mi friend joe has a great post on Sen. Hagel

joeleonardi.wordpress.com/ 2007/03/18/president-chuck-hagel/

when you people reconize the war is against islam, no it was not Iraq that attacked us, it was not Afganastan, it was not the Sudenese who attacked the Uss Cole , it was not the Saudies who attacked the Hotel in Rhiad, it was not the Palenstinens who danced up and down as the Twin Towers fell in America,so when you people falsely ask why did bush attack Iraq, “they did not attack America you are using a unfair advantage because Bush can not come out and say to America, “ Islam is the Problem” because we would have a clash between East and West, and chaos You just watch when the ACTIVE DUTY MUSLIMS follow our troops back to America and call upon all their INACTIVE TROOPS OF MUSLIMS already living here, what you WILL see is ISRAEL expanded, you will see busses blown up, school buses, schools , Malls , Government Buildings,Christian Churches, Iraq will look like party compared to when our troops are called home!. War in Iraq???? where is it? you have Muslims hiding as civilians they kill americans then go run and put their wifes Burka on, or go hide in a Mosque where we are duped in to not following them , there is no war, we are fighting a ????, where we have both hands tied behind our backs, and can not shoot someone who just shot a GI, if he is standing too close to a woman, or so called civilian.the put IADS along streets and wait for us to go buy, thats what the Mountian men used to do, put Beaver traps in the water and wait untilthe beaver came buy then caught them , it wasn’t a war against Beaver and its no war now!

Truthdig is an good representation,
Cause the truth is everything is alright. I dig that.
We don’t need no more chickens like the Bush Admins. If he’d back off of Iraq in the early stage, he may’ve looked like a “Stalwart” You know what I mean?
Then other Countries would’ve never converged. (Like China and Iran) And he ain’t even trying to get in their business,a chicken that he is. Otherwise, it would’ve never been exposed.
But anyway, back to the truthdig, we like to see the Republicans get their credit back for being a money making business who helps people in the free market enterprise, and not abusing their authorities with Wars, and contradictions, know what I’m saying?
We can make the Republican Party look good again. I became a Democrat because of the Bush Admins. and will remain, until he is out of Office. And that is the real Truthdig.
And I don’t want to see none of his friends in either. (like McCain, etc.) Thats the main reason why I want to see you run, to give the people something to compete with, instead of this one way ticket to Hell! You know what I mean. Cause, quiet as kept, the rest of them Republicans are just as much as in cohoots with Bush as McCain is, that are running for President. Some of them are just acting like they are playing him off, when they are really not.  Which is an automatic win for the Democrats.

Well anyway, sharpshooter, we’re going to do the do like we use to. And you would make a good President. If not, we’ll I’ll just remain a Democrat. But hopefully, we can convey the right message to our people, about money, independence and security, without all of this Administartive nonsense. Thats the Truthdig.

Wasn’t there a story somewhere about Chuck Hagel purchasing all the voting machines in Nebraska and then winning both elections? Oh yeah—here it is! If you want to win an election, just control the voting machines.

I’m not convinced that any Republican, at this point in our history, is honest enough to take us off this wrong path we’re on.

Vietnam “Democrat-launched”? Seems to me it was Eisenhower & Co. who divided ‘Nam at the 17th parallel, setting the stage for the delights to follow. Nor did the Republicans oppose the troop buildups to follow. The LEFT was the great opponent of the war, when they realized what it really was, a war of national liberation.
The Democrats, if they’re in power, will get the blame for the Iraq debacle when it collapses on their watch. Chuck Hagel has already knuckled under in his latest Senate vote…

It is a shame for all the Democrats and Republicans who voted for the war when considering the fact that Sen. Lincoln Chafee was the only Republican Senator who voted against it. That takes real courage, integrity, intellect, and leadership. For those who voted for the war before against it, it is too late and too little for my vote, CH included even though I am from Nebraska.

Is Robert Scheer drinking the koolaid now?

Hagel for president? WTF?

Hagel has ties to the electronic voting scandal and just this past week, joined the most radical, rightwingers in the senate GOP to eliminate the minimum wage.

Get a grip, Scheer.

Hagel isn’t a conservative though.....So your article’s premise is flawed from the ‘get-go’.

Hagel might be good on Iraq, “considering alternatives” (like the crooked and treacherous Hilary Clinton who will be having more Americans dying on behalf of evil criminal israel) but don’t forget he is a right wing republican

I’m with Scheer on this one.

Given the “choice” of Hagel or a Hillary (or a Kerry for that matter,) I’d throw in with Hagel. Iraq really is THE most important issue facing us-it threatens to end the United States we’ve known and replace it with an Argentine-style bankrupt nation.

I am an 81 year old all my adult life voting democrat who served my country in W.W.  II as a wounded Marine Corps machine gunner, recalled for the Korean War and trained young men going to Nam.

