Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Chuck Hagel for President! (Well known communist writer endorses Hagel)
Columbia (MO) Daily Tribune ^ | 1/21/07 | Robert Scheer

Posted on 01/21/2007 8:13:15 AM PST by Timmy

Chuck Hagel for president

By ROBERT SCHEER
Published Sunday, January 21, 2007

Chuck Hagel for president!

If it ever narrows down to a choice between him and some Democratic hack who hasn’t the guts to fundamentally challenge the president on Iraq, then the conservative Republican from Nebraska will have my vote. Yes, the war is that important, and the fact that Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York, the leading Democratic candidate, still can’t or won’t take a clear stand on the occupation is insulting to the vast majority of voters who have.

Hagel is a decorated Vietnam War vet who learned the crucial lessons of that Democrat-launched debacle of post-colonial imperialism.

Even more important, he has the courage to challenge a president from his own party who so clearly didn’t.

"The speech given" Jan. 10 "by this president represents the most dangerous foreign-policy blunder in this country since Vietnam," Hagel said. "We are projecting ourselves further and deeper into a situation that we cannot win militarily.

"To ask our young men and women to sacrifice their lives to be put in the middle of a civil war is wrong. It’s, first of all, in my opinion, morally wrong. It’s tactically, strategically, militarily wrong," he added.

If Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, another Democratic darling, has uttered words of such clarifying dissent on the president’s disastrous course, then I haven’t heard them.

Instead, too many leading Democratic politicians continue to act as if they fear that if they are forthright in opposing the war, they will appear weak, whether on national security or the protection of Israel, and so ignore the clear, strong voice of the American people that just revived their party’s fortunes.

Ever since President Ronald Reagan painted foreign policy as a simplistic war of good versus evil, the Republican Party has been in the thrall of neocon adventurers.

Yet, the national emergence of Hagel reminds us that, two decades earlier, it was Dwight D. Eisenhower, a war hero and a Republican, who was the only president to clearly challenge the simplistic and jingoistic militarism that most Democrats embraced during the Cold War.

It was President Eisenhower, in fact, who refused to send troops to Vietnam and his Democratic successors who opened the gates of war.

True conservatives, going back to George Washington, have always been wary of the "foreign entanglements" that our first general and president warned against in his farewell address. And it is in that spirit, recognizing the limits to U.S. military power, that Hagel spoke on NBC’s "Meet the Press."

Independent Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, late of an oft-opportunistic Democratic Party that saw fit to nominate him as recently as 2000 for the vice presidency, had just finished accusing those who don’t support Bush’s escalation of the war of being "all about failing." In his defense of the indefensible, Lieberman baldly repeated many of Bush’s lies that launched this war four years ago.

"The American people ... have been attacked on 9/11 by the same enemy that we’re fighting in Iraq today, supported by a rising Islamist radical superpowered government in Iran," the fear-monger said. "Allowing Iraq to collapse would be a disaster for the Iraqis, for the Middle East, for us, that would embolden the Iranians and al-Qaida, who are our enemies. And they would follow us back here."

Never mind the ridiculous image of "superpowered" Iran invading the United States or the fact that foreign jihadists - arriving after the overthrow of anti-fundamentalist strongman Saddam Hussein - make up only a tiny fraction of the combatants in Iraq. The question is how the apparently intelligent Lieberman doesn’t understand that the main task of our troops for most of their stay in Iraq has been, de facto, to expand the power of Shiite theocrats trained for decades in Iran. Tehran couldn’t have baited a better trap.

In any case, Hagel refused to bite on Lieberman’s apocalyptic vision, which somehow manages to skip the hard truth that Iraq has collapsed because of our involvement, not despite it.

"The fact is the Iraqi people will determine the fate of Iraq," Hagel responded, in what amounts to a radical opinion in paternalistic, arrogant Washington.

"The people of the Middle East will determine their fate," he said. "We continue to interject ourselves in a situation that we never have understood, we’ve never comprehended," and "we now have to devise a way to find some political consensus with our allies" and "the regional powers, including Iran and Syria.

"To say that we are going to feed more young men and women into that grinder, put them in the middle of a tribal, sectarian civil war, is not going to fix the problem," he added.

Words of wisdom that set the standard for anyone running for president.


TOPICS: Editorial; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: endorsement; hagel; leftistspew; president; rino; robertscheer; scheer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last
I guess if he can't get Fidel (his hero, no kidding), he will take Hagel.
1 posted on 01/21/2007 8:13:17 AM PST by Timmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Timmy

I doubt there is one poster on FR who would support Hagel.


