Hagel: US may need new political party

[flashl]

Source: Yahoo

OMAHA, Neb. - U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel writes in a new book that the United States needs independent leadership and possibly another political party, while suggesting the Iraq war might be remembered as one of the five biggest blunders in history.

"In the current impasse, an independent candidate for the presidency, or a bipartisan unity ticket ... could be appealing to Americans," Hagel writes in "America: Our Next Chapter," due in stores Tuesday. The Associated Press obtained an advance copy.

...

Hagel said that despite holding one of the Senate's strongest records of support for President Bush, his standing as a Republican has been called into question because of his opposition to what he deems "a reckless foreign policy ... that is divorced from a strategic context."

Hagel, who's been a harsh critic of the war since 2003, writes that the invasion of Iraq was "the triumph of the so-called neoconservative ideology, as well as Bush administration arrogance and incompetence."

Yahoo

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080320/ap_on_re_us/hagel_book;_ylt=AlmayHLG1JSNlbLZsgoK1ZSs0NUE

[elleng]

1. If Democrats don't put aside their differences well before November,

the situation will DEMAND something like Senator Hagel suggests, IMO.

[JoDog]

2. A-freaking-men

For a long time I have not felt totally at home in either political party. As it has become clearer that they are both beholden to the same special interests and shill for businesses over people, it has become clearer that a new party may be needed. If for no other reason than to try and keep the 2 main ones on their toes.

[tyne]

3. I agree.

[Dhalgren]

6. Well, any party with Hagel in it will most definitely be a corporate

party. I am not sure what you mean by "special interests", but if you mean the corporations, then Hagel is not your man. I agree that we need a new party, but not one that is somewhere between the two we have now; rather, we need a People's Party, of some sort, that actually represents the people as citizens and not any other groups or associations - just citizens.

[fascisthunter]

9. this is true

I don't trust Hagel, although a multi-party system is well needed.

[Alcibiades]

7. As soon as that party is formed

They will need support from the same interests in order to get into office. Without that support, it would wither away into insignificance, just as all other third parties have done. With that support it might supplant the Republican Party.

If we are to actually have a multiparty democracy, we must first change the electoral rules. Without some form of proportional representation, third parties have no hope in playing any rle in government.

[Dhalgren]

10. You're right.

[klyon]

12. you are correct

We need to get the money out of our political system. Our elected officals are being systematically bribbed to favor business and corporations over the wishes and needs of the American people. Public finance and the elmination of all gifts and favors to officals is a must.

[cascadiance]

13. We need instant runoff voting... If Nader were to JUST negotiate Dems supporting that...

... in their platform and subsequently pulled out, then I think his independent run will have accomplished something this time around and build him more support for future political efforts rather than derail progress towards better representation and keep him at odds with many progressives.

Another thing is if there is another party, it needs to have a clear set of objectives and platform, and not just be a party of "personality", like Perot's attempt at one was. We had a mish mash of different pols try to use it to gain power, and in the end had someone like Patrick Buchanan in effect put it to bed when he was allowed to usurp control over it.

I think like other posters here say, that a clear objective is to regulate out coporate and other linked special interest control over our political system, and to put in place more regulated capitalism in every sector of government, not a "free trade" government that is letting things get out of control like we have in place now.

[Ganja Ninja]

4. We probably need 4 or 5 more political parties

A conservative party.
A liberal/progressive party.
An evangelical party.
A religious unity party unifying christian and non-christian sects.
A labor party.
An environmental party.

[mmonk]

5. Many states have barriers too high to cross

for third parties. Remember, the party apparatus's control the system now.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

8. Corporate America controls the entire process including M$M, ask John Edwards.

[snot]

11. I predicted this might happen--if they decide they've trashed the brand

beyond retrieval, they'll just move on to a new one, with pretty much the same players. They do the same thing with corporations.

[katty]

14. awww, YA THINK?! polarization is a lose-lose, no options