I will not vote for anyone democrat or republican who is a war monger, Hagel looks good to me so far.

BRING OUR KIDS HOME - NOW !!!

Albert

Can knee-jerk Democratic Party leftists think their way out of a paper bag, and not see that a candidate like Hagel has the potential to split the Republican vote?  Do you not remember Ross Perot in 1992?

Oh, but that would be strategy and tactics, and not the pure ideological snake oil “dead-ender” Left Democrats like to peddle.  Look at who their most popular pick for President has been: Al Gore, a guy we know ahead of time ain’t going to run!  But that means Gore is safely free of strategy and tactics, the perfect snake oil “virtual candidate” for a virtual - as in unreal - politics.

Then there is Kucinich, another “virtual candidate” in 2004 who promply folded at the convention. It remains to be seen, and it is a big if, but IF Kucinich ditches the New Agers and actually runs a serious antiwar factional campaign within the Democratic Party, then I would encourage all the die-hard, dead-ender Green haters to dive in there behind Kucinich and kick up a real divisive storm winthin the Democrats, the more fractious and anti-Hillary the better! 

Just Do It!

Bob, what’s up with Hagel, are you going soft on us now when we need you the most.  Why don’t you support Kucinich who has been on our side since the beginning??  This is very bad for our country, everyone is confused and divided and you who usually shows such equalibrium. . .I just don’t know. . .

If Hagel could get nominated, it would be a pleasure to vote for someone rather than against someone else.

But the insiders would never allow that.

Mr. Sheer writes: “...the Republican Party has been in the thrall of neocon adventurers...”

Why does everyone forget that Clintons non-UN approved Kosovo attack was a PNAC/NEOCON adventure?

It’s right on the PNAC website:
http://newamericancentury.org/balkans.htm

It’s becoming pretty clear that the 2 major parties, having sold out their souls (and their bases) are bent on conquering the world.

The Hagels and the Pauls are like flies on the windshield.

Thank you, Robert Scheer, for pointing out the essential bankruptcy of the Democratic Party.  A right-wing Republican from Nebraska has the guts to oppose this criminal war, and the prominent Democrats do not?  They don’t deserve to win at pinochle, let alone elections.

Now if you can just point out to us some real alternatives....

Chuck Hagel is the kind of person many people who vote Democrat could support, as well as centrists and independents.

Many Americans seem to be tired of the “left” and “right” labels that often don’t seem to mean much. Many people want a “center.”

Although Joe Lieberman gives independent candidates a bad name, the idea of moderate, centrist candidates who transcend the two-party polarities may be a worthwhile concept.

The article below takes a look at some of these factors:

Independent centrist candidates might strike chord with voters

Steve Hammons
American Chronicle
July 31, 2006

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle. asp?articleID=11985

Evan as you speak, you are a fool.

The whole Iraq expansion is a complete canard.

See my comment to EJ Dionne.

Get real!

Ben

Robert Scheer, according to Wikipedia was born in 1936, which would have made him 18 in 1954, and Between 1964 and 1969, he was, variously, the Vietnam correspondent, managing editor and editor in chief of Ramparts Magazine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Scheer

I was impressd with Robert Scheer’s passionate remarks concerning CH yesterday on “Left, Right and Center,” but not convinced.

For further analysis of CH, please see Chuck Lippstreu’s comments at Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chuck-lippstreu/chuck-ha gel-5-good-5-_b_39086.html

I’m also from Nebraska and know how republican it is, so please don’t get carried away by Hagel. On this issue, he is to be commended, however, on the other important policies facing our country, he fits well with the far right.

Let’s face the facts, the “R’s” are not to be trusted and will always do what is wrong for America and continue to build the military-industrial complex or machine.

Chuck Hagel, being a Vietnam combat vet, knows about the costs of this war, not like the chicken hawks to started it and want to keep it going.

The Iraq War situation and the state of Washington, DC, is similar to those times during impeachment efforts against Richard Nixon toward the end of the Vietnam War.

These connections are explored in the following article, posted on truthout.org and AmericanChronicle.com:

Going in Circles: Vietnam, Iraq, Calls for Impeachment

By Steve Hammons
t r u t h o u t Guest Contributor
truthout.org
Tuesday 16 January 2007

