Barnstorming Obama plans to pick Republicans for cabinet

It's too bad Hagel wasn't a contender for the GOP nomination. I remember Lugar from way back when he was mayor. Good, sane, reasoned and realistic best describe him.

Based on his rhetoric about reaching across the aisle, I always assumed Obama would have a couple of Republicans in his cabinet.

 

It's a good thing and to be expected given his rhetoric, but will he actually listen to them?

 

My favorite part about this:

Senior advisers confirmed that Hagel, a highly decorated Vietnam war veteran and one of McCain’s closest friends in the Senate, was considered an ideal candidate for defence secretary. Some regard the outspoken Republican as a possible vice-presidential nominee although that might be regarded as a “stretch”.

Hagel (along with McCain) is one of my favorite Republicans. If Obama makes him VP, it basically moves the vast majority of the moderates and independents to Obama. I just don't know how the base would feel about it, and I'm not sure Hagel would be willing to run against McCain.

 

Major, you really ought to do your homework on the influence on voters of a VP choice. Really, you should. Or is this RM95 posting? Either way, do your homework.

Once you do your homework, CONTRIBUTE TO THE SITE.

 

I know about the "never say never" motto, but ain't no way Obama chooses a Republican for veep. That kind of talk is over the top dreamy nonsense IMO.

 

I wonder if McCain would have any Republican cabinet members?

 

Nobody remembers it but Bill Clinton had a republican Sec of Defense (Cohen).

 

mark, thank you for highlighting the reality that there are no democrats who could be trusted with national defense issues.

 

How did he say that?




Impeach Bush and Make Him Live with basso.

 

Can you name the last time the VP selection was voluntarily from the other party? Perhaps you should stop pretending you know anything about politics. Your record so far is beyond terrible.

 

Does this mean that, in fact, you're not at all open to Obama as you've previously claimed? By the way, the article suggests no such thing.

 

Fun with rhetoric! Truth: plenty of democrats can handle national defense issues. Have before and will again.

The person matters more than the party. I know that adds some shades of gray (or other non black and white colors) to the spectrum, but we'll just have to plug along.

 

Wesley Clark gets the no vote?

 

the more and more i read these threads over the years. the more i realize how rude some people can be.

 

correct .

[rquoter] In the national security business, the question is, do you have--when you have served in uniform, do you really have the relevant experience for making the decisions at the top that have to be made? Everybody admires John McCain's service as a fighter pilot, his courage as a prisoner of war. There's no issue there. He's a great man and an honorable man. But having served as a fighter pilot--and I know my experience as a company commander in Vietnam--that doesn't prepare you to be commander-in-chief in terms of dealing with the national strategic issues that are involved. It may give you a feeling for what the troops are going through in the process, but it doesn't give you the experience first hand of the national strategic issues.

If you look at what Hillary Clinton has done during her time as the First Lady of the United States, her travel to 80 countries, her representing the U.S. abroad, plus her years in the Senate, I think she's the most experienced and capable person in the race, not only for representing am [sic] abroad, but for dealing with the tough issues of national security.[/rquoter]

 

Except that Wes Clark's career military career didn't end in Vietnam and he is in fact a retired four star General which does give him the experience to be a commander in chief. McCain retired as a Captain. There's no comparison between these two guys on qualifications and experience.

 

so you would agree that only someone who has served in the military is qualified to be commander in chief?

 

No, I would say just having served in the military doesn't qualify you as commander in chief. I'd prefer someone who has a sense of history and strategy over someone who served in a hot war, particularly service on a non-strategic level.

 

I was hoping for Wes Clark as Sec of Def.