What if Obama does the unthinkable? How will you react?
You are right - that is unthinkable!
Do you have the slightest basis for thinking that is a possibility?
Mind you, at one level he needs to do that to win - once people realise how hard left he really is he's going to be in a power of trouble.
What do you think about Chuck Hagel for Obama's VP?
Actually, he's been my pick all along. He's a Vietnam vet, has business executive experience, and he's been vocal about the poor handling of the Iraq War.
Democrative Pres w/Republican VP. Talk about change...
What do you think of Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska? Would you vote for him if he ran for president?
I prefer Sam Brownback of Kansas over Chuck Hagel.. Plenty of experience, leadership positions, and results. Check Sam Brownback on Wikipedia.
However, to be practical, you've got to look at the three current Republican frontrunners (McCain, Giuliani, and Gingrich). It looks like Giuliani is ahead in the current polls, but he doesn't represent an awful lot of midwestern Republicans, and Gingrich doesn't have the charisma and is running 3rd anyway. McCain is the man to ask when you want straight answers.
why would a liberal democrat be concern with McCain or Huckabee?
Speak for yourself. This conservative will vote for John McCain in the primary and general election. A good leader has the ability to reach out to democrats and independents, which McCain has done and will continue doing. It is time to end the political stalemate in Washington, and get the parties working together again, not working to destroy eachother.
Politics aside, which former politician would you most like to have a beer with?
Bill Bradley was a hero of mine as a kid when he played BB for Princeton, and yet was also a brilliant student. But since he's not a choice, I'd have to say Bill Clinton. He too is a brilliant guy who is extremely knowledgeable and personable, and would be very interesting to talk to.
Whoever the CFR leaders tell him to. Same as Obama. Biden is a senior member as was Cheney who while picking a Veep ended up picking himself.
Whoever it is they will have been invited to the last Bilderberg meeting...Chuck Hagel is a member of both and would be strong choice for cross-over votes. I would prefer he picks Rudy Giuliani for the fun of watching. Or maybe Romney which would prove that he was being told what to do since both he and his wife can't stand him.
McCain voted against the GI Bill. He gave the following reason (probably not his exact words, but this is as close as I can come): If we make college available to veterans, they will leave the military at the end of their three year term. Without this assistance, they will stay in the military longer.
I should think that three years in the military would be long enough for anyone unless they want to make the military their career. As it is, three years in the military, four years in college--they'll be at least 25 by then.
The Republicans have never been real fans of education for the masses. They seem to think it is still a privilege of the rich. If they can keep the rest of us uneducated, we're less likely to ask questions about how they run our country. It's time for us to take it back from them. Obama believes in making education affordable for all.
Is there a link to Chuck Hagel verbally taking the Bush admin to the wood shed?
Here's a transcript of the Chuck Hagel speech, discussing the incompetent and arrogant Bush Administration:
Hagel: "And I have to say -- this is my opinion -- is my opinion that this is one of the most arrogant, incompetent administrations I've ever seen personally or ever read about."
Hagel: "And I'll leave that to history as to its determination. As to my personal opinion, which I have not been shy about sharing, I think as most of you know in speeches or interviews, this administration in my opinion has been as unprepared as any administration I'm aware of, not only the ones that I have been somehow connected to and that's been every administration -- either I've been in Washington or worked within an administration or Congress or some way dealing with them since the first Nixon administration. I would rate this one the lowest in capacity, in capability, in policy, in consensus -- almost every area, I would give it the lowest grade."
Should Republican party elders pull Chuck Hagel aside and ask him to change his party affiliation?
First, Lieberman lost a Democratic primary for his senate office, which is why he ran (and won) as an independent. I believe he is still a Democrat, as indicated by his super-delegate status in the party.
Chuck Hagel isn't the only one who should have support by the GOP pulled. But it is his choice in the end. I agree that pressure should be exerted on him (and others who clearly don't represent Republican positions) to identify himself as an Independent.
What do you think about Chuck Hagel as a potential running mate for Obama?
I met him, was impressed with his straight forward ideas and ideals, so have no real problems with the idea. But I think two unprecedented 'firsts' (opposite party VPs happened in the first three elections) would be too much to ask this election. Sec. of Defense seems more likely.
Is it easier to be a hawk when one has never been on the front lines or served in combat?
I mentioned it earlier.
Bush, Cheney, Rove etcetera are the boys on the schoolyard that pay the bully to trip the girls with skirts on so they can see up their dress.
It is the "chickenhawk syndrome."
Notice that the totalitarian thug over in Russia is not impressed and verbally b***h slaps our Secretaries of State and Defense.
Notice that General Sanchez thinks these chickenhawks would be courtmartialed if they actually had the guts to serve.
If Obama gets the Democratic nomination, who should I vote for?
I see nothing wrong with Obama and he and Hillary's views are similar however, if you're determined Mike Gravel is even further left than Obama and Hillary, Nader is touting a single payer health care program and of course the socialists and communists run someone in my state every year. On the other side I haven't heard of anyone.