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011607D.shtml

- - -

Going in circles: Vietnam, Iraq, calls for impeachment

Steve Hammons
American Chronicle
January 12, 2007

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle. asp?articleID=19080

Well, well.  I’m amazed at the reaction Scheer’s column has brought forth.  All of you same readers who laude his columns week after week after week.  Might it not be that he did not mean literally that he would want Hagel as president.  I mean, why don’t you ask yourself if it is really plausible that he would want that?  Perhaps he was just saying that Clinton, and most of the rest of the field out there just make him sick because of their nauseatingly vacuous stance on the war primarily but really on many things.  Perhaps Bob was saying “look, here’s someone who is staunchly in the other camp, and even they would be preferable to the shit that we seem to be bringing forth.” Even I was surprised at his column and alluded to that in my earlier comment, but I am impressed at the energy that many of you have brought forth.  However, there has been only one person so far, Ernest, who has really offered something that perhaps we should all start looking at:
“Careful scrutiny reveals that there is a progressive candidate in the running who is head and shoulders above the others on all of the above-listed issues; a candidate who has consistently opposed the war in Iraq; who, unlike Chuck Hegel, did not provide the Bush regime with a retroactive immunity for violations of the War Crimes Act as Congress eliminated the centuries old right of habeas corpus, and who, unlike any of the individuals mentioned by Mr. Scheer, has not merely paid lip service to opposing the war but has proposed an immediate cut off of all funds.  His name is Dennis Kucinich”.

Bob Sheer proves himself the principled guy I’d suspected he was all along. Unlike the purely anti-Bush, DNC drivel coming from such currently popular and self-promoting blogs as Unclaimed Territory, Sheer has the distance, the maturity and the self-respect to be read regularly. Sheer’s piece is more a positive statement about Sheer than Hagel.

John Lowell

Please, please, it’s not just the war. So many things need fixing and desperately. Global warming, globalisation, the stealing of the resources of poorer nations (i’m well aware of my own country’s shortfalls there, especially in East Timor), the privatisation of water, the regulation of media ownership, amongst other things.
I’m not sure why i have posted comments here, it is out of character for me, and i feel like a bit of a twit. I do what i can in my own country with what power i have, and my comments here are a waste of my time. Before i go, i just want to remind anyone who might read this what a privilege as well as a burden it is to be able to participate in the most powerful democracy in the world now that we (the world) are facing our greatest challenges, all disasters of our own making. No one can expect the US to be perfect, goodness always includes mistakes and imperfections. It might not be fair but it’s a fact that you guys need to do the heaviest lifting right now. I’m relegated to being one of those hopeful spectators, and it is hard to know that if the US elects another Bush in 2008 another four years will be lost, and there’s nothing i can do about it. The hour is getting late, and i’m just smart enough to be afraid.

I will not vote for ANYONE who voted for the war in the first place.
Doesn’t matter what they say now, particularly the rhetoric that they were lied to and are now angry because they believed the reasons presented for going to war, WMD’s, Mushroom clouds, etc,etc..

I am a humble common citizen, well-read but without a college education and even *I* could see those reasons for what their were ~excuses,i.e. lies~!

I refuse to vote for president anyone so gullible that they believed The Resident of the White House and his election theives.

We need someone of wisdom, intelligence, common sense, and truth who is able to see a lie for what it is and courage to call it what it is, at the time it’s spoken.

At least it would be refreshing.

Apalling.

Steal your place in the senate, get the “progressive” endorsement!

Alzheimers may be coming early this year.

“If You Want To Win An Election, Just Control The Voting Machines” by Thom Hartmann
href="http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0131-01.htm

Crimes of the State
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/

Any sane thoughtful,fair mind,at least I think I possess some,...OLIVIA SNOW FOR PRESIDENT

I notice my vigorous criticism of your editor’s Scheer idiocy claiming the Vietnam war was “..... that Democrat-launched war” has not been allowed into the running discussion, although my addendum was! Is this technical error, oversight or deliberate censorship.

I went on at some length to say it was John Foster Dulles, our Secretary of State in 1954, who sabotaged the Geneva Peace Agreement that settled this war with the French agreeing to a military withdrawal and the 4 nations signatory to that agreement approving elections in 1956.
It was widely assumed then that Ho Chi Minh and his supporters would win that election.

Maybe Scheer wasn’t born yet, but I was 22 and many progressives knew Dulles’ arrogant and contemptuous action was likely to lead only to a renewal of warfare in Vietnam. And it did.

The same Republican reactionaries who drafted a vain,lazy and ignorant puppet,Eisenhower for President and Crook Nixon for VIP in the 1952 election backed Dulles in declaring the Vietnam national independence leader, Ho Chi Minh a Communist, and setting up his own puppet, Diem and a fictional “South Vietnam” to wage war with
these “Communists” in Southeast Asia.

As a result over one million civilian lives were lost in Vietnam over the next 20 years, and we lost some 58,000 Americans, and 500,000 wounded.
This is why I personally have never voted for any Fascist/Republican scum in my life at any level,
and never will. Perhaps Scheer never did his homework here. But this claim is simply one more Republican lie, whether he knows it or not.
And I hereby call on him to repudiate it now.

As for Truthdig’s readers, any of whom were not even born 52 years ago, to get a real truthdig far below the endless stream of Republican politico lies I have heard over 60 years, go read Stanley Karnow’s “Vietnam”, an honest classic, and Frances Fitzgerald’s “Fire in the Lake” for starters before you swallow more Republican propaganda. “Sometimes the truth hurts!”