2 posted on 01/21/2007 8:14:04 AM PST by dirtboy (Duncan Hunter - I still like ya, but please read the 10th and get back to me regarding Congr pardons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
I'm sure Up-Chuck is lapping up this praise. It's what he's been angling for for the last six years.

Chuck Hagel would make a worse president than Hillary Clinton.

3 posted on 01/21/2007 8:15:15 AM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
Chuck Hagel is NOT a conservative Republican ...
4 posted on 01/21/2007 8:18:21 AM PST by Ken522
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
"the conservative Republican from Nebraska will have my vote"

Which Republican is THAT?

It sure as hell ain't Hagel!

5 posted on 01/21/2007 8:19:08 AM PST by traditional1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traditional1

For which party will Hagel run??


6 posted on 01/21/2007 8:20:55 AM PST by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Timmy

Ben Nelson is probably more to the right than Hagel.


7 posted on 01/21/2007 8:21:44 AM PST by NapkinUser (http://www.teamtancredo.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy

Always remember that columnist Scheer enjoys the distinction of being SO far left that EVEN THE LA TIMES fired him.


8 posted on 01/21/2007 8:28:04 AM PST by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: corkoman
"For which party will Hagel run??"Yeah, or FROM which party will Hagel run!

LOL

9 posted on 01/21/2007 8:29:13 AM PST by traditional1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
I just love it when left wing loonies endorse Republicans.

This right wing wacko endorses Bob Casey for the Democratic nomination, because I think he's the best Dem we can hope for.
10 posted on 01/21/2007 8:37:52 AM PST by BW2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy

I don't recall Hagel speaking out when Clinton sent troops to Bosnia or Haiti.


11 posted on 01/21/2007 8:40:04 AM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Forgot your tagline? Click here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
I would not support Hagle - I would vote against him just as I will vote against Hillary. However, I will consider a vote for Joe Lieberman, Gingrich, Romney, Giuliani, or any qualified person not owned by the MSM. The 2008 fight is between the American people and the media. Hillary Clinton is not qualified to lead the country.

Being qualified means a person must have character, integrity, be pro-American, stead fast principals and values, a through understanding of and led by the United States Constitution in war and in peace.

There is no doubt that a person of the Clinton persuasion would have been burned at the stake and in later years been tried for treason and other crimes. In times of real morality and real values, these two would never have been considered for leadership in any elected position.

12 posted on 01/21/2007 8:40:37 AM PST by yoe (Hell is coming now for sure...................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Timmy

“Look, I’m a long-shot for the Republican nomination,” Hagel admitted. “McCain, Guiliani, and Romney are all lining up as ‘hawks.’ My only chance is if the whole war is a disaster. This resolution is a risk-free way for me to help bring that about. Without a united country behind him, Bush can’t win this. At the same time, I’m on the right side of the polls. I could be seen both as a visionary and a man of the people. It’s my best option if I’m ever going to be president.”

read more...

http://www.azconservative.org/Semmens1.htm


13 posted on 01/21/2007 8:47:11 AM PST by John Semmens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy

LOL... this clown Hagel will get like 3 votes in the primaries if he runs for President.


14 posted on 01/21/2007 8:49:16 AM PST by jveritas (Support The Commander in Chief in Times of War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy

Hagel is on the same level as Jimmy Carter in my book. What a disgrace to the Republican party and our country.


15 posted on 01/21/2007 8:55:28 AM PST by dc-zoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy

I note that you have violated JimRob's rule about changing headlines.


16 posted on 01/21/2007 8:56:18 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy

Is it surprising that a communist would support a candidate named 'Hagel' ( I'm thinking a homonym for Hegel)?


17 posted on 01/21/2007 8:57:28 AM PST by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ken522
Chuck Hagel is NOT a conservative Republican

You must really hate Dubya then. Chuck Hagel is to right of Bush on prescription drugs (voted against Bush's budget busting "reform") and campaign finance reform (he voted against the McCain Bill that bill Bush signed).

18 posted on 01/21/2007 8:59:09 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Timmy

Who would have thought 30 yrs ago we would have Presidential candidates named Hussein or Hagel?

Maybe we can put up a counter ticket of Adolf Mussilini Stalin and a running mate of Ghangis Ho Chi Pot?


19 posted on 01/21/2007 9:00:25 AM PST by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy

I saw this at Huff Post. Scheer lunacy!


20 posted on 01/21/2007 9:00:46 AM PST by veronica (http://images20.fotki.com/v360/photos/1/106521/3848737/gladysPSCP-vi.jpg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson