Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, February 23, 2013

Chuck Hagel's path to confirmation as President Barack Obama's new secretary of defense became more secure on Thursday when Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) said he would support the nomination. He is at least the third Republican -- along with Mike Johanns and Thad Cochran -- to back Hagel's confirmation.

Advertisement

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

rcade

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you have comments about site moderation, contact the site publisher in email.

That's it?

All the years he served in the senate and that's his thanks?

#1 | Posted by Tor at 2013-02-23 02:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Doesn't it make anyone nervous when Hagel's own party does not feel he is capable for the job? I can understand the republicans trying to block a democrat, but one of their own? Something smells real bad and I think it is Hagel.

#2 | Posted by gtjr at 2013-02-23 04:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

#2 - It doesn't matter what party he belongs to. The Republicans are so single-minded in their opposition to anything Obama proposes that their default position is no. Obama could come out today and propose a 5% across the board income tax cut and an outright ban on abortion and the GOP would immediately threaten a filibuster.

#3 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2013-02-23 04:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

So, there are, then, exactly 3 Republican Senators who are not owned by Israel.

#4 | Posted by tvdog at 2013-02-23 06:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

" It doesn't matter what party he belongs to. The Republicans are so single-minded in their opposition to anything Obama proposes that their default position is no."

Bingo. Hagel is the right guy for the job. It's that simple. Critical of Israel? GOOD. About f'in' time. Why is it that we're supposed to agree with everything Israel does, even when they're engaging in some of the very behaviors to which they were subjected in the lead-up to the Holocaust?

#5 | Posted by pragmatist at 2013-02-23 06:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Doesn't it make anyone nervous when Hagel's own party does not feel he is capable for the job?"

Not a bit considering what their party has become. They are irrational on most issues. Who really cares what they think any more.

#6 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-23 06:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

Pragmatist,

Yeah we should be sucking up to the terrorists. Those Iranians are real allies, just like the Saudi's. You should get your head out of that warm moist place. You left wingers are going to be trying to blame republicans when one of the terrorist nations sets off a nuclear bomb in a populated area that they built during the weakest president since Carter on foreign policy. If you believe the Iranians or North Koreans are developing nuclear capability for peaceful uses you are plain stupid.

Actually the republicans should give Obummer everything he wants so when the country fails he will have no where to hide. He makes Hoover look successful, his policies will take years to reverse and our economy will not recover for a long time. Oh wait, it has been a long time since we have had a good economy, but it will be at least four more years.

#7 | Posted by gtjr at 2013-02-23 10:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Wow, so criticizing someone, or allowing for criticism is the exact same thing as sucking up to that person's enemy. Your logic is astounding.

No, the Iranians and Saudis are not allies. Gee, where were your guys going after the Saudis after the vast majority of the attackers on 9/11 were showed to be Saudi nationals?

And I said NOTHING about nuclear capability for peaceful uses. Why do you have to make stuff up in responding to a comment on an anonymous blog? Makes you feel good about yourself somehow?

#8 | Posted by pragmatist at 2013-02-23 10:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

I forgot I need to take a lot of time telling you what has already been covered. Sen Hagel has been a suck up to terrorist nations, that was brought out at the confirmation hearings, has shunned the Israeli's, as you in your post. The Israeli's at least are our ally in the area. You cannot be so naive as to think the Egyptian's, Saudi's, Kuawati's, Iranian's, Pakistani's, or Syrian's will stand up for us and our human rights beliefs in the middle east? That is why Hagel is not the best person for the job, he will be a disaster just like Obummer's foreign policy in the middle east has been.

In case you have not noticed the North Koreans and Iranians have basically thumbed thier noses at Obummer and his policies and demands. You and your left wing friends will be asking "how this can happen" when a terrorist nation sells a small nuclear weapon to a terrorist organization that is detonated in the free world. I know you do not take this seriously but it is a very serious situation, you just want to boil it down to the republicans don't like Obummer. It is not that they don't like Obummer, they don't like his lame policies.

#9 | Posted by gtjr at 2013-02-23 11:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

You really need to look at my posting history before lumping me in with "your left wing friends." You also need to look at history: WHO has never taken Saudi Arabia to task? Why haven't they? I'm not arguing these points with you at any greater length. It's not worth it. You see sucking up where others see dialogue. And you neatly (for your own arguments) ignore the questions I asked. You also see Obama's foreign policy through your own ideological lens. It seems you want another Bush. Well, you got that in some ways (war, drones) but not in others (rhetoric, negotiation). There are lots of people who believe that Obama's foreign policy is quite good, or at least has good aspects. You deliver as if you and your critics have access to the Truth. But whatever gets you through the night.

I wonder about this: for decades, Hagel has had the respect of most of his party, as an expert in foreign relations. Now he's nominated by a Democrat (oh, no, bipartisanship) as State, and the party generally turns against him? Hm. (Yes, I'm sure he had detractors before now, as every pol does.)

#10 | Posted by pragmatist at 2013-02-24 08:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

Doesn't it make anyone nervous when Hagel's own party does not feel he is capable for the job? I can understand the republicans trying to block a democrat, but one of their own? Something smells real bad and I think it is Hagel.
#2 | Posted by gtjr

Really? You might want to consider another interpretation: the GOPers can't stand one of their own working for Obama - and what they really don't like is Hagel's presence serving as a nasty reminder of the con job they pulled on the American people the last time they were in the WH by launching an unnecessary war in Iraq.