What is it that Unity08 believes and how exactly will it become a force in the 2008 elections?
Well, since Democratic and Republican platforms are pretty much exact opposites, I think the only thing they'll agree on is that donuts with sprinkles are better than donuts without sprinkles. Unless that's deemed blatant "sprinklism", at which point they will decide both types of donuts are equal, and give billions of dollars to ineffective government programs directed at raising awareness and insuring sprinkleless donuts can sponge off of taxpayers for the duration of their shelf life. Then they'll find some way of aborting them. Possibly yanking them out of the fryer when they're only half cooked?
They are the swing voters, who could go either way. They are different on every issue mind you. For example the right to bear arms issue. The left would support gun laws prohibitting firearms. The right would support not have restrictions. Somewhere in between are many people who believe there should be laws, but not very strict ones. They are a "moderate"s. A "centrist" politician will try to appeal to them by supporting gun control legislation but also championing the second amendment decision from a couple of weeks ago. Bill Clinton was great at straddling the line. Obama is now looking to try to do the same.
Why did Obama take a Democrat and a Republican Senator on his overseas trip?
You are correct...A good president should listen to both sides and decide what is best for the country. Today’s politicians forget that they are elected by the public, a public servant; instead they work for big corporate and some don’t even listen to their own party or advisor's. Obama is the change we need.
Why did many Conservatives attack Conservatives who thought Palin was a dismal choice?
Because they are all educated Conservatives. The Republican Party has been embracing the uneducated, the prejudiced, the Bubba's (i.e., Rush Limbaugh) and running down education and intellectualism as if it is a bad thing. And most of their intellectual Conservatives say the same thing.
So why are Republicans opposing a fellow Republican to become Secretary of Defense?
Compare Senator Hagel's thinking in 2002 to Republican thinking in 2002 on Iraq.
"If disarmament in Iraq requires the use of force, we need to consider carefully the implications and consequences of our actions. The future of Iraq after Saddam Hussein is also an open question. Some of my colleagues and some American analysts now speak authoritatively of Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds in Iraq, and how Iraq can be a test case for democracy in the Arab world. How many of us really know and understand much about Iraq, the country, the history, the people, the role in the Arab world? I approach the issue of post-Saddam Iraq and the future of democracy and stability in the Middle East with more caution, realism and a bit more humility... Imposing democracy through force in Iraq is a roll of the dice. A democratic effort cannot be maintained without building durable Iraqi political institutions and developing a regional and international commitment to Iraq's reconstruction. No small task."
Compare that above to biggest cheerleader at the time.
Iraq's uncertain future, as opposed to its totalitarian present, has become the principle [sic] concern of many realists. "What comes after a military invasion?" Senator Chuck Hagel would like to know. "Who rules Iraq? Does the United States really want to be in Baghdad, trying to police Baghdad for twenty or thirty years?" ... Predictions of ethnic turmoil in Iraq are even more questionable than they were in the case of Afghanistan. Unlike the Taliban, Saddam has little support among any ethnic group, Sunnis included, and the Iraqi opposition is itself a multi-ethnic force...
[T]he executive director of the Iraq Foundation, Rend Rahim Francke, says, "we will not have a civil war in Iraq. This is contrary to Iraqi history, and Iraq has not had a history of communal conflict as there has been in the Balkans or in Afghanistan..."
Who was right 10 years later? Republicans do not want reminder on why their foreign policy was so bad.
Many Republicans need to like Hagel. What is weird the about face?
"Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell lavished praise Friday on Sen. Chuck Hagel and said many of his warnings about the Iraq war have been validated.
“Many of the predictions Chuck Hagel made about the war came true,” the Kentucky senator said in a brief interview after his remarks at a fundraising reception.
“They have proven to be accurate.”
Hagel’s views on the war “have not diminished his effectiveness,” McConnell said, and may, in fact, increase his effectiveness over time.
Hagel warned against a U.S. attack against Iraq without broad international support and careful planning for the aftermath. Most recently, he has opposed President Bush’s increase in U.S. troops while supporting changes in the U.S. military mission and gradual withdrawal of most combat troops."
After that assessment in 2007 from Senator McConnell, what changed?
All negative comments and etc aside looking for a mature group of both repubs and dems?
Hey, get out of my head! That was the same thing I was thinking of last night. Colin Powell, Hillary Clinton, John McCain working with Obama would be wonderful, wonderful, wonderful. I hope he does just that.
McCain made me cry. I voted for Obama but I felt so sorry for him. I love that man; he has a lot of integrity.
Why am I hearing noise about Chuck Hagel running for President when John McCain lost credibility for being?
Chuck Hagel recently announced he was refusing to run for President, otherwise he has some excellent qualifications. its very curious why none of the candidates (that truly represent the will of the people) can get support to run from the big corporate types. The candidates in favor of outsourcing, illegal immigration, CEO domination, and the wars for oil seem to get all the big money support.