Cross posted at The Huffington Post

After a big build-up of expectation that Senator Chuck Hagel would announce something about his intentions for 2008 today – presidential campaign, senatorial campaign, or retirement – Hagel punted his decision until later this year. As someone who does not understand why Hagel would run for president, I see this as a sensible play. Hagel’s false image as a moderate and maverick block acceptance with much of the Republican base, despite the fact that Hagel voted with President Bush more than any other senator. Hagel’s media persona severs natural support that he would have for his positions on abortion, civil rights, and environmental protections within GOP primary voters.

With Chuck Hagel, what you see in his Iraq war opposition is not what you get with on every other issue. He is not a Republican Democrats can love and he makes no efforts to hide the direction he wants to take the Republican Party and America in.

Chuck Hagel would have a tremendously difficult time overcoming perceptions of centrism to win the Republican nomination. With every other Republican candidate, excepting Sam Brownback, holding strong pro-war positions, it’s unlikely that Hagel would be seen as a suitable balance as a vice presidential candidate.

My guess is that Hagel is waiting to see how well the Rudy McRomney troika succeeds at talking to conservative voters. If the base rejects them, Hagel might be under the illusion that he will be able to swoop in and win voters over with his hardline conservative voting record. Likewise if there are major scandals that pull one or more of the frontrunners down, Hagel may try to enter the race as a saving option. The only problem with this is that it’s the strategy that Newt Gingrich is deploying: wait until September 30th, 2007 to consider entering the race.

The only other logical explanation for Hagel’s continued flirtation with a presidential run is that he thinks he can generate enough grassroots support to become an attractive third-party candidate. With the Unity 08 “movement” gaining visibility and talk of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg exploring an independent presidential run, it’s possible that Hagel thinks a home will open up for him on a ticket outside of the Republican Party. This is running a bit far afield into fantasy scenario land, though, and I hope that Hagel’s ego isn’t stretching itself out this far.

If Hagel wants to end the war, he can best do this by remaining in the Senate. If Hagel wants to restore the Republican Party to a position of sobriety and real conservatism, he will achieve the most by trying to lead his party from the Senate. If Hagel wants to lower his handicap, he should retire from politics and play more golf. He’s not winning a presidential nomination and it’s foolish for him to continue to entertain such thoughts.

Technorati Tags: Chuck Hagel

Other Candidates | No Comments »

New York Times blog, The Caucus, reports:

Other Candidates | 10 Comments »

Chuck Hagel is considering a Unity Aught Eight run.

He said that if he ran he would seek the Republican nomination. Yet he’s also talking up Unity08. That’s a plan by a bipartisan group of political operatives to draft a bipartisan presidential ticket on the Internet and offer voters an alternative to the Democratic and Republican candidates next year.

“I think it’s a very intriguing enterprise,” Hagel said. He said most Americans are disenchanted with the major political parties.

Maybe Republicans aren’t crazy about Chuck Hagel and don’t want to vote for him, but I have a tremendously hard time believing that any significant group of Americans will vote for a presidential ticket because they are civil and not because of any ideological reasoning. Civility is a red-herring. A political party devoid of any political ideology is the last thing America needs when you look at the problems that will be facing this country after Bush’s term expires.

I really hope that Hagel either jumps into the Republican field or announces that he will not be running for president. Unity Aught Eight is about the vanity of the candidates who would consider themselves as the personal savior of American politics.

Technorati Tags: 2008 Presidential election, Chuck Hagel, Unity Aught Eight, Unity08

Other Candidates | 2 Comments »

The campaign for John Cox, the Illinois Republican, sent out a plea to supporters in the latest e-newsletter assailing the media as “liberal” in a less than subtle way.

The media is very excited about pushing the candidacy of Barack Obama because he is clearly “one of them” i.e. a liberal. This should come as no surprise to anyone, but it does underline one of the fundamental problems with the media in this country.

“National Communications Director” Stephen Abbott argues that Senator Barack Obama (D-Illinois) is the media darling because the they are in cahoots! Nevermind the fact that cable news outlets constantly run smear jobs on him.

CNN, allegedly the “most liberal” of the cable news stations according to conservatives, is the most frequent offender. After conservative operatives began highlighting Senator Obama’s middle name, CNN’s Jeanne Moos filed a story, “What’s In a Name?” comparing the junior senator’s middle name with former Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein, and his last name with al-Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden.

