Check in here if you ***do not*** want Hagel as vp.

[AlCzervik]

i swear to zod this place is turning in to Chuck Hagel underground.

Under no circumstances do i want Hagel as vp or appointed to any cabinet position, we have plenty of well qualified democrats to fill all the slots.

[Lucky 13]

1. It's Barack's choice.

What ever he decides, I support him.

[AlCzervik]

3. and i doubt he'll pick Hagel.

[Lucky 13]

50. Hagel, Clinton, Sebelius, Clark, The Tooth Fairy...

... whoever he chooses, I support him.

[MaineDem]

125. Then you'll see one hell of a fight at the convention

I don't think the strong Democrats at the National Convention will roll over and support Obama's choice as easily as you are. I don't think a Republican would get the votes to win the position. We'll see another name put into nomination, regardless of who Obama choses.

[lastliberalintexas]

150. Blind unquestioning faith in a candidate is a bad thing

I thought Americans learned that after the GW Bush candidacy, but I guess not. Identity politics suck.


Fastest way to ensure that I go third party and then get the hell out of Dodge is by putting someone like Hagel in as VP, for Obama or Clinton. I'll hold my nose and vote for the centrist Dem nominee, but I'll be damned if I'll vote for a ticket that has an actual republican.

[WeDidIt]

2. Better him than Clinton. n/t

[AlCzervik]

5. i doubt he'll pick her either.

[DemVet]

117. He doesn't have to pick...Hillary will TAKE it if she wants it. BO has no say in the matter.

[calimary]

84. NO.

[WeDidIt]

88. IF the only two choices for Veep were Hagel and Clinton

I'd go with Hagel hands down.

[calimary]

105. NO. Clinton. She's pro choice. Hagel is not. It'd be too close for comfort.

Besides, her presence on the ticket would prevent some nutcase on that end from deciding to "decide the election" on his(her) own. Some of those fuckers are already joking about it (see FUCKERbee).

[WeDidIt]

116. Nope, I'd still go for Hagel

No Clinton. No more. I actually think more highly of Bush these days than Hillary Clinton.

[PBS Poll-435]

139. Your screenname makes your post ironic, don't cha think?

[WeDidIt]

180. Not at all

Hillary stopped being anything resembling a Dem this week by proclaiming she would take the nomination to the convention.

If she was a Dem, she'd exit gracefully already.

[PBS Poll-435]

183. I didn't see your requirement in the 2004 party platform.

Or any other DNC, or NY Democratic Party document.

Perhaps you can direct me to a link.

Thanks in advance.

[WeDidIt]

184. Let's see, in 2003, I knew for a fact Zell Miller wasn't a Dem

Look at what happened in 2004.

Then, in 2005, I had determined there was no way Lieberman was a Dem.

I calls 'em as I sees 'em.

Clinton is the third time I've determined somebody who called themself a Dem wasn't really a Dem.

If she pulls out on June 4, I'll admit I was wrong and am only batting .667.

[PBS Poll-435]

185. Her pulling out of the race has nothing to do with solidifying her Dem credentials

[WeDidIt]

186. Taking the nomination to the cnvention means she wants the Dems to lose

It's that simple.

[PBS Poll-435]

187. Sigh...

Whatever you say.

[polmaven]

126. So, let me see if I have this straight.

Someone with the screen name "IWantAnyDem" would rather have a Republican than a Democrat....

Sure, that makes all kinds of sense.

[WeDidIt]

129. No, I'd take a Republican who acts more like a Democrat

than the alleged Democrat who is most certainly a Republican.

And a few weeks ago, I would have never considered Clinton to be a Republican.

[lastliberalintexas]

149. When the fuck did Hagel start acting like a Dem?

Anti-choice, anti-gay rights, anti-female, pro-military industrial complex, pro-school prayer, panders to the religious right. And you'd pick that over Clinton? Fuck.


Oh and just in case you didn't know- HAGEL VOTED FOR THE IWR. Pass it on to your Obama buddies, because apparently some of them don't know that.


Goddamn the primary blinders have gotten even bigger.

[WeDidIt]

155. And he's still more of a Democrat than Hillary

That says more of Hillary than it does Hagel.

[lastliberalintexas]

158. Bullshit

Your primary blinders are showing. I'm not a Clinton fan by any means, and I'd pick her any day and twice on Sunday over Hagel.

Step away from the primary, go outside and get some exercise. Then ask yourself again, do you want a right wing republican who voted for the IWR who is also very, very socially and fiscally conservative or do you want a pro-choice, pro-gay rights, somewhat fiscally progressive Dem named Clinton? If you seriously still pick Hagel, then our party is in worse shape than I thought.

[WeDidIt]

160. Actually, I took my party loyalty blinders off

and saw Clinton for what she truly is.

And the truth of the matter is that Hagel is more of a Democrat than Hillary, which saddens me to no end.

[AlCzervik]

162. so you really don't want any dem. You're willing to go outside and give the vp slot

away to a anti choice republican, nice.

and nice way of overlooking many other democrats for that slot that aren't Hillary.

[WeDidIt]

164. I want any Dem

and Hillary Clinton is no more of a Democrat than Joe Lieberman or Zell Miller.

[AlCzervik]

166. Lieberman is no longer a democrat, Zell Miller is no longer a human.

HRC would be about my last choice for vp but she'd be one ahead of Hagel who isn't even on my list.

[WeDidIt]

168. Hagel's on my list of those I don't want

But he's more acceptable than Hillary at this point.

[WeDidIt]

165. Oh, and BTW

for the record, Hagel is the second to the last person whose name has been floated that I would want on the ticket as a Veep, right in front of Hillary.

[AspenRose]

4. Nope.

eom

[AlCzervik]

6. thank you.

[MadBadger]

7. You can't talk bipartisanship and then appoint no republicans to the cabinet

That just isnt going to happen in an Obama Administration.

[AlCzervik]

13. ok he can give something to Lincoln Chafee, i think he left the gop but he should still count.