Ion C. Laskaris,Burlington,Vermont + iclrevusa.com

ARE YOU KIDDING? Wasn’t CH the one who got elected on his own corrupt voting machines?

I expect this kind of piece coming from the corporate media--not from the likes of Robert Scheer.  While progressives should regard opposition to the war in Iraq as a minimum qualification, a great deal more is needed.  Obama, Clinton, Hegel, and McCain all share a common allegiance to corporate America, imperialism and the military-industrial complex. 

One would hope that before declaring support for “any” presidential candidate, knowledgeable progressives would examine where that candidate stands on such issues as media and campaign finance reform; restoration of the New Deal safety net; repeal of the Bush tax cuts; universal, single payor health care; restoration of civil liberties through a repeal of the USA/PATRIOT Act and the Detainee Treatment Act; an end to the neoliberal privatization schemes; future Supreme Court appointments.

It is time to stop focusing on shallow and meaningless personality issues; to stop permitting the corporate media to tell us which candidates are “viable"--and therefore deserving of our attention. It is time to stop this nonsense of supporting either one-issue candidates or candidates packaged for approval by their corporate handlers. 

Careful scrutiny reveals that there is a progressive candidate in the running who is head and shoulders above the others on all of the above-listed issues; a candidate who has consistently opposed the war in Iraq; who, unlike Chuck Hegel, did not provide the Bush regime with a retroactive immunity for violations of the War Crimes Act as Congress eliminated the centuries old right of habeas corpus, and who, unlike any of the individuals mentioned by Mr. Scheer, has not merely paid lip service to opposing the war but has proposed an immediate cut off of all funds.  His name is Dennis Kucinich.

“The speech given last night [Jan. 10] by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam.”

Huh? Wouldn’t the decision to subvert international law and invade Iraq qualify for this?

And Bob why no mention of Hagel’s support for the war up until this point? Or is that not worth mentioning?

Now that I am a member of the American Independant party and their recent endorsement of Ron Paul, Congressman from Texas and someone I believe is the right man has my support, no more of these CFR pre picked candidates. Ron Paul, a Republican, voted against the war, he is pro second ammendment, believes in our Constitutional rights, limited government in our lives. He is a long shot, I have heard interviews with him, he is sincere. He is not popular with some of the bigger guns in congress and he is against the NAFTA Super Highway and the proposed North American Union! As a former Democrat I am spending my vote on Ron Paul! People, he is worth your time to check him out!
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2006/cr062906.htm

Hagel does seem one of the best of the lot. The question I ask myself about all these candidates is—when (not if) the U.S. gets hit with the next terrorist attack, will this candidate have enough guts not to have to incinerate someone to sate the demand we’ll make for revenge? I asked this on my blog here.

One of the more interesting suggestions I got from a commenter was Wesley Clark—for some of the same reasons Scheer trusts Hagel.

There is a good chance that Republicans might produce a candidate who out-antiwars the Democrats in 2008.

How come? Because it’s no secret that the Israel lobby and the pro-Israel neocons pushed for the Iraq war and are pushing for more wars with Iran and Syria.

Bush is an anomaly, in a way, because traditionally the Democrats are more attached to Israel than the Republicans. Bush and Rove wanted to bring the right-wing Jewish demographic, with their media power and their Likud-aligned lobby, solidly into the GOP column - while pleasing the Christian Zionists in the GOP base as well.

The post-Bush Republicans can say they’re going back to their roots: after all, the last US President to say NO to Israel and make it stick was the Republican Eisenhower in 1956.

In 2008, Hagel could run on the slogan, “It’s going to take a REAL Republican to stop the Israel-first agenda.”

This has some scary overtones, of course. I hope that the Democrats will be able to field a truly antiwar, liberal candidate in 2008. Otherwise, the GOP may cleverly escape the Bush legacy and rule for another generation.

I disagree with those who say Hagel is merely positioning himself for a run for President.  He’ll never make it through the Republican primaries after making statements like the ones Sheer discusses.  If I were Chuck Hagel, I’d be worried aout getting reelected to the Senate, which requires him to face the voters in redder-than-red Nebraska

Plus,the decision to surge wasn’t the “worst foreign policy decision in the history of the country”.  That dubious distinction belongs to the Duh-cider’s decision to invade Iraq in the first place.

Nostalgia about bringing back old conservatives helped to give the neocons all four branches of government.  They fell into lockstep, won all four branches of government and though they lost the last election, are busily beserking because they feel “chaos is opportunity” (as long as they control the opportunity market).

Hagel changed his mind finally in the face of a bloody, expensive, counterproductive boondogle.  Also Nebraska has few military contractors or Likudniks to back him. And judging by your cheerleading, it was a good career move.  He doesn’t have to worry about his religious right backers much any more because they’re starting to come around against war.  It’s just politics. 