Jeff Greenfield, CNN senior political analyst, found it hilarious to run a three-minute story on Obama’s open-collared wardrobe and claim it will invoke images of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with voters.

CNN employs Glenn Beck, who on his nationally syndicated radio show (unaffiliated with CNN) questioned Obama’s race by arguing that he is “colorless” and “might as well be white.” He added, “You don’t notice he’s black.” (As if your race is like a zit that you try to hide.) Top conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh reiterated this bogus, racist line recently as well, and used the racial slur “Halfrican-American” because Obama is biracial.

CNN did, however, debunk a right-wing hit job on Obama when FOX News picked up a story from Washington Times-owned website, Insight. The story claimed Senator Obama attended a madrassa, a terrorist training camp, as a child in Indonesia. (FOX News commentator and radio host, John Gibson, refused to believe the story was not true and made wild claims about the CNN reporter that debunked the claim.)

Despite all that, Cox “national communications director” Stephen Abbott would have you believe that the media is conspiring to elect Barack Obama.

The Cox camp also allege a concerted effort by the media to exclude Cox from the discussion. Now, this is a judgment call on the part of the press but it is hard to say they got it wrong on this one. Our resident “proud leader of the Cox posse” here at The Right’s Field, Colton Henson, feverishly gives us updates in the comments, noting supporters in over two dozen states. There may be a story in how Cox has built his ‘national’ support structure without major donors. (Self-financed?) But to suggest that Cox’s candidacy would be a serious threat even if he did have relatively equal press to second- or third-tier candidates is just foolish.

Read the full e-newsletter below:

(more…)

Other Candidates | 10 Comments »

RedState diarist AcademicElephant has a recommended diary up laying out the full details for why a Donald Rumsfeld-John Bolton 2008 presidential ticket is the tonic that will cure all of the GOP’s ills. An elixir sent forth from the bowels of the earth, this pair of rejected Bush officials will be a shining point of light for the Republican base amidst a field that, in the words of Erick Erickson, sucks. AcademicElephant writes, “Let’s dare to dream for a moment, shall we?” and dream he does!

We need a president and a vice president who are cool under fire. Who function in the real world but who are not strangers to idealism. Who have a clear vision of where this country needs to be 10, 20, even 50 years out and form their policy accordingly—not with an eye to the next election cycle. Who think like CEOs but understand that they are the servants, not the corporate head honchos, of the American taxpayer. Who are singularly unimpressed by the pretensions of our enemies—and many of our so-called allies—but who are profoundly humble before the greatness of our nation. Who see our country as larger than themselves.

And who are Republicans so dyed in the wool that the Democrats respond with appalled horror at the very mention of their names.

Well, he’s right on that last part. I am appalled that any sober political commentator would look to the two most reviled Bush administration officials (no longer in office) and see dreams of hope and glory.

Leaving aside all potential avenues for humor that this proposed ticket affords us, what is telling about AcademicElephant’s very serious and thoughtful (even if unrealistic) post is the way in which the Republican field completely lacks candidates who will provide what dyed-in-the-wool activists are looking for. McCain, Romney, and Giuliani just won’t cut it, which leaves both an opening for whoever is behind Door #4 and begs the question, “well who is behind Door #4?”

This question becomes one about the health of the Republican, conservative movement. This is a movement that has effectively dominated presidential politics since the election of Richard Nixon. Yet they are poised to enter an election cycle without a candidate with solid movement credentials. Yes, Brownback, Huckabee, Tancredo, and Hunter might fit closer to the Right’s ideal than the current front runners, but for those men to become viable they must generate a movement behind them. If the conservative movement can’t do better than social moderates like Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney (well, depending on the day of the week), let alone a pariah like John McCain, then it will be clear that the American Right no longer has real control over the interests of the Republican Party.

Technorati Tags: 2008 Presidential election, Donald Rumsfeld, John Bolton

Other Candidates | No Comments »

Right-wing radio host Michael Savage (real surname: Weiner) says he may leave his show to run for the Republican nomination for president in 2008. (That was so last week and Al Franken-y.)

Michael Savage, the nation’s third-most listened to radio talk-show host, says he may leave his top rated show to make a bid for the GOP nomination for president.

“I know it sounds bizarre but when you consider the people running for the presidency, none . . . seems to be qualified,” Savage told NewsMax in an exclusive interview. [emphasis added]

That is about the most ridiculous reasoning for a political neophyte to run on: “They’re all unqualified, so vote for me, who is even less qualified!”

