Obama likes to say that he opposed the war from the start, but he took that stance when he was a State Senator and it was politically expedient for him with his constituents. Upon becoming a US Senator, his criticism of the war morphed into criticism of the way it was being waged and his record in the Senate is a Siamese twin to Clinton’s record.

Unlike the two Senators, Congressman Kucinich was continually fighting in the House for the Democrats to show some spine and oppose Bush’s war and to stand up for the Constitution which Bush’s administration has trashed. Kucinich brought impeachment charges against Vice-President Cheney while the Democratic leadership fought all attempts to do so despite a lot of grassroots pressure.

Unlike the two Senators, Kucinich had a detailed plan to get our troops out of Iraq within three months of taking office along with a realistic plan for getting the UN and a neutral Arab Coalition to help keep the peace in Iraq while they rebuild their country. Both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama remain non-committal about when and how they plan on bringing troops home and have said stuff that imply they will be leaving troops there until 2012.

Worse still the two Senators along with former candidate John Edwards, said menacing things about Iran and “keeping all options on the table” while Kucinich has fought against aggressive actions towards that country.

And that’s just the foreign policy differences.

On the home front, Kucinich would have pushed for a Single-Payer Universal Healthcare plan proposed in H.R. 676 that he and Congressman Conyers currently have floating in Congressional limbo land that would cut the parasitic insurance companies out of the equation and put healthcare decisions back into the hands of people and their chosen doctors through public funding and private delivery. In contrast, the two Senators are pushing programs that will ultimately amount to giving corporate welfare handouts to the insurance companies.

Kucinich was not funded by wealthy corporations and lobbyists. Clinton is funded by both including Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch. Obama receives huge corporate donations that allow him to portray himself as not taking lobbyist money even while he is still compromised. Furthermore, Obama’s book The Audacity of Hope along with his many speeches where he talks about talking with and reaching out to corporate America reveal a very corporate, upper-class friendly politician who believes in “proper social divisions and classes” where everyone is in there place.

There are many, many other differences.

In short, a Kucinich presidency would have been night in day from what will get from any of the current candidates.

Our next President no matter who he or she may be will likely show aggression towards Iran (and perhaps get us into another conflict), will continue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, will not work to reign in the corporations and the growing divisions in wealth between the upper classes and the poor, will not deliver true universal healthcare, and will continue business as usual in Washington.

Kucinich would have gotten us out of Iraq and Afghanistan, introduced an attitude of seeking peace and diplomacy over military conflict, delivered a sustainable and truly universal healthcare system, fought for the working class in America, challenged the corporations and their media, fought for election reforms that make it easier for people to vote for their preferred candidate instead of “lesser evils”, fought for sound environmental policy, and so much more.