[bridgit]

28. Whoa, as VP, Hagel would be president of the senate...

That's not a cabinet position, that's a heartbeat from the prez

[MadBadger]

30. I agree, but Ive alreay said I think Hagel would make a solid choice for Sec. of Defense.

[AlCzervik]

33. i still realy dislike that idea, why Hagel, why not a democrat? * years of getting

s rewed by Bush on everything and yes Hagel was part and parcel of that party, so no way.

[damonm]

137. But you overlook one salient fact...

Hagel OPPOSED Bush on the war, torture, AND warrantless wiretaps, and has been a powerful voice for veterans in the Senate. Hagel as VP? No. SecDef? Abso-freaking-lutely.

[lastliberalintexas]

152. HAGEL VOTED FOR THE IWR

Goddamn, get your heads out of your asses people. You'd be inviting a third party revolt on the left and begging for a presidential assassination from the right.

[damonm]

156. fact.

From wikipedia:

On August 18, 2005, Hagel compared the Iraq War to Vietnam and openly mocked Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion that the Iraqi insurgency was in its "last throes."<8>

In November 2005, Hagel made a much-publicized statement: "To question your government is not unpatriotic — to not question your government is unpatriotic." This was in reference to the lack of open debate in Congress regarding the Iraq War, and in defense of his assertion that the United States should withdraw its troops.

In December 2005, in reference to Bush, the GOP, and the PATRIOT Act, Hagel made a much-publicized statement: "I took an oath of office to the Constitution, I didn't take an oath of office to my party or my president."<9>

Sounds like a real ideologue to me...

also:

In November 2007, he rated the Bush administration "the lowest in capacity, in capability, in policy, in consensus -- almost every area" of any presidency in the last forty years. He also revealed he is open to running as vice-president with the 2008 Democratic nominee.<19> In the same month, he said, "I have to say this is one of the most arrogant, incompetent administrations I've ever seen or ever read about."<19>

I STILL think he'd be a good SecDef.

[lastliberalintexas]

159. You said he opposed Bush on the war, I pointed out that he voted for it

He and Clinton both voted for it, both now think it a mistake, except that she advocates "immediate" withdrawal while he does not.

He is a right wing republican who has voted to slash VA benefits. He does not fucking deserve to be anywhere near ANY Dem adminstration.

[damonm]

170. So, we disagree...

In July 2007, Hagel expressed his intention to cooperate with Senate Democrats in voting for a bill that would set a timeline to get out of Iraq.

And I STRONGLY question your assertion that he voted to slash VA benefits, as he's currently cosponsoring (with Jim Webb) the "Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007", which would establish a program of educational assistance for members of the Armed Forces who serve in the Armed Forces after September 11, 2001.
Also, Hagel was deputy administrator of the VA, and resigned in protest over cuts in veteran's benefits.

[bridgit]

39. How bout Veterans Affairs?

[AlCzervik]

43. How about Max Cleland for that?

[bridgit]

53. I have '0' quarrel with that, Hagel could do a Sec of Transportation gig maybe...

I wouldn't give him anything to do with energy, defense (certainly not so-called 'home land' anything), commerce, etc...yeah, I'm a little hard-nose blankity blank, but they've had their biiiiig opportunity to run the school bus off the cliff and did a bang-up job of it in the process. There *has* to be other republicans out there somewhere that don't smell of bush...or did I just answer a question I did not ask

[AlCzervik]

55. i'm totally for inviting him to a wh dinner, i think that's pretty fair.

or maybe head up a blue ribbon panel to determine why mini horses are so adorable.

[bridgit]

57. Aren't mini horses adorable though? And don't we need to know just why that is?

[AlCzervik]

58. for real.

[Cant trust em]

47. Is VA a promotion, or demotion for a major player in the Senate?

Cabinet positions (State, Defense, AG excepted) aren't really the most prestigious. That's my opinion, at least.

[MadBadger]

52. He's done with the Senate I believe.

[AlCzervik]

56. he is, he's retiring, hopefully permanently from public disservice.

[bridgit]

61. Well, we're just trying to find Charles something for him to do in his retirement...

[AlCzervik]

62. i think we nailed it.

[Cant trust em]

63. Maybe he can take up SCUBA diving or something.

[JimGinPA]

8. Not VP, But He May Be Offered A Cabinet Spot

[lastliberalintexas]

153. Why? The man is a freaking right wing conservative

How the fuck does that warrant a cabinet position in ANY Dem administration? God you people are making me use incredibly offensive language...

[On the Road]

190. It Often Happens

that a member of the opposition party will be nominated for a cabinet post as a gesture of bipartisanship.

Clinton had Cohen for Defense
Even Bush had Mineta for Transportation

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. I don't want him as VP.

Apart from his position on Iraq, his voting record is quite conservative. As Republicans go he's not as bad as some, but he's still a Republican. There are plenty of real Democrats to choose from. While he can certainly be useful as a foil to McCain, he shouldn't be on the ticket.

[AlCzervik]

14. exactly and thank you.

[elfin]

10. Not me - too socailly Conservitive by far

but OK as Sec Def or Sec State.

I am paranoid of assasination attempt on Barrack - his sucessor MUST be in tune with Supreme Court appointments.

[AlCzervik]

16. i'm not ok with that either, Hagel hasn't earned it and the gop has fucked us over way

too many times.

[bicentennial_baby]

11. Meeeeeee!

[AlCzervik]

19. and that's why i love you.

[bicentennial_baby]

27. No anti-choice, anti-gay Repukes on our ticket!

Or frankly, anywhere near the Executive Branch. Shameful.

And I love you

[Aloha Spirit]

12. here

[beezlebum]

me

[AlCzervik]

22. yay.

[Johnny__Motown]

15. No repugs on the ticket period... I see no reason to fight an incumbent repug 8 years from now

[AlCzervik]

21. you so get it.

[bridgit]

17. present...

[AlCzervik]

23. excellent.

[4themind]

18. Sorry to hijack your thread

but I'm doing it anyway, lol, It's not going to matter WHO the V.P. I.M.O. is if this thing goes to the convention,like hillary is suggesting it will today if she doesn't get her way, with a bitter half of the electorate that is being fomented from the other side.It won't matter if it's Al Gore as V.P. or Dick "freakin" cheney, cuz the chances of them actually getting into the white house will be between slim and none IMO. Again sorry to high jack your thread but it just seems like people are arguing about who is going to be the co-captain of the titanic while it's in the process of sinking. But back to your regularly scheduled thread, heh.

[AlCzervik]

24. please.

[newmajority]

20. I hope people were listening to Hartmann this morning

He listed off the ratings Hagel had from various orginizations, but for the sake of brevity, I'll just mention two....

Christian Coalition - 100%

NARAL - 0%

Now add to this the fact that Hagel wouldn't even be in the Senate if it were not for his previous job as the CEO of ES&S Machines, which is behind only Diebold in the number of electro-fraud "voting" machines being used in this country.......


Why the HELL would any Democrat even consider for half a second supporting this man? Because he's on the right side of the war?

Well shit, if that's all it takes, let's put Ron Paul on the ticket. He's actually on the right side of a lot more things than Hagel is.

[AlCzervik]

29. no kidding! so many people never look at voting records! Hagel says some nice things

about Obama and people start warming up to him. My gawds, imagine if Hagel sprung for ice cream?

[lastliberalintexas]

154. THANK YOU

I can't believe some people here...

[Canuckistanian]

192. Yeah, I heard that

Hartmann read a list of Hagel's "achievements".

If you didn't know who he was talking about, Hagel's voting record could have been that of Coburn or Inhofe or Santorum (*shudder*).

[babylonsister]

25. I don't at all, but SecDef might work. nt

[AlCzervik]

31. sorry, you know i love you but no, he has in no way earned that or deserves it.

so many democrats could fill all the jobs. * years of Bush and sorry, no Quarter to the gop.

[cascadiance]

74. I might do it, but the deal is we'd have a Dept of Peace with D. Kucinich heading it up!

If we have both, then we have quite a depth of viewpoints/perspectives for any conflict situations that might come up.

I think having Hagel be the Secretary of Defense might help Republicans accept more a Department of Peace with Dennis Kucinich heading it up too!

But aside from that, I don't want Republicans with that much power. Especially at VP slot. That just sets up Obama with a bigger bullseye on his back than if Hillary were his VP. And in both cases I think he'd be worse off than JFK was!

[tnlefty]

26. Not just no, but HELL NO!!!

No way in hell that I'm gonna be eager to vote for a presidential ticket with a repub on it - never done it and I don't intend to start now.

[AlCzervik]

32. glad to hear it.

[rox63]

34. Hell no!

Perhaps some cabinet post dealing with defense or veteran's issues would be ok. But not VP, no way.

[AlCzervik]

36. how about an invite to a wh dinner? I think that's a totally fair compromise.

[Coexist]

35. .

[Lerkfish]

37. I don't prefer Hagel, I don't prefer Clinton, I don't prefer lieberman

surely to pete we got better choices.

[AlCzervik]

41. of course we do! The very idea of a republican on the ticket or in the cabinet

is just nightmarish.

[Cant trust em]

38. No republicans in the top 5 for the chain of command.

Sorry, but this is our time.

[AlCzervik]

42. or the top 20 in the chain of command, or maybe 50.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

40. Check.

[AlCzervik]

45. Heyo!

[bigwillq]

44. I do not want Hagel.

I highly doubt Obama will pick him but we shall see.

[AlCzervik]

46. good and thank you.

[RainDog]

48. He only polled @ 30% approval. The LOWEST of any choice

He will be in a cabinet position tho, I'm sure. Maybe that's to get him to reverse rig the voting machines or something.

yes. I'm cynical.

[AlCzervik]

49. he needs to go retire from public service and just go do whatever.

[sniffa]

51. Obama/Ferarro 08

[AlCzervik]

54. You're a smart ass! and besides, she hates men!

[mmonk]

59. In this age of lies, I refuse to throw a truthteller under the bus.

[AlCzervik]

60. so not wanting him as vp or in the cabinet is throwing him under the bus, please?

i did not insult him once, i just don't want him. Why is that so difficukt to understand that is not being dropped in the grease?

[Inuca]

69. No, but

referring to his years of "disservice" is (throwing him under the bus). You are free to enjoy your blinders though, fortunately Obama does not seem to share your views, and I am not referring to Hagel specifically but to his I hope sincere desire to end the era of US vs. THEM.

[AlCzervik]

70. look not picking from the qualified democrats in order to pick Hagel is

"Throwing dmocrats under the bus" and quite frankly Hagel has never been one of us so there is no bus to throw him under.

[Inuca]

80. Agree to disagree

It's just that I happen to agree with mmonk that truthtellers are hard to come by among politicians of either party and it is a quailty I value highly.

[mmonk]

85. Thanks.

We can't correct the direction we are going if people don't know where we've been. Hagel would provide a non partisan look or appearance to the truth from the public perspective. And that is a pressing issue right now in saving this country from itself and its dishonest currents.

[AlCzervik]

89. his record on a women's right to choose is terrible and that does matter to me very much.

[mmonk]

76. Yes, there are plenty of good choices in our party.

But having Hagel somewhere in an Obama administration would not bother me in the least. I think it would be great to have his visibility in the equation. He wouldn't harm us. It's not like he would be voting for something you don't like in the Senate since he would be in the executive branch.

[fishwax]

64. hell no

picking a republican for the vice presidency would be a slap in the face to our qualified democrats.

[AlCzervik]

68. ding ding ding!

[Colobo]

65. I like Hagel.

[AlCzervik]

67. thats fine, i just do not want him in the cabinet or as vp.

[NEDem]

71. I like Hagel too

And I wouldn't mind him as a cabinet position. I'd take him over Hillary as VP any day of the week. But I think there are Dems who would be better as VP than him.

[Swamp Rat]

66. k&r!

I'd rather have Clinton, and that's saying something!

[chknltl]

Last Time I checked, the "D" in DU stood for Democratic.

...um perhaps I may have missed something somewhere in the fine print but I thought it meant we supported ...um ...like Democrats. I am sure somewhere on the internests there must be a bush butt kisser underground, (BBK). I'll bet that the BBK has a wider stance on things than we do here in the DU.

[AlCzervik]

73. no you missed nothing, D does still stand for democrat.

[varelse]

72. I won't vote for Obama if he chooses a Republican running mate

That category includes Chuck Hagel. Hope he chooses a qualified Democrat for VP.

[Raine]

75. NO absolutely not!

We have enough good people of our own in the Democratic party, we don't have to choose from theirs.

[me b zola]

77. Checking in to just say no to Hagel

[Secret_Society]

78. It would make it difficult for me to vote for the ticket

[LittleBlue]

79. I like Hagel. SecDef definitely

He has proven he understands the value of lives in war. He should be rewarded for being so outspoken against this debacle.

[Johnny__Motown]

82. That would imply that no Dem could do the job as well as a Repug.. we have the rare

opportunity of establishing our party as the one which understands how to defend our nation in this post 9/11 world.


I am not against some type of bi-partisan cabinet but I think we had better look at the big picture on national defense and our party's reputation on it.

[LittleBlue]

90. I don't see that it really matters

Whether it's a Dem or a Repub, I'm more concerned with avoiding war than other considerations. He could be a valuable member in spreading progressive thoughts considering the media frenzy it would create.

He may not be more qualified than other Democrats, but he may be more effective.

[sfam]

81. Go Sebelius!!!!

That is all...

[calimary]

83. Here. It's like voting for Ron Paul because you like his opposition to the war and his

willingness to legalize pot.

And not bothering to examine where he stands on everything else.

Hagel is the same way. Yes, he's on our side as far as opposing the war, but he might as well be john mcsame when it comes to a woman's right to choose. Might be a good cabinet official, though. Maybe something in the VA or the Pentagon? He is a Vietnam War veteran.

[AlCzervik]

86. i agree and Bridgit and i think we found a job for him---

the head of a blue ribbon panel to determine why mini horses are so adorable.

As for Veterans affairs i'd give it to Max Cleland.

[calimary]

101. Yeah, Max Cleland would be perfect for that job.

NOBODY in the lead jobs in the Defense Department should get there without having served, and seen combat of some sort. Wesley Clark would be another superb one for Defense Secretary, assuming he's not the running mate.

[AlCzervik]

87. dupe.

[Olney Blue]

91. Why would we risk giving the GOP power, if something happens to our Dem?

God forbid.

[AlCzervik]

97. i don't know, thats why i posted the op. I'm confuzzled about what i've read here

in the past few days. Hagel can come to dinner and then go home.

[mmonk]

127. If he is a cabinet member, how would we be giving the GOP power?

[Olney Blue]

196. I was referring to the VP slot only.

[lmbradford]

92. Please God NOOOOO!

[ShortnFiery]

93. I could handle Hagel better than a DLC Clintonian such as Wes Clark or Fast Eddy Rendel.

[ZinZen]

94. It won't be Hagel.

[Change has come]

95. I do not want Hagel as VP.

[donheld]

96. No to Hagel

[Danger Mouse]

98. no repugs on our DEM ticket, thanks.

[AlCzervik]

99. thanks.

[Jim Lane]

100. At last, my chance to say something nice about HIllary Clinton.

I don't want Clinton as Obama's running mate -- but I'd rather see the post go to Clinton than to Hagel.

Unlike some DUers on this thread, I wouldn't rule out all Republicans. Even if someone like Bill Richardson would be a better VP, it's possible that a recovering Republican could be a better VP candidate, helping us to pull in swing voters.

Some folks have mentioned Lincoln Chafee. He's not a good fit for Obama. He was Mayor of Warwick and then served a little more than one term in the Senate. Obama needs someone with more experience, particularly executive experience.

The only non-Democrat who merits any consideration is Mike Bloomberg. He was a Democrat, then a Republican, now an Independent; he ran a huge business and then ran the nation's biggest city. Picking him would strengthen Obama's claim to be transcending politics as usual. Bloomberg is much better than Hagel on reproductive rights, LGBT issues, and gun control. Like Sebelius or Napolitano, he does raise the double-prejudice problem: Can we win with a ticket that has no white Christian male? To make up for that, though, I think he'd bring a lot of benefits to the ticket.

While we're on the subject of unorthodox picks, McCain has an obvious cross-party possibility, who's been mentioned on DU before: Joe Lieberman. McCain's conservative detractors would be apoplectic at putting such a "liberal" on the ticket. McCain, however, could conceivably gamble that most of them, when they were through fulminating, would realize they had nowhere else to go. However despised Lieberman is on DU, his selection as McCain's running mate would help McCain's "maverick" image and take the wind out of our "McSame" and "no third Bush term" themes.

[BlueMonday]

102. As an 'Obama Republican' who likes Hagel, I think that he'll be necessary...

... if McCain chooses Lieberman. If not, I don't think he ought to get the nod.

[WinkyDink]

121. You're a REPUBLICAN?? WTH??

[Marrah_G]

132. Yeah check out his latest "Purge the party" posts- It's disgusting

[AlCzervik]

145. i just saw that, oh the irony.

[Inuca]

128. Welcome to the tent :-) n/t

[Oak2004]

135. Welcome to the land of the sane

I'm an ex- Republican. Though not a Democrat, there's a lot more I can find to support among the Democrats today.

The GOP is so far from the party I joined it's unrecognizable to me. It looks, frankly, a little bit like Mussolini's party, except that the Republicans couldn't get the trains to run on time even if there was only one train and the only place it was going was round and round the Christmas tree.

[Warren DeMontague]

142. McCain won't pick Lieberman. As a Republican, you ought to know that no-one pro-choice is getting

anywhere NEAR that ticket.

Joe, for all his faults, is pro-choice.

The knuckle-dragger Theocrat wing of the GOP is going to have enough trouble rallying around McCain. He's going to pick someone they thoroughly approve of for the #2 slot. Watch.

