HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » President Obama to tap Fo...

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:06 PM

President Obama to tap Former Senator Chuck Hagel (R) for Secretary of Defense.

Source: MSNBC

Just on Hardball.

No link yet.

66 replies, 5993 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 66 replies Author Time Post
Reply President Obama to tap Former Senator Chuck Hagel (R) for Secretary of Defense. (Original post)
onehandle Dec 2012 OP
Drunken Irishman Dec 2012 #1
Coyotl Dec 2012 #66
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #2
question everything Dec 2012 #57
Fearless Dec 2012 #62
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #63
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #65
patricia92243 Dec 2012 #3
SCliberal091294 Dec 2012 #4
iandhr Dec 2012 #6
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #8
blm Dec 2012 #53
cstanleytech Dec 2012 #60
forestpath Dec 2012 #14
babylonsister Dec 2012 #31
dlwickham Dec 2012 #36
babylonsister Dec 2012 #38
forestpath Dec 2012 #41
dlwickham Dec 2012 #42
forestpath Dec 2012 #43
babylonsister Dec 2012 #51
forestpath Dec 2012 #40
iandhr Dec 2012 #5
yourout Dec 2012 #7
hedda_foil Dec 2012 #11
indepat Dec 2012 #25
oberliner Dec 2012 #9
alp227 Dec 2012 #17
oberliner Dec 2012 #18
alp227 Dec 2012 #24
oberliner Dec 2012 #27
alp227 Dec 2012 #50
wisteria Dec 2012 #44
oberliner Dec 2012 #47
Joey Liberal Dec 2012 #10
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #12
forestpath Dec 2012 #13
MrMickeysMom Dec 2012 #15
dlwickham Dec 2012 #37
MrMickeysMom Dec 2012 #55
dlwickham Dec 2012 #56
Faygo Kid Dec 2012 #16
amandabeech Dec 2012 #19
Kelvin Mace Dec 2012 #32
babylonsister Dec 2012 #34
Kelvin Mace Dec 2012 #58
TheProgressive Dec 2012 #20
Lamonte Dec 2012 #21
iandhr Dec 2012 #22
oberliner Dec 2012 #23
iandhr Dec 2012 #35
oberliner Dec 2012 #48
iandhr Dec 2012 #54
Kelvin Mace Dec 2012 #30
wisteria Dec 2012 #45
bvar22 Dec 2012 #26
DonCoquixote Dec 2012 #61
bvar22 Dec 2012 #64
tularetom Dec 2012 #28
Kelvin Mace Dec 2012 #29
babylonsister Dec 2012 #33
MrSlayer Dec 2012 #39
alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #46
doc03 Dec 2012 #49
Douglas Carpenter Dec 2012 #52
Douglas Carpenter Dec 2012 #59

Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:07 PM

1. Good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 02:17 PM

66. Good Gay Basher!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:07 PM

2. Good. The RNC, AIPAC et al can go pound sand. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:53 PM

57. And LGBT right groups?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014343932

As long as you list all the groups opposing him

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to question everything (Reply #57)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 02:29 AM

62. Evidently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to question everything (Reply #57)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:44 AM

63. I predict he'll publicly eat those words and apologize.

1998 was a time when DOMA was a mainstream piece of legislation, even amongst liberal Democrats like Paul Wellstone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:09 PM

3. There was not a Democrat in all the land that could do the job? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patricia92243 (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:12 PM

4. hes actually decent...

He endorsed a democrat for senator who lost in nebraska. he also opposes stupid wars like iraq.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCliberal091294 (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:13 PM

6. Not to mention...

... he accompanied then Senator Obama on the overseas trip to the middle east when he was an candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCliberal091294 (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:24 PM

8. He voted for the Iraq War

But opposed it after we were losing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #8)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:06 PM

53. He opposed it for a number of reasons, and, fortunately, the right reasons....

Hagel actually became very close with Kerry and Biden, especially after they were stranded in Afghanistan after their helicopter went down and the three of them were very close to checking out.

