What do Conservatives think of John McCain? 3

Senator Chuck Hagel was one of the first Republicans to take a hard look at what McCain had done when he picked Palin as his running mate:

In an interview with the Omaha World-Herald, Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel (R) suggested that Palin doesn't have the foreign-policy experience to be president. "'She doesn't have any foreign policy credentials,' Hagel said in an interview. 'You get a passport for the first time in your life last year? I mean, I don't know what you can say. You can't say anything.'"

Check out this other Hagel line: "'I think they ought to be just honest about it and stop the nonsense about, "I look out my window and I see Russia and so therefore I know something about Russia,"' he said. 'That kind of thing is insulting to the American people.'"

Yep... This is a heartbeat away from reality and McCain still thinks this is just fine and dandy. The American public are a little more conscious of the harsh realities of this erratic and impulsive decision by McCain.

Who will Ron Paul support?

That is, if Ron Paul, the closest thing to a real conservative - being a right tilted libertarian - in the GOP, weren't in the running?

Last month, during a Republican debate, Ron Paul was asked whether he promised to support the GOP nominee next year, no matter who emerges from the primary process. “Not right now I don’t,” Paul said, “not unless they’re willing to end the war and bring our troops home.”

Apparently, in the ensuing weeks, “not right now” has become “no.”

Paul called his Republican presidential rivals, including frontrunner Rudy Giuliani, “neo-conservatives” whom he couldn’t support in the general election should his own bid fail.

“They think we’re supposed to spread our goodness through force,” Paul said. For example, none will pledge not to wage war on Iran, he said. “How could I support something like that?”

Apparently, he can’t. But it means that of the top seven candidates in the Republican field, Paul is the only one who isn’t prepared to support the party’s eventual nominee. It’s not the kind of thing that will go over well within the party, but then again, Paul’s interest in the Republican Party appears nominal — it’s a venue for him to advance his ideas and agenda, not necessarily an opportunity for him to lead the party.

We know it isn't any republican candidate that is in the running right now. We can take a guess on whom he would support based on past statements:

The conservative Senator Chuck Hagel would be one choice, if he were running (obviously), and Rep. Dennis Kucinich.

There is a reason that both, Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, enjoy a large base of support from activists on the left and right, and are both derided consistently by the corporate owned media. It is because of their commitments to saying what they stand for and believe, their constant fights against the illegal occupation of Iraq, and actually voting by the standards of their public statements.

But Paul and Kucinich are both labeled wackos and fringe candidates by the media standards.

Go figure?

This kind of populist type backlash from grassroots in the left and right sure as hell isn't because people think that the media darlings and self-fulfilling-prophesied "top tier candidates" are competent, honest, have integrity, or are even relatively sane judging by their patchwork of flip-flops, twisting of truths, and circle-jerk logic demonstrated by their votes and statements and resulting in continued failures for Democracy, and for America.

Not 60... It is a 50 Vote Hurdle for Withdrawal Timetable

BooMan takes a look at a common misperception concerning current legislation on the timetable for withdrawl:

THE DUDE: Yeah, my thinking about the case, man, it had become uptight.

All the time I have been thinking about this supplemental bill for funding the war in Iraq I have been working on the assumption that the Senate would need 60 votes to pass the legislation. I thought, briefly, that Reid could invoke reconcilation because the bill would affect the budget, but that only pertains to regular budget legislation, not supplemental funding. Nonetheless, it looks like I've had my head up my ass.

Proponents of the troop withdrawal deadline face a lower hurdle than in earlier Senate votes. Earlier efforts to win approval for a withdrawal timetable needed 60 votes to overcome a filibuster; this time, opponents will be trying to strip a withdrawal plan that's already in legislation. That means it will require a simple 50-vote majority to keep it in.

So, okay, I'm still learning Senate procedure.

WALTER: Dude, nothing is fucked. Come on. You're being very unDude.

This changes things substantially. There was literally no chance that the House version would pass the Senate if it required 60 votes.

But at 50 votes... The hurdles don't seem quite so insurmountable, eh?

It even renders Joe neocon Lieberman's vote and positions as a moot point. There will be enough moderate Republicans that will, likely, make the 50 vote mark an easy one to surpass in this political climate. Ya gotta love that! heh Poor ol' obsolete Joe...

Kucinich: IMPEACH? Yes or No

Watch it, think about it, and respond to it.





Impeach for Peace wants you to tell him what you think:

Respond to this video question from Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) via comments, e-mails, letters and most importantly a DIY Impeachment petition of memorial.

Call Rep. Dennis Kucinich at 202-225-5871 or E-MAIL REP. KUCINICH.

We report... You decide. No spin on this one.

UPDATE:
Chuck Hagel talks impeachment via Saramerica:

“Any president who says, I don’t care, or I will not respond to what the people of this country are saying about Iraq or anything else, or I don’t care what the Congress does, I am going to proceed — if a president really believes that, then there are — what I was pointing out, there are ways to deal with that,” said Sen Chuck Hagel R - Nebraska.

Oooh! Tell me more Chuckie!! I love it when Senators actually speak as if they have (gasp) balls. Or a scrotum, to use the word a certain subsector of librarians loves to hate.

"He’s not accountable anymore, which isn’t totally true. You can impeach him, and before this is over, you might see calls for his impeachment. I don’t know. It depends on how this goes,” Hagel says in an interview in the April edition of Esquire magazine.

A far-right-wingnut (and make no mistake on this, he is a wingnuton ALMOST every other issue) talking impeachment.

Hagel: Go sell shoes!

Senator Hagel comments on those that get squeamish about how to oppose the failed bush Iraq policies. ctblogger had the YouTube video that I was looking for of Hagel up already:

This morning in his opening statements before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) said:
"This is a very real, responsible addressing of the most divisive issue in this country since Vietnam. Yes, sure, it’s tough. Absolutely. And I think all 100 senators ought to be on the line on this.

What do you believe? What are you willing to support? What do you think? Why were you elected?

If you wanted a safe job, go sell shoes. This is a tough business. But is it any tougher, us having to take a tough vote, express ourselves and have the courage to step up on what we’re asking our young men and women to do?

I don’t think so.

When I hear, on both sides of this argument, impugning motives and patriotism to our country, not only is it offensive and disgusting but it debases the whole system of our country and who we are.

My goodness. Can’t we debate the most critical issue of our time, out front, in front of the American people?

The expect it. Are we so weak, we can’t do that?

I don’t think so. Like always, the American people are far ahead of us sitting here, far ahead of us. Because we’re concerned about politics. We’re concerned about our position. We’re concerned about our next election.

So we tinker. So we figure out wordsmithing. So should we oppose the president or just not support the president?

Different languages: disagree with the president ; that’s not as harsh as oppose the president.

But you know what, the American people have got this sorted out. They always have. They’re not conflicted with the nuances of life. They understand what’s going on. What we are proposing here — and everyone will have an opportunity to voice their opinion, present their amendments, make their case, as they should.

It’s the strength of who we are, the fabric of our society.

But we owe it to those men and women that we continue to send in that grinder."

The Senate needs to get tough with the failed and irresponsible Bush administration. Hagel is breath of fresh air compared to the Republican politics of the past.