[WA98296]

103. No Thanks to Mr. Voting Machine Business!

[Kool Kitty]

104. I kinda like Hagel, but no, not VP.

I guess I just like how he feels about the war.

[MattNC]

106. i've never seen

many noteworthy journalists or commentators mention Hagel with much seriousness. The whole rumor sounds like one of those that just developed a life of its own after a while - true or not.

[Milo_Bloom]

107. VP, no.. Sec of Defense.. YES.

I wouldn't want him in a position that involves policy on civil rights, choice or have any power over other potential progressive issues.

HOWEVER,

I believe he has a very good head for foreign policy and we shouldn't shut him out of that capacity, simply because we do not like his views on choice.

[ruggerson]

110. A Sec'y Of Defense

would have to implement the dismantling of DADT.

Hagel is a huge proponent of DADT.

[Milo_Bloom]

112. WHat is his view TODAY?

And is this the most important issue facing the current, broken US military?

Is Obama going to make this a PRIORITY? I don't believe so (http://www.electiongeek.com/blog/2008/04/10/obamas-join... /)

Is it a PRIORITY? In reality... no.

[ruggerson]

113. It's one of many important issues

and there are plenty of good people who support getting rid of the policy. And it is part of Obama's platform. Why not choose people whose sense of right and wrong is not upside down?

[Milo_Bloom]

115. What is his view TODAY?

I also gave you a think in which Obama said it is not a prerequisite for him.

I don't know Hagel's current view on Don't ask don't tell. The only quotes I could find from him directly on the subject were 9 years old.

[ruggerson]

108. I can't believe how many DU'ers would support a bigot

un fucking real.

[OmahaBlueDog]

109. Some myths we need to end

Hagel will not be Obama's running mate

Hillary will not be McSame's running mate

[hokies4ever]

111. Perhaps a position in the cabinet

Nobody truly thinks that Obama is going to give him the V.P. spot.

[musicblind]

114. I'll agree with you. I would like to see someone who is pro gay rights in that position.

or at LEAST half way there.

[JCMach1]

118. HELL NO... no more REPUGS

[dreamnightwind]

119. no Hagel please

He's far far right wing, only good on the war.

Also no to HRC and any DLC pols.

This is our year. These right-wing fanatics took a virtual tie in 2000 and rammed their radical agenda down our throats for 8 years, smirking at us the whole time. I'm tired of watching Dems give away what they believe in in the spirit of bi-partisanship. It's only bi-partisan if both sides do it, otherwise it's capitulation.

How about the left wing of the party, anyone remember us? We're the ones that actually believe in what's good for this country and its citizens. Don't forget it.

Barbara Boxer works for me. Plenty of other worthy lefties too. We can win this election with our people, we don't need to compromise what we believe in this time. It's time to grow a pair and lead this county.

Be proud of restoring this country with a true liberal agenda. Articulate what it's about. Articulate what the GOP and DLC people are about. After the last 8 years, it couldn't be any easier to make these points, if we have the conviction to do it.

[WinkyDink]

120. NO REPUBLICANS, IN ANY SPOT. The fire, next time!

I cannot believe how GULLIBLE some Democrats seem to be.

The GOOD GUYS WEAR "D". PERIOD.

[Dumak]

122. **absolutely not**

Now naive is this idea of having a republican VP. The main function of a VP is to replace the president. We don't want to encourage the president's death. We can only imagine the technology available now to make a death look natural/accidental. And yes, the fascist republicans would happily do such a thing as long as they are not caught.

The republican idea of bipartisanship is that the minority party cross the aisle to vote with the majority. It is *not* examining both sides of an issue and finding a happy middle ground. So by their own definition, assuming the democrats will have a majority, it is solely the republicans' responsibility to show bipartisanship.

The only place a republican should go is in the cabinet position where they can do the least amount of harm. They've done enough damage to the country and world already. Time to get serious.

[demmiblue]

123. Checking in!

[MaineDem]

124. I do NOT want Hagel or ANY Republican on the Democratic ticket

I don't think it would ever pass the convention.

Cabinet, okay. VP? No f'ing way!

[onehandle]

130. No Republicans ever. Being good on one thing doesn't mean shit.

He's a thug in the McCain tradition.

[eleny]

131. No to Hagel

He's far too conservative on social issues. And then there's that association with the voting machines. This guy is a Trojan horse. I don't trust him one iota.

[Orsino]

133. I do not.

Republicans can't be trusted with the keys to the Corvette. They'll wrap it around a tree every time.

[Marrah_G]

134. The fact that this is even in question on DU is very disturbing

[dave123williams]

136. You DO want some Republicans to cross the line and vote for a Dem president, right?

Hagel's a good choice for that - for reasons that go beyond the fact that he is a good and honest man. He's been opposed to the war right from the gate, and I've followed his career for years with interest. He's a rationalist, and doesn't suffer fools lightly.

That being said, you get the same exact thing in Jim Webb of Virginia. Republicans respect him.

[AlCzervik]

138. i see, so they have to be bribed with the promise of Hagel?

And his record on choice sucks and i'm not even close to ok with that.

[dave123williams]

191. Well, you can bribe them with their own tax money, so why not.

[Warren DeMontague]

144. Hagel is anti-choice. Hagel is anti-stem cell research. Anything happens to the President, Hagel

would be next in line, next in line to appoint Supreme Court Justices.

The Majority of Americans are PRO CHOICE. What possible logic could there be in putting an anti-choicer on the Dem ticket?

No Sale. Sorry. Not going to happen. Uh Huh.

[mmonk]

195. Hagel wouldn't be in charge of decisions on choice.

Why is this so hard for people to understand?

[Warren DeMontague]

200. Uh, because the Vice President is next in line for the Presidency.

In which case, he WOULD be picking Supreme Court Justices.

Why is that so hard for people to understand?

[lastliberalintexas]

157. So you want to see a 3rd party revolt from the left?

Not to mention, you actually think Obama would continue to get support from women and GLBT with Hagel on the ticket? Please.

[WinkyDink]

171. There happen to be enough registered Democrats. Let Hagel switch Parties, if he's so "good and

honest."