Gravel has the best and more lasting solution--direct democracy that has given the Swiss no wars in over 150 years, no boom and bust economy, few immigration and unemployment problems, a great healthcare system, no fascist War on Drugs, a healthy environment and the highest per capita income in the world.  I think you should start looking more closely at our dark horese candidates before making such a leap of faith as to support former? neocons.

I disagree!
He is only politically positioning himself for the run.  He isn’t genuine in his recent statements.  His past actions on policies, Iraq, Bush administration shows his loyalty and idealogy lies with skewed republican philosophy that favors the elites.  Robert Sheer shouldn’t make such a short-sighted statements.  Remember John McCain who people thought as moderate and independant republican but he is showing extreme views on every turn these days.  John McCain tries to buy religious right and far right voters.  Whereas, Chuck Hagel is trying to get overall popular vote by his recent comments and actions.  Like today’s typical corporate lackey politicians they say and do what will get them the elected positions they want.  Then they do what extremists, lobbists, and corporations want rather than citizens they represent.

Are you sure you want to try another hand at a republican who may well be another bought and paid for stooge?

Hagel was CEO and Chairman of American Information Systems (now ES&S;) from Nov. 1993 through March 1995.  He still has substantial financial interests in the company.  ES&S;machines were used in the FL-13 and (I believe) NC-8.  Hagel is OK if you like democracy-subverting, corporate shills.

Among Obama’s biggest financial boosters are corporate law and lobbying firms.  He voted for the Class Action Fairness Act, a law that makes it much more difficult to file class action suits.  He voted against capping credit card interest at 30%.  Obama wants a national medical records database, containing everyone’s medical history.  Obama wants us to believe that this database would be secure and that no insurance company or prospective employer would have access.  Of course, Obama’s support wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that his wife is employed by the University of Chicago Hospitals and that she received an almost $200,000 raise two months after he took office.

Although he represents a state that has been economically devasted by trade agreements, Obama’s policy director once was a senior aide to Rubin.  I have not heard much vocal support from Obama on legislation that would rein in some of the more destructive effects of the national-security-threatening, middle-and-working-class-destroying, insane trade agreements.

I completely agree with mite.

It’s interesting how polls taken today talk about how Bush is handling the war not about his administration lying us into an illegal conflict for outrageous profits.
I also find it interesting that everytime Bush wants military conflicts or to take away human rights or the civil rights of Americans he invokes 911 in his speeches always. Is this trump card a little too convenient?

I will only vote for a candidate who addresses these points;
To repeat mite’s list…
1. Federal Reserve Bank
2. Internal Revenue Service
3. 16th and 17th Amendment Never Ratified By States
4. Re-Open 911 Independent Investigation
5. Repeal Patriot Act
6. Repeal Military Commissions Act 2006
7. No David Ray Hate Crimes Bill HR 254
8. Repeal Dept. of Homeland Security (Nazi-SS)
9. Repeal Domestic Security Enhancement Act 2003
10. Repeal Bankers New Bankruptcy Acts
11. Impeach Cheney and Bush Jr.
12. Open Investigation of Bush Sr. for Treason reference Iran Contra, and Saddam Hussain of the 1980’s and 1990’s. It all leads to both wars.
13. Return the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA back to the people and enact the Supreme Law ‘U.S. Constitution, repeal ‘Uniform Commercial Code’
14. Stop jobs from going over seas-period.
15. Stop ‘North American Union’
16. Stop The Loans from the Banks to finance the WARS.

The politico-pundit-aristocracy seems to think Howard Dean is “unelectable”. Wasn’t he particularly clear on the Iraq issue? Back when it cost him?

I’ve lived in Nebraska most of my 50+ years.  It’s hard to imagine the Huskers *not* choosing Hagel over the competition.

More fascinating to me is the characterization of Ike, our neighbor to the South, as some kind of peacenik because he didn’t quite get around to sending troops to French Indo-China.

Eisenhower did manage to set our CIA on its seemingly never-ending rampage of government-toppling, democracy-busting meddling, beginning in Iran.  We’re still reaping the rewards of that first dirty trick, played against the elected government of Iran in the 1950s.

Yeah, I think it was Nixon that kept our boys out of Northern Ireland.

Hilary is a confused. She is talking about national security interest in Iraq and there isn’t any feasible. Below is a quote from MSNBC
“Clinton sees vital interests in Iraq
“We do have vital national security interests in Iraq,” declared Clinton. “Al Anbar province is the staging ground for attacks by the Sunni insurgency and al Qaida in Iraq. Both are directed at us. We have vital national security interests with respect to what Iran is doing in crossing the border. We have a commitment to the future and the safety of the Kurdish people. There’s a lot that we still have as part of our ongoing obligations that are in Americans interests, as well as the interest of the people of Iraq.”

Meantime, here is the real national interest. It is the cost of war, plus human lives and the worldwide condemnation of this mindless war based on false pretexts.
http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wra pper&Itemid=182

As a quick addendum to my prior entry, has Scheer any idea how often Chuck Hagel has groveled submissively over the last 6 years to our illegal president,selected by 5 Fascist/Republican scumbags on the U.S. Supreme Court. It’s too late for apologies now, unless one adopts Scheer hypocrisies. The only good Republican for the rest of this century is a dead one - politically,
since their Nazi gestapos have all the guns and bullets. Not to mention the power to gun us all
down who oppose their home-made “Axis of Evil!”

It is true the Democrats are all hacks; Obama a vacuous airhead like Kerry before him, Hillary a cunning and manipulative twit, tired,old reactionary Joe Biden no intelligent voter’s kind of Democrat, and a glib southern hustler, Edwards, who scolded the long-dead populist tradition without the faintest idea what it fought for. So the only good national Democrat from here on, in our parasitic American empire is also a dead one! Just write in Ralph Nader’s name again and refuse to vote for high-office vermin.
You will at least feel cleaner!
Ion C. Laskaris,Burlington,Vt. + iclrevusa.com

I would vote for Hagel on the one issue. The Dems will have to commit political suicide to lose the House or Senate. The money we would save on ending the war could be used on progressive issues. Hillary is so timid and calculating on the issue. Edwards is a good man but the favorites seem to be Hillary and Obama right now.

I despise Lieberman but the people of Connecticut (democrats) knew what he was and they still re-elected him. One has to be leery of thinking they know what democrats want. Personally, I think the whole darn bunch of the current crop of politicians in Washington should be booted. There are not more than a handful who have any backbone and most would sell their mother to get re-elected. Until the American public has the sense to make elected office in Washington a revolving door, I suspect it will never get any better no matter whom we elect.

Something tells me that Mr. Lieberman is an insider with the Bush admin. I think that he is one of Bush’s foot soldiers who pretends to be a Democrat/Independent while working quietly to advance the Bush policies. He is devious, and he is devoted to the Israel lobby. Instead of switching to the Republican party, he thinks that he can do more by appearing as separate. Just watch him for a while, you’ll see what I mean.

Hagel is great on this one issue--too bad his record is so neo-con.

If democrats are left with choice of Clinton or Obama, then Ron Paul, a true conservative, would be the way to go.

Just two points I’d like to make regarding the reactive (and understandable) position put forth in this article.  One:
“the hard truth that Iraq has collapsed because of our involvement, not despite it”.  This is not being said nearly enough.  The Bushian retort that we must just look to the future and the stakes are so enormous, is just so much horse crap.  It is Bushes fault that we are in the pickle we are in today...not Bin Laden, not Al Qaida, not Hussein, not anyone else.
And Two, even more important: We have got to stop thinking that military intervention is going to get us anywhere but deeper in the quicksand in the Middle East.  These are not the Balkans, this is not Africa.  We stand at loggerheads with Islamic sensibilities vis a vis morals, ethics, justice, way of governance.  To think that we are going to win them over to be some glorious, youthful democracies sitting at the alter of our experience in democratic governance is beyond stupid, it is ignorant.  If we don’t muster the political and social initiative to find acceptable common ground to form the border between these two massively contradicting cultures then I do believe the prophets, and feel that the final conflagation will emanate from Palestine and envelope the whole world.  If that happens then I trumpet what Yeats said, “let all things pass away.”

Nonononononononononononononononononononononononono!

No No No No. Please check his voting history!
No No No No. Please check his voting history!
No No No No. Please check his voting history!

He Is owned by Corporate America.  We don’t need more of this.  We have to find a leader who will stand and speak for the people and we better do it by 2008. Can anybody point out anyone in the US Senate, the US House, or Corporate America who is not corrupt? Any religious leaders? Any state leaders? There must be someone with moral values?  I don’t see anyone in the current crop that is not just out for a personal power play.  After 200 plus years, how in God’s name could we end up here?
Amish leaders? People with values! We need to come up to your moral values. Please, step forward and fix this corrupted broken democracy for our helpless children.

Bush, speaking on 60 minutes, and then days later in a short interview on PBS remarked
that if Democrats were to come up with another
option on Iraq, he might listen to it. Strange
that voices from his own party - Hagel - front
and center offer other options. Krugman in the NY Times offers the same reminder - “you should shut the thing down.” The Iraq study group was panned, public sentiment denied and still Bush, McCain and Lieberman prop the surge mentality all the way. Let Hagel have his day in the sun - and let some of that light shine on the White House. If Hagel or whoever, is a viable sound candidate a year from now, then good for them. I saw Hagel vs. Lieberman on Meet the Press and I nearly fainted. We need 10-15 more Republican senators speaking out, NOW...hopefully they in tandem with Hagel, can make a difference.

i have enjoyed a new hobby the last few years. please try it.  i count the amount of times ploiticians use the word “clearly” . i know this sounds very dumb. but just try it.  why do people cnstantly use this unnessacary word?  why cant people say for ie.  the american people want the war to end.  not..."clearly , the american people want the war to end.  or...they even go as far as to say clearly..its unclear.  the more someone uses the word clearly the less chance they have for my vote and scheer is one of the worse offenders.  admittedly this sounds petty and stupid, but its not.  other overused words.  “look” and “at the end of the day” very sincerely, keith in vancouver, wa.