Crackpot Conservatism for America

“[The U.S.] is being taken over by the freaks, the cripples, the perverts and the mental defectives.”

-San Francisco Bay Guardian, September 20, 2000

“Oh, you’re one of the sodomites! You should only get AIDS and die, you pig! How’s that? Why don’t you see if you can sue me, you pig? You got nothing better than to put me down, you piece of garbage? You got nothing to do today? Go eat a sausage and choke on it. Get trichinosis. Okay, got another nice caller here who’s busy because he didn’t have a nice night in the bath house and is angry at me today?”

-Bauder, David. “MSNBC fires Savage on anti-gay remarks.” Associated Press: July 7, 2003

“To fight only the al-Qaida scum is to miss the terrorist network operating within our own borders… Who are these traitors? Every rotten radical left-winger in this country, that’s who.

-From his book, Savage Nation, January, 2003

“I’m beginning to think that women should be denied the vote. Their hormones rage; they are too emotional.”

-San Jose Mercury News, November 6, 1998

Funny party ticket alert: Brownback-Weiner ‘08!

Other Candidates | 4 Comments »

Enough. Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel is not a maverick. He is not a rebel. He is not a moderate. He is not John McCain circa 2000. He does not benefit from a strong “Draft Hagel” movement. He is not a Republican Democrats can like. To borrow the words of Republican presidential candidate Sam Brownback, we need to take the “Chuck Hagel is a maverick” meme behind a barn and kill it with a dull axe

Chuck Hagel’s voting record is clear. He votes with Bush and he votes the way conservatives want him to vote. Hagel votes against abortion rights, against civil rights, and against environmental protections. Hagel’s beliefs are squarely in line with the Republican Party platform. Period.

Hagel is certainly occupying an important political space by opposing the Bush/McCain plan to escalate the war in Iraq. He is vocally and visibly against sending tens of thousands of more American troops into the meat grinder of Iraq. Doing so gives other Republicans cover to take similar positions. Hagel is embracing a correct position on Iraq, but it is not based on his ideology and it tells us nothing about what Chuck Hagel believes about how government should work and what policies we should be deploying to make our country a better place. Opposing the president as a member of the Republican Party is a rarity today and I can appreciate the pleasure Democrats feel when Bush is getting whipped by a Republican. Let’s be clear: Iraq is one issue and Chuck Hagel is a lock-step conservative on every other issue Republicans care about.

Hagel’s opposition to Iraq is not centrism, it’s the minimum threshold for being a human being with power to influence the course of events in a war. In this context, Hagel is only a maverick to the extent that the party with which he shares his deepest seated beliefs on the economy, taxation, and the role of the federal government is filled with people who have spent the last five years prioritizing the powers of the presidency over their own, while seeking the approbation of the man who continually benefits from their negligence as legislators. That, then, is a statement about the Republican Party and not Chuck Hagel.

It is important that we ask who Chuck Hagel is because praise of a Republican presidential candidate does not do our movement any good. Praising Hagel on Iraq gives him cover to be a right-wing ideologue on all other issues. The last thing that America needs is another Republican masquerading as a moderate while holding the line at the policy bastions of the conservative movement.

Please, the next time you hear Chris Matthews, Tim Russert, or even a Republican blogger claim that Hagel is a moderate, a maverick, or any other adjective that paints him as an anti-Republican figure, remember that it simply is not true. He remains a purebred Republican despite his correct positioning on Iraq. As edifying as it is to watch Hagel denounce Bush’s Iraq plan, our satisfaction must be short lived and it must not guide us towards falsely deifying this doctrinaire Republican.

Cross posted at The Huffington Post.

Other Candidates | 5 Comments »

I think I need to declare a fatwah on the “Hagel is a maverick” meme.

Speaking of silly coverage of Chuck Hagel, Chris Cillizza follows up his argument for Chuck Hagel with an argument against Chuck Hagel. Cillizza writes:

Primaries — especially presidential primaries — are about appealing to base voters. For Republicans, that means emphasizing a strong national defense, cutting taxes and saying all the right things about hot-button social issues like abortion and gay marriage. Hagel is far from the perfect fit for this sort of voter.