[dave123williams]

193. Good and honest would be fucking refreshing at this point.

[progressoid]

181. No he's not a good choice. Here:

http://www.ontheissues.org:80/Senate/Chuck_Hagel.htm

Abortion

Voted NO on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life. (Mar 2003)
Voted YES on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
Voted YES on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)

Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record

Budget & Economy

Voted YES on $40B in reduced federal overall spending. (Dec 2005)
Voted YES on prioritizing national debt reduction below tax cuts. (Apr 2000)
Voted YES on 1998 GOP budget. (May 1997)
Voted YES on Balanced-budget constitutional amendment. (Mar 1997)

Civil Rights

Voted YES on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)
Voted YES on loosening restrictions on cell phone wiretapping. (Oct 2001)
Voted NO on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on setting aside 10% of highway funds for minorities & women. (Mar 1998)
Voted YES on ending special funding for minority & women-owned business. (Oct 1997)
Supports anti-flag desecration amendment. (Mar 2001)

Rated 60% by the ACLU, indicating a mixed civil rights voting record.

Corporate Interests

Voted NO on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on reforming bankruptcy to include means-testing & restrictions. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on restricting rules on personal bankruptcy. (Jul 2001)
Rated 87% by the US COC, indicating a pro-business voting record. (Dec 2003)

Crime

Voted NO on $1.15 billion per year to continue the COPS program. (May 1999)

Rated 50% by CURE, indicating mixed votes on rehabilitation.

Drug Enforcement

Voted YES on increasing penalties for drug offenses. (Nov 1999)

Education

Voted NO on $52M for "21st century community learning centers". (Oct 2005)
Voted NO on $5B for grants to local educational agencies. (Oct 2005)
Voted NO on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education. (Mar 2005)
Voted NO on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors. (May 2001)
Voted NO on funding student testing instead of private tutors. (May 2001)
Voted NO on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction. (Apr 2001)
Voted YES on Educational Savings Accounts. (Mar 2000)
Voted YES on allowing more flexibility in federal school rules. (Mar 1999)
Voted YES on education savings accounts. (Jun 1998)
Voted YES on school vouchers in DC. (Sep 1997)

Rated 36% by the NEA, indicating a mixed record on public education.

Energy & Oil

Voted NO on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's AMWR. (Nov 2005)
Voted NO on $3.1B for emergency oil assistance for hurricane-hit areas. (Oct 2005)
Voted NO on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%). (Jun 2005)
Voted NO on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on Bush Administration Energy Policy. (Jul 2003)
Voted NO on targeting 100,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010. (Jun 2003)
Voted NO on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill. (Mar 2003)
Voted YES on drilling ANWR on national security grounds. (Apr 2002)
Voted YES on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months. (Mar 2002)
Voted YES on preserving budget for ANWR oil drilling. (Apr 2000)
Voted NO on ending discussion of CAFE fuel efficiency standards. (Sep 1999)
Voted NO on defunding renewable and solar energy. (Jun 1999)
Voted YES on approving a nuclear waste repository. (Apr 1997)

Environment

Voted NO on including oil & gas smokestacks in mercury regulations. (Sep 2005)
Voted YES on confirming Gale Norton as Secretary of Interior. (Jan 2001)
Voted YES on more funding for forest roads and fish habitat. (Sep 1999)
Voted YES on transportation demo projects. (Mar 1998)
Voted NO on reducing funds for road-building in National Forests. (Sep 1997)

Rated 0% by the LCV, indicating anti-environment votes.

Families & Children

Voted YES on killing restrictions on violent videos to minors. (May 1999)

Rated 100% by the Christian Coalition: a pro-family voting record.

Foreign Policy

Voted YES on enlarging NATO to include Eastern Europe. (May 2002)
Voted YES on killing a bill for trade sanctions if China sells weapons. (Sep 2000)
Voted NO on cap foreign aid at only $12.7 billion. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on limiting the President's power to impose economic sanctions. (Jul 1998)
Voted NO on limiting NATO expansion to only Poland, Hungary & Czech. (Apr 1998)
Voted YES on $17.9 billion to IMF. (Mar 1998)
Multi-year commitment to Africa for food & medicine. (Apr 2001)

Trade

Voted YES on free trade agreement with Oman. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade. (Jul 2005)
Voted YES on establishing free trade between US & Singapore. (Jul 2003)
Voted YES on establishing free trade between the US and Chile. (Jul 2003)
Voted YES on extending free trade to Andean nations. (May 2002)
Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam. (Oct 2001)
Voted YES on removing common goods from national security export rules. (Sep 2001)
Voted YES on permanent normal trade relations with China. (Sep 2000)
Voted YES on expanding trade to the third world. (May 2000)
Voted YES on renewing 'fast track' presidential trade authority. (Nov 1997)

Rated 92% by CATO, indicating a pro-free trade voting record.

Government Reform

Voted YES on allowing some lobbyist gifts to Congress. (Mar 2006)
Voted NO on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity. (Mar 2006)
Voted NO on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads. (Mar 2002)
Voted YES on require photo ID (not just signature) for voter registration. (Feb 2002)
Voted NO on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations. (Apr 2001)
Voted NO on funding for National Endowment for the Arts. (Aug 1999)
Voted NO on favoring 1997 McCain-Feingold overhaul of campaign finance. (Oct 1997)

Gun Control

Voted YES on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
Voted NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence. (Mar 2004)
Voted NO on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted YES on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
Voted YES on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)

Rated A by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record.

Health Care

Voted YES on limiting medical liability lawsuits to $250,000. (May 2006)
Voted NO on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D. (Feb 2006)
Voted NO on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics. (Nov 2005)
Voted NO on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Jun 2003)
Voted NO on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada. (Jul 2002)
Voted NO on allowing patients to sue HMOs & collect punitive damages. (Jun 2001)
Voted YES on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Apr 2001)
Voted NO on including prescription drugs under Medicare. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES on limiting self-employment health deduction. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on increasing tobacco restrictions. (Jun 1998)
Voted YES on Medicare means-testing. (Jun 1997)
Invest funds to alleviate the nursing shortage. (Apr 2001)

Rated 12% by APHA, indicating a anti-public health voting record.