I’me extremely disappointed that Robert Sheer would write such a piece supporting Hagel for President. Yes, Hagel has spoken out against the war but did he speak out against it three years ago???

Its so easy to lambast Bush now but not when he really needed to be! Sheer, you’ve given Kucinich publicity on your Web site and gave me the impression that you would vote for him. Kucinich has been critical of George W. Bush for much longer than Hagel. And to vote for Hagel on one issue alone??? No. I can’t do it and you haven’t persuaded me to do so either. I vote for Kucinich.

The fact that he is upfront, doesn’t tow the party line, and doesn’t yet seem to have great fountains of PR money pouring into his campaign from some impossibly rich shadowy power-brokers, these things have certainly pricked my interest in him.

You would vote for Hagel for President based on ONE ISSUE? I know that the war in Iraq is the number one issue we face, but this stinking war is going to end sooner than most people may think regardless of who is elected President in ‘08. We can not afford to throw away the rest of the progressive agenda just because Hagel is right on this ONE ISSUE.

Or instead of jerking ones knees when Hagel put forth this public sound bite that was intended to provoke this reaction,a look at the voting record of Hagel,which is strict neoCon and pro bush should make any intelligent voter find another canidate.
Dennis Kucinich who voted against the war in the first place and who is for American Freedon instead of a police state and who has always done what is best for the people instead of what is good for big business...I could go on ...Kucinich is WAY better then Hagel in every policy unless you are a supporter of Oligarchy.
I cannot belive this garbage.  Only a very superficial voter or a schill for the republicons could think one little speech makes a good presidential candidate.

Clinton’s specialty now seems to be paraphrase of Bush Administration talking-points - She spoke today of tne need “to condition American aid to the Iraqis on their meeting political benchmarks” (hard love for the Green Zone quislings - *so* relevant for the rest of the people of Iraq, huh?)...She also talked of Bush’s failure “to put leverage on this government”: yet again, mirroring the senile paternalism of this criminal administration…

Has anyone noticed how well this new-ish tack re Iraq - “now, all you people are gonna have stand on your own two feet” - jibes with the old Moynihan-ian “benign neglect” of the urban poor (the precursor of the DLC’s later welfare “reform")? The wretchedness of Iraq is being re-cast, by retrenched Republicans & by calculating corporate-friendly Dems like Clinton & Obama alike, into the “moral turpitude” of a people who were in reality smashed by serial wars & U.N. sanctions & kleptocracy...God, it feels as if Clinton & Obama can hardly get MORE conservative than they already are…

Forget the partisan nonsense. It’s national interest at stake. Flush down all warmongering and double talking candidates.

I go for Hagel or Kucinich.

Senator Obama for president and Ron Paul vice-president. Ron Paul is running! But he isn’t recieving any press. It seems his realistic, perceptive approaches to issues, such as media steering by the CFR and the Tri-lateral, demonstrated in the current diversion from the Iran crisis, is threatening to their interests.

The corporatocracy has not sanctioned any coverage of, for example, the recent predator drone that was shot down over Iran. But the flying asassin was mocked on the latest Simpsons cartoon.

FOX’s “24”, and serveral other shows, show torture on every episode. In the premier of “24”, Keifer Sutherland has a jagged dagger stabbed into his rectum. “Lost”, ABC’s top drama, depicts similar dehuminanization. 

Obama believes America is not a torturous country. Paul has the background and knowledge of the truth, and would really help guide him.

Once again, as it was in 2004, Dennis Kucinich is noticeably absent from a piece written about Democrats not being vocal enough, or having enough spine, or being tenacious enough on Iraq.  Well, Bob, it’s writers like you that keep Dennis Kucinich from being heard, noticed, or even mentoned in “Mainstream Media”. It’s “mainstream writers” like you that are talking to the left while huddling safely in the middle. THE MIDDLE BE DAMNED! This country was born of a leftist revolution and if one doesn’t soon come....?
Dennis Kucinich, Bob!!!

I thought Richard Nixon had a secret plan to get america out of vietnam.

Amen to Charlie L. Based on his voting machine escapade, not to mention his almost-perfect Bush support record, Hagel is a snake in the grass.

Mr. Scheer,

As a progressive Democrat I fully agree with your contention that the number one critical issue facing our country is our extrication from that disaster that Dumbya Bush got us into in Iraq.

That fiasco is creating a serious financial and social crisis in our country which may take at least a generation to correct in order to get us back on track again. The harm done to our international reputation may take even longer to repair.