On the war in Iraq, he has been highly critical of President Bush — more often finding agreement with the Democrats on the issue than with his own party. Regardless of where the nation as a whole is in regards to the war, the base of the Republican Party remains largely supportive of Bush’s effort and views any call for a withdrawal as a recipe for a loss.

Cillizza offers plenty of support to the notion that Hagel is out of touch with the Republican base on Iraq, but, like Lorie Boyd, says nothing – nothing – about how Hagel’s ideology aligns with the Republican base on issues other than Iraq. He says nothing of how he thinks Hagel is out of step with Republican voters on taxes, social issues, and defense issues. He votes the right way for Republicans, so I’d really have liked to hear where Cillizza is basing this conclusion. We are asked to simply trust that because Hagel differs with Bush on Iraq he is wholly cut from the cloth of a maverick.

Cillizza’s larger concern is that Republicans just don’t like mavericks, because they didn’t nominate John McCain in 2000. Hagel’s (still unexplained) issue positioning makes him a rebel within the Republican Party. Mavericks can’t win, so Hagel is at a nearly insurmountable disadvantage.

Moreover, because Hagel is not currently an official candidate and is not fundraising and does not have staff in early primary states now, Cillizza thinks he cannot be viable. I’m not someone who gets to set Beltway Insider Conventional Wisdom, but it seems to me that Cillizza is set on making sure that the $100 million or bust viability meme is brought fully to bear on second and third tier candidates.

Hagel is a sitting senator. Even if he’s from Nebraska, a minus for Cillizza from a fundraising standpoint, Hagel should be able to find people to work for him and support his presidential race. Recognizing that Cillizza is playing devil’s advocate with himself, his analysis is silly, furthering the simplistic and as of yet unjustified narrative of Chuck Hagel as the new moderate rebel of the Republican Party.

Technorati Tags: Chris Cillizza, Chuck Hagel

Other Candidates | 1 Comment »

Lorie Boyd of Wizbang has apparently never read the American Conservative Union scorecard for the senate nor looked at a senate voting record.

War protester and Today show host Meredith Vieira referred to Chuck Hagel in an interview with Laura Bush today as a “conservative” Senator who had been a longtime supporter of her husband. She then asked if the President felt betrayed by Hagel’s opposition to the surge. I know Vieira is hopelessly biased by her personal views, but is she really that ignorant of Chuck Hagel’s history? Chuck Hagel was calling Iraq Vietnam back in the days when many Democrats were still in support of the mission there. [emphasis added]

One is conservative based on ideology, not fealty to the president. Even question Hagel’s Republican hacks — something that I could see coming based on Hagel’s statements against escalating the Iraq war –would be silly when put in the context of his voting record. But Boyd didn’t do that – she focused on even calling Hagel a conservative.

It must be pretty embarrassing for Boyd to launch a critique on a media personality based on ignorance of “Chuck Hagel’s history,” but fail to demonstrate any vision for his history beyond his positioning on the Iraq war, let alone source any of the critique on Hagel’s voting history in the Senate.

Given that Hagel is a conservative Republican who voted in support of the Bush agenda more than any other senator last year, I think calling Hagel a conservative Bush supporter makes perfect sense, excepting his Iraq positioning. Adding the words “on Iraq” would make the statement wrong (Boyd doesn’t link to the Vieira transcript), but short of that why would you disavow one of the most conservative senators from that moniker because of his position on one issue? It’s just dumb.

Technorati Tags: Chuck Hagel, Lorie Boyd

Other Candidates | 7 Comments »

The first northeastern socially moderate candidate bites the dust. Manchester Union-Leader:

He didn’t directly take himself out of presidential contention, but former New York Gov. George Pataki told key Granite State Republicans last night he won’t object if they want to closely examine and endorse other candidates.

At a private dinner in a secluded alcove at Fratello’s Italian Ristorante in Manchester on Tuesday night, Pataki told about a dozen activists and uncommited GOP leaders that “he’s going to let the dust settle and see where we are in a few months,” House Republican Leader Michael Whalley told UnionLeader.com today.

Pataki said that “he’s not going to actively campaign for President, indefinitely,” said a person at the dinner who asked not to be named. “He never came out and said, ‘I’m not running for President,’ but everybody basically saw the handwriting on the wall, which is he’s out. When you tell your activists it’s OK to go support other candidates, the handwriting is on the wall.”

Hat tip to Elana Levin.

Other Candidates | 3 Comments »