Hagel's mistake - some would view it as such, although I don't - is he dared speak truth to power.

#11 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013-02-24 09:17 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Republican Senator John McCain on Sunday said his former colleague Chuck Hagel was not qualified to be U.S. defense secretary...."
www.reuters.com

My, my, what a difference getting nominated to a cabinet post by a Democratic president makes:

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in particular was a vocal advocate for Hagel's character -- even after his dissent on U.S. foreign policy regarding Iraq and Israel were well-known.

In 2006, while he was preparing to run for president, McCain was asked whether he'd consider Hagel for a cabinet post. "I'd be honored to have Chuck with me in any capacity," he said. "He'd make a great secretary of state."

Two years later, McCain reaffirmed that position after securing the Republican nomination...[saying] Hagel is a "respected leader in America" who "served his country admirably, with honor and distinction."

At a 2007 fundraiser...Mitch McConnell (R-KY) called Hagel "one of the premier foreign policy voices (and) one of the giants in the United States Senate," according to the Nebraska-based Lincoln Journal Star.

The following year, McConnell, bidding farewell to his retiring colleague, praised Hagel as a "great statesm[a]n" and "leading voice in foreign affairs."
. . .
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) bid Hagel farewell by praising Hagel's "independent background" and "sense of independence." Alexander said Hagel -- along with then-Sen. Dick Lugar (R-IN) -- "understands the world better than almost anyone."

The former Nebraska senator received similar parting accolades from Republican Sens. Mike Enzi (R-WY) and Bob Corker (TN), who will vote on his confirmation.

#12 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013-02-24 12:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

#10

Pragmatist

I would never say that George Bush had great foreign policy, but he did have the respect of our allies. This is something Obummer does not have. In fact Germany, France, and a number of other allies just ignore him. Our enemies, that George Bush's foreign policy at least held at bay somewhat, now just thumb their nose at us. I guess it is what you see as the role of the U.S., leader or follower. Even Bill Clinton did a much better job with our allies and enemies. If we are not the leader then who will lead? Some despot in the middle east, China? Who will we be subserviant to as a nation when the credit card is maxed out? There are a number of dictators waiting in the wings for our fall and Obummer is just helping move it along.

Actually if you go back to find who has done such a miserable job with foreign policy it would have to be the Carter administration. It does appear that Jimmy will leave to see Obummer take the "worst presidnet ever" mantle from him. Something I am sure he has prayed for. Which brings me back to Hagel who has a favorable view of the dictatorships in the middle east and disdain for the one democracy, Israel. He is the wrong person to lead the defense department. Sadly there will be a number of senate republicans who will vote for this loser and we will suffer the consequences as a nation.

#13 | Posted by gtjr at 2013-02-24 01:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yeah, that Bush, he really had the concept of alliance down, didn't he?

Read my post #10 again. It's about all I have to say to you, unless you wanna show me that you're open to foreign policy being anything other than bullying. But hey, at least you didn't put words in my mouth this time. I suppose I should be satisfied with that.

Movin' on...

#14 | Posted by pragmatist at 2013-02-24 01:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

I would never say that George Bush had great foreign policy, but he did have the respect of our allies. This is something Obummer does not have. In fact Germany, France, and a number of other allies just ignore him.

France, Germany and even Canada showed Dumya great respect when they told him pound sand when he was assembling his 'coalition of the willing.'

#15 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2013-02-24 06:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

#2
absolutely not, quite the opposite. the GOP is the party of morons.

#16 | Posted by ichiro at 2013-02-24 06:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Doesn't it make anyone nervous when Hagel's own party does not feel he is capable for the job?

Given the list of idiots said Party have tried to get into the WH, and most of those idiots they did manage to get elected, their opposition to Hagel proves what a great and wise choice he is.

Our enemies, that George Bush's foreign policy at least held at bay somewhat, now just thumb their nose at us.

9-11 was a greatjob of holding America's enemies at bay. So was his allowed saudi terrorists to leave afterwards. Iraq and afghanistan kept America's enemies at bay, if you don't count all those who went to afghanistan and Iraq to kill Americans. And then there were all those Embassy bombings. And an anthrax attack. All that for a mere trillion or two added to America's MAOSTERCARD.

As for worst President, name another one, other than Saint george, who lost two "gimme" wars and almost bankrupted America while allowing the worst attack on American soil in history. Geez, even Jeff Davis and Dick Nixon only lost ONE war each, and they were against real enemies, not a few guys in sandals and dresses.

#17 | Posted by northguy3 at 2013-02-24 10:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

France, Germany and even Canada showed Dumya great respect when they told him pound sand when he was assembling his 'coalition of the willing.'

And even his bestest poodle, the UK cut and ran as soon as they figured out Dubya couldn't fight his way out of a wet paper bag with a machete in each hand. Most of the coalition of the willing were the coalition of the willing to take money not to protest.

btw, speaking of the coalition, has that Tongalese war canoe made it to Iraq yet?

#18 | Posted by northguy3 at 2013-02-24 11:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2013 World Readable

 

Advertisement