You hit it right on regarding some of the weak-spined political hacks among the Democrats such as Hillary Clinton, whom I do not intend to vote for under ANY conditions.

So, is that how it works?  You STEAL a United States Senate seat by electronic vote count fraud, and then, by taking the positions that your constituents EXPECT of you, that somehow makes you qualified to be a PRESIDENT?

Folks, this guy is a right-wing REPUBLICAN and he is CORRUPT.  HE STOLE HIS SENATE SEAT.  Don’t you folks get that?  He STOLE it?  He rean the company that made the voting equipment, he sold it to the state, then he ran for office and won in a “suprise upset.” HE STOLE A SENATE SEAT.

There’s only one place you should go after doing that—JAIL.  Not the oval office.  Sorry.

Corrupt is corrupt.  Corrupt Republican may be redundant, but it’s no less corrupt.

He will be thrown out on his ass by 70% to 30% in the first election they have that doesn’t use HIS equipment.

Come on, Bob.  Putting an adult in charge of the country wouldn’t set well with the middleschool mentality of its citizens.  And heck, Ron Paul would be a better bet than Hagel.  At least his take on foreign policy would lead him to pull in ALL of the troops we have stationed in 131 different nations.

Face it, it doesn’t really matter who runs the gov’t.  As long as my fellow citizens view America as the “deciders” about all that is going on on this small planet, the whole place is on tenuous ground.

If you consider the large number of Americans out of our population of 300,000,000 who make their living butting into the concerns of other nations, well-beyond the atlantic, pacific, Rio Grande, and 49th parallel, you can see where the trouble lies.  While I don’t advocate isolationism, I do advocate getting our on house in order first.

The lives of American soldiers, sailors, and airmen are not worth “Iraqi Democracy,” or democracy anywhere but in the United States.

Come on, Mr. Scheer, a Republican with cojones, how about that, I grant you - but check out his voting record - he’s still a Republican.
Here’s an idea: Jim Webb for president - courage, intelligence, integrity - what a novelty, a Democrat with guts, brains, and class? Can we try to get our minds around that image? is it just too way out there to even contemplate? do we HAVE to hark back to an Eisenhower as the model of all that’s good? Give me a break - short of Britney Spears or Genghis Khan, anybody looks good compared to the appalling, simpering, twisted adolescent we got stuck with in 2000 -
let’s salute Senator Hagel’s courage, and the possibility of intelligent life in the GOP - but let’s at least examine the fighting chance that we can do BETTER than the Republicans.

I like what Senator Hagel says also, but I would never want to see another Republican President or Congress in control of the government. Haven’t we learned what happens when the religious right and the"R’s" take control? God help us if this ever occurs again. Come on Mr. Shearer, you know better than support a Republican, even if they support this issue of war mongering. They just can’t be trusted on most of the other social, health and education issues.

Oh, Good Goddess Almighty.....think people, think.  And Bob, yes, I am surprised at you.  Believe me, few folks are more anti-war than I am, I feel like I’ve been living there since 3/03.  However, Hagel has been voted in thanks, apparently, to yet MORE shenanigans with the voting machines and his investment, in, I believe Seminole?  Check out blackboxvoting.org...they have the skinny.  I hate to say it, but I would not believe he is a “clean” Republican.  Who of them are these days?  There’s always a crappy agenda that WILL not be “FOR THE PEOPLE,” if they are elected to the White House again.  The money has already been voted in, thanks so much Congress, so witholding funds is a no go.  Let’s hope a resolution opposing this escalation goes through.

I’m with Hagel and Obama.  We need to get ourselves away from these twissted politics and focus on things we can all agree on- like the Millennium Development Goals.  One of these goals, eradicating world hunger, would cost us only $19 billion annually until 2015.  The Borgen Project wants you to make this clear to your representatives now!

Of Democrats/Republicans the most informed is
Ron Paul, who is not running.  We need firstly somebody to address 9/11, besides the empire of military bases over the Earth.  Maybe Rev. Sharpton can get bolder, but at this point nobody running is.  We need a Cynthia McKinney.

I don’t know what else Hagel has to say but Denis Kucinich is just as oppossed to the war and he expresses lots of other ideas I agree with.

I almost couldn’t believe I was listening to a republican. I wish everyone else would listen to him! Chuck Hagel appeared on Charlie Rose last week and gave an extremely articulate, fact studded repsonse to Bush’s offensive and shallow presentation re: Iraq. For example, Hagel picked up on Bush’s throw away lines about Iran and Syria and compared this aggression (commenced quite a while ago) and the justification for it to our invasion of Cambodia in 1970. That he mentioned the importance of an equitable resolution to the Palestinian Israeli conflict at the beginning of his response to the despicable J.L. shows that he gets it, the regional context of our foreign policy blunders.He is not afraid to tell the truth about Iraq and what needs to be done. His lack of rhetoric and platitudes is refreshing. Go Chuck.