Homeland Security

Voted YES on reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act. (Mar 2006)
Voted NO on extending the PATRIOT Act's wiretap provision. (Dec 2005)
Voted NO on restricting business with entities linked to terrorism. (Jul 2005)
Voted NO on restoring $565M for states' and ports' first responders. (Mar 2005)
Voted NO on adopting the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. (Oct 1999)
Voted YES on allowing another round of military base closures. (May 1999)
Voted YES on cutting nuclear weapons below START levels. (May 1999)
Voted YES on deploying National Missile Defense ASAP. (Mar 1999)
Voted YES on military pay raise of 4.8%. (Feb 1999)
Voted NO on prohibiting same-sex basic training. (Jun 1998)
Voted YES on favoring 36 vetoed military projects. (Oct 1997)
Voted YES on banning chemical weapons. (Apr 1997)
Rated 0% by SANE, indicating a pro-military voting record. (Dec 2003)
Hiding sources made post-9-11 analysis impossible. (Jul 2004)
CIA depends too heavily on defectors & not enough on HUMINT. (Jul 2004)
Administration did not pressure CIA on WMD conclusions. (Jul 2004)

Immigration

Voted YES on establishing a Guest Worker program. (May 2006)
Voted YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security. (May 2006)
Voted YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship. (May 2006)
Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998)
Voted YES on limit welfare for immigrants. (Jun 1997)

Jobs

Voted NO on raising the minimum wage to $7.25 rather than $6.25. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on repealing Clinton's ergonomic rules on repetitive stress. (Mar 2001)
Voted YES on killing an increase in the minimum wage. (Nov 1999)
Voted YES on allowing workers to choose between overtime & comp-time. (May 1997)

Rated 8% by the AFL-CIO, indicating an anti-union voting record.

Principles & Values

Voted YES on confirming Samuel Alito as Supreme Court Justice. (Jan 2006)
Voted YES on confirming John Roberts for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. (Sep 2005)
Religious affiliation: Episcopalian. (Nov 2000)

Social Security

Voted YES on Social Security Lockbox & limiting national debt. (Apr 1999)
Voted YES on allowing Roth IRAs for retirees. (May 1998)
Voted YES on allowing personal retirement accounts. (Apr 1998)

Rated 22% by the ARA, indicating an anti-senior voting record.

Tax Reform

Voted YES on permanently repealing the `death tax`. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on $47B for military by repealing capital gains tax cut. (Feb 2006)
Voted YES on extending the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends. (Nov 2005)
Voted YES on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years. (May 2003)
Voted NO on reducing marriage penalty instead of cutting top tax rates. (May 2001)
Voted NO on increasing tax deductions for college tuition. (May 2001)
Voted YES on eliminating the 'marriage penalty'. (Jul 2000)
Voted YES on across-the-board spending cut. (Oct 1999)
Voted YES on requiring super-majority for raising taxes. (Apr 1998)

Rated 78% by NTU, indicating a "Taxpayer's Friend" on tax votes.

Technology

Voted YES on restoring $550M in funding for Amtrak for 2007. (Mar 2006)
Voted NO on disallowing FCC approval of larger media conglomerates. (Sep 2003)
Voted YES on Internet sales tax moratorium. (Oct 1998)

War & Peace

US in "deep trouble" in Iraq. (Sep 2004)
Iraq took our eye off the ball in Afghanistan. (Aug 2004)
Iraq took our eye off the ball in Afghanistan. (Aug 2004)
Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Nov 2005)
Voted YES on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding. (Apr 2005)
Voted YES on $86 billion for military operations in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Oct 2003)
Voted YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq. (Oct 2002)
Voted NO on allowing all necessary force in Kosovo. (May 1999)
Voted YES on authorizing air strikes in Kosovo. (Mar 1999)
CIA mischaracterized Iraq WMD & abused intelligence position. (Jul 2004)
Iraq-al-Qaida contacts, but no complicity or assistance. (Jul 2004)
CIA knew State of the Union Iraq-Niger connection was false. (Jul 2004)
Iraq was not reconstituting its nuclear program. (Jul 2004)
Iraq was not developing its biological weapons program. (Jul 2004)
Iraq was not developing its chemical weapons program. (Jul 2004)
Iraq was developing missiles, but not to reach the US. (Jul 2004)

Welfare & Poverty

Tax credits to promite home ownership in distressed areas. (Apr 2003)

AIS (American Information Services) & ES&S (Election Systems & Software)

While Diebold has received the most attention, it actually isn't the biggest maker of computerized election machines. That honor goes to Omaha-based ES&S, and its Republican roots may be even stronger than Diebold's.

The firm, which is privately held, began as a company called Data Mark, which was founded in the early 1980s by Bob and Todd Urosevich. In 1984, brothers William and Robert Ahmanson bought a 68 percent stake in Data Mark, and changed the company's name to American Information Services (AIS). Then, in 1987, McCarthy & Co, an Omaha investment group, acquired a minority share in AIS.

In 1992, investment banker Chuck Hagel, president of McCarthy & Co, became chairman of AIS. Hagel, who had been touted as a possible Senate candidate in 1993, was again on the list of likely GOP contenders heading into the 1996 contest. In January of 1995, while still chairman of ES&S, Hagel told the Omaha World-Herald that he would likely make a decision by mid-March of 1995. On March 15, according to a letter provided by Hagel's Senate staff, he resigned from the AIS board, noting that he intended to announce his candidacy. A few days later, he did just that.

A little less than eight months after steppind down as director of AIS, Hagel surprised national pundits and defied early polls by defeating Benjamin Nelson, the state's popular former governor. It was Hagel's first try for public office. Nebraska elections officials told The Hill that machines made by AIS probably tallied 85 percent of the votes cast in the 1996 vote, although Nelson never drew attention to the connection. Hagel won again in 2002, by a far healthier margin. That vote is still angrily disputed by Hagel's Democratic opponent, Charlie Matulka, who did try to make Hagel's ties to ES&S an issue in the race and who asked that state elections officials conduct a hand recount of the vote. That request was rebuffed, because Hagel's margin of victory was so large.

