|
|
12:03 am - August 06, 2003 I worked from home today and spent a lot of time listening to various media files of Democratic presidential hopefuls. Specifically, I revisited the NPR interviews I had listened to and watched/listened to the statments made at the Human Rights Campaign Fund's recent forum featuring the major candidates. Like mnay of the folks out there, I have been leaning towards Dean. After today, I am not as sure. I have not decided against him, and I think there is more time to make this decision, but he has some problem areas that I think are worth addressing. I thought it would be a good idea to do a background piece on the folks running for President from the Dems. My initial impression is that my candidate has yet to enter the race. Here is what I am looking for: 1. Someone who reads what is put before her/him, considers it, weighs it against knowledge and history, and then moves forward as effectively as possible. 2. Someone who values public education and believes that serious education reform is a process of making things happen and not making people jump through hoops. We can devise a thousand tests and competency rewards and systems and plans, but until a few key changes happen for our schools, they are unlikely to succeed: a. We need to pay teachers a living wage to ensure that this is an attractive and valued line of work. b. Until we prioritize public education and put our policy and our money where our rhetoric-filled speeches are, we have a long road to hoe. 3. Someone who believes in a woman’s right to make decisions about her own body. Who understands that "partial birth abortion" is a rare medical procedure that the right clamors around and rallies against so they can open the door to stop abortion altogether. 4. Someone who can work intelligently to turn the economy around with the help of Congress, the states, etc. 5. Someone who will demand enforcement of due process, the constitution, civil right protections, etc. as they work on issues of immigration and "homeland security."
Today's entry will focus on my concern about Kucinich and abortion: (from Select Smart) He received a 10% score from Planned Parenthood and a 75% from the National Right to Life Committee. However, on in early 2003 Kucinich said he was now pro-choice. But his anti-choice record is more than that. It is anti contraception coverage and, I think, anti-woman. It is arrogant for politician's to continue to control women's bodies and I just am not having it. His flip-flop is way to recent for my tastes. From The Nation: One thing you won't find on Kucinich's Web site, though, is any mention of his opposition to abortion rights. In his two terms in Congress, he has quietly amassed an anti-choice voting record of Henry Hyde-like proportions. He supported Bush's reinstatement of the gag rule for recipients of U.S. family planning funds abroad. He supported the Child Custody Protection Act, which prohibits anyone but a parent from taking a teenage girl across state lines for an abortion. He voted for the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which makes it a crime, distinct from assault on a pregnant woman, to cause the injury or death of a fetus. He voted against funding research on RU-486. He voted for a ban on dilation and extraction (so-called partial-birth) abortions without a maternal health exception. He even voted against contraception coverage in health insurance plans for federal workers – a huge work force of some 2.6 million people (and yes, for many of them, Viagra is covered). Yeah. I have doubts that he is my people. Read more on Kucinich at Select Smart. Next entry: Dean: The Heroic non-Liberal Liberal, or Why Dean is better than Green.
|