The Real McCoy

I love and admire Sam Waterston, whom I have met and talked with personally, and I was a stong supporter of Chuck Hagel, who is talked about as a Unity 08 candidate. But now I read this article about all the old pros gathering to engineer the Unity ticket, and I wonder if this veneer of being a grassroots movement isn't really a sham. Read here my comments:

The nascent Bloomberg campaign has brought out some heavy hitters:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22445078/page/2/

However, most of these are men with a reputation of being Democrat hawks and Republican moral issue liberals - precisely the opposite of Chuck Hagel, or at least the Chuck Hagel we were induced to support for President. In fact, I don't see what Bloomberg would plan to do differently from Hilary Clinton, as most of these men had no trouble working with Bill. And if Giuliani or Romney were Republcan nominee, looking at their records rather than their rhetoric, Bloomberg would offer no alternative to either of the major party nominees in expectation of social policies. Perhaps, like Ross Perot, he would speak forcefully about Social Security and Medicare reform, but the problem there has never been in the White House, Democrat or Republican, but in Congress. How would an independent President wield any more clout over them?
The clear need on a third party line in 2008, something neither major party is likely to offer, is someone who stands with the Christian Right on moral issues and against them on war and foreign policy. As far as I can tell that candidate is Ron Paul, who is unlikely to get the Republican nomination, but it could also be
Chuck Hagel. But that candidate is not, unless he says something surprising, Michael Bloomberg. So why do they think they can enlist the kind of grass roots volunteers that Ron Paul has garnered to run a man who DOESN'T offer any discernable alternative. And why would Chuck Hagel want to join such a campaign?

Alexis de Tocqueville was a 19th century author, not 18th century. Do your homework.