I think Obama has developed a complete trust in those three men, and sees them as a way of transforming the role the US plays in the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:59 AM

60. Alot of people were fooled into voting for that btw and no that is not an endorsment for Hagel

as I frankly dont care if he gets the position one way or the other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SCliberal091294 (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:36 PM

14. Decent? Not with his record.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #14)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:53 PM

31. Hey you...is there ANYTHING you like about Obama? Just wonderin'. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Reply #31)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:03 PM

36. the link is for Hagel not Obama

Hagel is a white former senator from Nebraska

Obama is the current black president from Illinois

hard to confuse the two

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dlwickham (Reply #36)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:08 PM

38. I 'get' that, but every thread

on DU this person responds to is negative where Obama is concerned; Obama would be the one doing the selecting. But thank you for clarification I did not need.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Reply #38)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:22 PM

41. How touching that you care so much about what I post.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Reply #38)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:23 PM

42. looks like you did need it

just thought I'd help you out

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dlwickham (Reply #36)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:23 PM

43. Thanks...apparently this poster is so obsessed with my posts she just snapped.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #43)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:58 PM

51. In your dreams... Ta ta, and I'm sure we'll meet again, or not. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Reply #31)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:21 PM

40. Hey you....is there ANYTHING you don't like about Obama? Just wonderin'.nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patricia92243 (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:13 PM

5. He was an enlisted man in Vietnam...

... so he knows what its like for people on the ground

And he isa Republican who is opposed to starting World War III by bombing Iran.


I think he is a fantastic choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patricia92243 (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:14 PM

7. By today's standards he is a Dem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yourout (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:28 PM

11. Precisely. And that's why he left the Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hedda_foil (Reply #11)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:44 PM

25. He's still a RW hack, as proven by his voting record. Dem presidents must feel is it manly to

appoint an effin' 'puke as Secretary of Defense so 'pukes will not so easily brand him as "soft on national defense." What an effin' crock of excrement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:27 PM

9. Two white males in a week?

A little diversity maybe?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:06 PM

17. Name one non white male then.

Besides Colin Powell, or mr. WMD in Iraq.

And I have to admit your subject line is rather disturbing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:10 PM

18. Susan Rice

“I do think the White House has to be a little bit careful,” said panelist and former DNC Communications Director Karen Finney. “I think naming two white men in the same week when you just saw an African-American woman who was overly qualified get treated the way she did, and in a cabinet that–let’s face it–could probably use some more diversity anyway, probably not a smart strategic decision.”

Alex also lamented the “disgraceful” way in which Republican senators had treated Rice, before she had even been nominated by the president. “This is a woman who took on the Iranians and the North Koreans and somehow we were told she was too tough? The irony is not lost on me there,” she said.

http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/12/18/john-kerry-now-the-republicans-favorite-democrat/

Assuming you meant someone who is neither white nor male as opposed to a male who is non-white.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #18)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:33 PM

24. What military background does Rice have?

Diversity coupled with merit is the right thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #24)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:50 PM

27. Same as William Cohen before he became Secretary of Defense

You don't think she deserves the nomination?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #27)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:56 PM

50. Given how Rice volunteered to withdraw from SOS nomination,

I doubt if it's a good idea for her to be nominated for another cabinet position during this presidency.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #18)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:34 PM

44. Democrats had concerns about her also. And, the other choice was more qualified.

It is wrong just to promote someone because they are a certain sex or color. The most experienced/most qualified person should get the job. Just because Rice was a victim, is a woman and is Black, doesn't mean she should get the job if she isn't the best fit and the most qualified.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wisteria (Reply #44)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:41 PM

47. Every Sec of Defense in history has been a white male

This ought to change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:27 PM

10. I like Hagel, but I don't trust him

He'll turn on Obama if it suits his purposes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:32 PM

12. Good--he's ignoring the smear attempts by the

defense lobbyists and neocons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:34 PM

13. PUKE. Oh well, what's another Republican in Obama's Republican administration.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:38 PM

15. Oh, no... not the poster child for electronic voting fraud, please...

Can we please have someone with moral values and belief in democracy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrMickeysMom (Reply #15)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:05 PM

37. I forgot about that

thanks for bringing it up

I think it was EOS that he either owned or had controlling interest or something along those lines

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dlwickham (Reply #37)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:05 PM

55. I'll have to get my reference out for this, but I think it became ES&S...

But, it's cheating, any way you look at it.

