Sunday, January 06, 2008

Kucinich explains his endorsement of Obama

Dear Supporter,

For the record:

  1. New Hampshire is the first state where we are aggressively campaigning. Due to the Party lockout in Iowa, we chose to focus on New Hampshire.
  2. I am the only person running for President who voted against the war, against funding the war 100% of the time, against the Patriot Act, and who stands for a universal single-payer not-for-profit healthcare system. Nevertheless I was excluded from Saturday night's ABC Presidential debate, or four tone monologue as it was.
  3. In answer to your questions about why I didn't support former Senator John Edwards on the second ballot in Iowa: I have serious concerns about his connections to a Wall Street hedge fund, Fortress Investment Group. While attacking others for accepting campaign money from Washington lobbyists, he is up to his ears in money from Wall Street special interests.

He made half a million dollars in a single year for attending a few meetings for Fortress and has invested a substantial part of his own personal wealth in the hedge fund whose portfolios are responsible for sub-prime predatory lending practices, Medicare privatization, and an entire range of corporate sharp dealings that are driving the middle class into poverty.

While I indicated Senator Obama as a preferred second choice in Iowa, Progressives have fundamental disagreements with him and all of the other Presidential candidates on most of their major positions on the issues.

We must have the courage of our convictions to fully support and vote for what it is we really want. For once, we must realize our power, stop playing tactical games, and vote as a bloc - which, as you know, is what the religious right does and why they often win.

We Progressives are in the majority in this election. We will win only when we refuse to compromise and vote with integrity.

Dennis Kucinich


Anonymous said...

Wow. I think this should be addressed by the John Edwards campaign. I'm taking a wait-and-see to the current voting because while I like Dennis Kucinich I think there's been enough said for people to make up their own minds. But if John Edwards becomes the nominee it will still be necessary to answer this kind of charge and I hope it will be done soon.

hipparchia said...

i'd like to see edwards address it too, but i've been doing some research since this arrived in my inbox a little while ago. i hope to have a post up, later today maybe, on whatever i can find out.

Anonymous said...

It's a private equity firm. It buys up over-leveraged [debt-ridden] companies that it believes are otherwise sound, cleans them up, and then returns them to the market when they are on sound footing and will be worth more than was paid for them.

They essentially consolidate the debt and make it manageable without going into chapter 11.

They have hedge funds in their portfolio along with a number of other types of funds.

They profit from the stupidity of CEOs, and are very conservative on their own liquidity.

If I had a million to invest, I would have these guys on my short list because they are also in foreign markets.

This will no doubt be "Whitewater" for Edwards if he's elected. The guy has made his money suing corporations, so his investment opportunities are limited.

Steve Bates said...

So... Kucinich's objection to Edwards is that a very wealthy man (that includes most presidential candidates throughout history) who is a plaintiff's attorney by trade (no bad thing, IMHO) had some dealings with a hedge fund? Awwww, gimme a break!

As for Kucinich, he couldn't even find a way to stay on the ballot in the Texas Democratic primary. Politicians should be honest people, but they need not be purists. Kucinich has turned into a purist.

Standard (tired) disclaimer: I will vote for the Democratic nominee in November. And my primary vote, a throwaway, is as yet uncommitted. But Kucinich is not helping his case or his cause by endorsing Obama over Edwards at this point.

hipparchia said...