As might be expected, Hagel has been generously supported by his investment partners at McCarthy & Co. -- since he first ran, Hagel has received about $15,000 in campaign contributions from McCarthy & Co. executives. And Hagel still owns more than $1 million in stock in McCarthy & Co., which still owns a quarter of ES&S.

http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2004/03/0 ...

Personal Financial Disclosure

Nowhere does it claim that in 1995 prior to running for Nebraska state senator that 'board fees' were paid to Hagel by either AIS or ES&S, merely that Hagel recieved a salary from McCarthy & Co. which owns 25% of ES&S and of which Hagel was board member until early 1995.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/pfd1995/S6NE00087_95.pd ...

Hagel’s ethics filings pose disclosure issue

On May 23, 1997, Victor Baird, who resigned Monday as director of the Senate Ethics Committee, sent a letter to Sen. Charles Hagel requesting “additional, clarifying information” for the personal financial disclosure report that all lawmakers are required to file annually.

Among other matters, Baird asked the Nebraska Republican to identify and estimate the value of the assets of the McCarthy Group Inc., a private merchant banking company based in Omaha, with which Hagel had a special relationship.

Hagel had reported a financial stake worth $1 million to $5 million in the privately held firm. But he did not report the company’s underlying assets, choosing instead to cite his holdings as an “excepted investment fund,” and therefore exempt from detailed disclosure rules.

http://www.hillnews.com/news/012903/hagel.aspx

U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel Now Admits Ownership In Voting Machine Company - Senate Ethics Committee Director Resigns

U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel Now Admits Ownership In Voting Machine Company-- Senate Ethics Committee Director Resigns 1/30/03
On October, 10, 2002 Bev Harris, author of the upcoming "Black Box Voting: Ballot-Tampering" in the 21st Century, revealed that Republican Senator Chuck Hagel has ties to the largest voting machine company, Election Systems & Software (ES&S). She reported that he was an owner, Chairman and CEO of Election Systems & Software (called American Information Systems until name change filed in 1997). ES&S was the ONLY company whose machines counted Hagel's votes when he ran for election in 1996 and 2002. The Hill, a Washington D.C. newspaper that covers the U.S. national political scene, confirmed her findings today and uncovered more details. (more...)

http://www.whoseflorida.com/voting_machines.htm#U.S.%20 ...

[Warren DeMontague]

140. Check. Roe v. Wade is non-negotiable. No anti-choicers on the ticket.

Period. End of story.

It's an idiotic idea.

[AlCzervik]

141. Thank you!

[mod mom]

143. ES & S. enough said.

[The Magistrate]

146. Absolutely Not, Ma'am

[AlCzervik]

147. Thank you.

[TwilightGardener]

148. If Obama selected him (HIGHLY unlikely), that would signal to me that

Obama put a lot of thought into the decision, and decided that Hagel was still for whatever reason the best choice, despite the obvious differences they have. Obama wouldn't make such a radical decision just to pull in more Indies/Repubs, or whites, or whatever--he would do it for personal or philosophical reasons (trust, work ethic, talent, etc.), and therefore I'd have no problem with it. Whomever Obama picks (as long as it's truly his decision, and not some forced crap like Hillary's terrorist campaign to get on the ticket), I will trust that person. I do think Hagel will end up with a cabinet position, since Obama has already mentioned him as a potential pick--and it will be an important one.

[AlCzervik]

151. well i hope not, plenty of great democrats already, no need to go outside.

we've already found a nice little job for Hegel and he can still come to a wh dinner.

[Adelante]

161. Oh, no, no, no

I have some measure of respect for Hagel on the war, but no way on the Democratic ticket.

[AlCzervik]

163. Hi Wes.

Thank you.

[Adelante]

167. Hi, Chimps

[Lisa0825]

169. NO REPUBLICANS!!!

I am voting to put a DEMOCRAT in the White House! I will trust his judegement completely as far as his chosen Democrat, even Hillary who I despise, but no way in HELL should a Democrat pick a Republican as a running mate. A particular cabinet position, sure, why not? But NOT a heartbeat away from the presidency!

[kerry-is-my-prez]

172. nope - don't want him. Wesley Clark is the one....

n/t

[OzarkDem]

173. Any Dem choosing an R should be immediately disqualified

Its a Democratic Party ticket, nothing else.

[cornermouse]

174. Why would anyone even think about putting a republican into

the vp spot? Why?

[AlCzervik]

175. you have to take that up with the people that like the idea.

i still don't understand it myself.

[polichick]

176. We need a Democratic veep in case Obama can't serve out his term...

Hagel could serve in another capacity.

[rosesaylavee]

177. God no. n/t

[Fox Mulder]

178. Agreed.

[Ganja Ninja]

179. No damn Republicans in any office.

None! Nada! Zip!

[progressoid]

182. I can't believe that anyone even considers it.

[FatDave]

188. Not as VP.

I want him nowhere near domestic policy. Secretary of Defense, that I might consider, though I'd hate to pass up Clark or Webb for it.

[AlCzervik]

189. FatDave, we found a job for him already.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

I think it's a fair compromise.

[bullwinkle428]

194. It's funny that those who seem so okay with accepting Hagel as VP

are the same ones screaming for the last how many months things like, "ZOMG...HILLARY IS TEH BIGGER REPUBLICAN THAN MCCAIN!!! HOW COULD EVER CONSIDER HER FOR THE TICKET???"

[mzmolly]

197. Checkin' in!

[frogmarch]

198. Hagel as vp? This Nebraskan says

OH NOES!

Anyone who thinks that just because Hagel is against the war that he's a good guy is mistaken. Check his voting record....rethug to the core!

[bullwinkle428]

199. Those going only by the "anti-war" standard might as well go with Ron Paul...

seriously.

[LiberalAndProud]

201. Another Nebraskan checking in.

NO!