/2010

I'm a progressive. I support(ed) Pres. Obama for President, but not without some reservations. I never doubted that Pres. Obama is as committed to America and ideals as anyone else (perhaps more). I don't believe he's a "socialist," heck, I'm not certain you can call him liberal. But his qualifications and commitment are without question.

What I saw, and see now, is a genial, smart, guy who's idealistic and likes to remain positive. What I have observed about idealistic people is that they do tend toward too much compromise on the front end of any debate. They also tend toward wanting to please people. I wanted to see who he would select in his administration to balance his idealism with some level of hard-nosed justice (forgoing expediency). For the most part, he has had a good ratio... but with this gargantuan job before him(us), he does need to get back to the ideals of justice over political expediency. Gibbs' job is one of political expediency (by necessity) and now he needs to rework his messages to get back to what is just, what is right, and what we voted Pres. Obama into office for.

I'm not sure that any person elected into the Presidency at this time would be able to do any better than Obama has.

To depict the Left as a lock-step voting block is to deny the nuance at the heart of progressivism. We can do better. Yes, we can.

[ArbitorA]

12:48 AM on 08/13/2010

Awesome and thoughtful post. Enjoyed it.

[Dave TN]

02:27 AM on 08/13/2010

It's not that he is a liberal, or can be considered a liberal by most people; it’s that the GOP, FAUX media and tea party followers have shifted so far right that everyone left of Pat Buchanan is now considered liberal and if he ain't careful he will be added to the list. You know the list that contains all the people that the extreme right wants to get even for some grievance, perceived or contrived. But like all terrible two year olds, the GOP faithful can be easily distracted by some shiny distractions and the ole bait and switch of the truth. This is scarily why the GOP electorate runs in lock step and also why they will believe Obama signed the TARP bank bailout bill instead of the real signature GW Bush scribbled probably in pencil at the bottom. I wandered from my point, that’s what happens when I type and watch news simultaneously, but this tinfoil chase by the other side is not how the left and moderate left (yes Sarah Putzlin there is a moderate voter) view, dissect and discuss issues. The Whitehouse I believe knows this, while Gibbs may need some reminding.