Isn't there anyone left with an ounce of ethics? The only few ones I know of are working their knuckles bare in the Senate and House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrMickeysMom (Reply #55)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:48 PM

56. you're right

it was ES&S and the answer to your question is no

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 05:58 PM

16. WaPo editorial page and neocons don't like him. So good pick.

That's good enough for me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Faygo Kid (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:11 PM

19. Those are very encouraging non-endorsements.

I'd rather a Dem, but I don't think that Hagel will be too bad.

I like that he was a grunt in Vietnam. Now there'll be two vets of that crappy war in influential cabinet positions. That can't be bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Faygo Kid (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:53 PM

32. Since when is an unapologetic war monger a great pick

for Secretary of War?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #32)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:00 PM

34. This doesn't sound like an unapologetic warmonger to me...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Hagel

In July 2007, Hagel was one of three Republican Senators who supported Democratic-proposed legislation requiring a troop withdrawal from Iraq to begin within 120 days. He told Robert D. Novak "This thing is really coming undone quickly, and Maliki's government is weaker by the day. The police are corrupt, top to bottom. The oil problem is a huge problem. They still can't get anything through the parliament—no hydrocarbon law, no de-Baathification law, no provincial elections".

snip//

Criticism of Bush administration

On August 18, 2005, Hagel compared the Iraq War to Vietnam and openly mocked Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion that the Iraqi insurgency was in its "last throes". In November 2005, Hagel defended his criticism of the Iraq war stating "To question your government is not unpatriotic — to not question your government is unpatriotic." In December 2005, in reference to Bush, the Republican Party, and the PATRIOT Act, Hagel stated "I took an oath of office to the Constitution, I didn't take an oath of office to my party or my president."

In January 2006, Hagel took issue with Karl Rove saying "I didn't like what Mr. Rove said, because it frames terrorism and the issue of terrorism and everything that goes with it, whether it's the renewal of the Patriot Act or the NSA wiretapping, in a political context." In July 2006, Hagel criticized the Bush administration on its handling of the Israel-Lebanon issue saying "The sickening slaughter on both sides must end and it must end now. President Bush must call for an immediate cease-fire. This madness must stop." He also said "Our relationship with Israel is special and historic,... But it need not and cannot be at the expense of our Arab and Muslim relationships." Following heavy Republican losses in the 2006 midterm election, Hagel penned an editorial in the Washington Post highly critical of military strategies both employed and proposed for Iraq. He wrote that "There will be no victory or defeat for the United States in Iraq," and called for a "phased troop withdrawal". According to a SurveyUSA poll, in August 2006 Hagel has a 10% higher approval rating among Nebraska Democrats than Republicans.

In January 2007, Hagel openly criticized President Bush's plan to send an additional 20,000 troops to Iraq. He called it "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam, if it's carried out." Together with Democrats Joseph Biden and Carl Levin he proposed a non-binding resolution to the Democratic-controlled Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which rejected Bush's policy as "not in the national interest" in a 12-9 vote. After an April 2007 visit to Iraq with U.S. Congressman Joe Sestak (D-PA), Hagel stated his belief that the occupation of Iraq should not continue indefinitely and expressed his intention to cooperate with Senate Democrats in voting for a bill that would set a timeline to get out of Iraq.

In November 2007, he rated the Bush administration "the lowest in capacity, in capability, in policy, in consensus—almost every area" of any presidency in the last forty years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Reply #34)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:41 AM

58. He voted us into both wars.

He was smart enough to recognize his mistake, but not smart enough to avoid it in the place.

NO ONE, Democrat or Republican, who voted for the wars, should have ANY job in ANY future administration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:11 PM

20. What, no Democrats available?

Isn't Hagel the one who owned the voting machine company and then ran for Senate and won?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:16 PM

21. SecDef

Two more white guys. Kerry and Hagel. How about a lady? A female Republican moderate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lamonte (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:24 PM

22. Are there any left?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #22)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:26 PM

23. Susan Rice?

Oh, wait...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #23)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:03 PM

35. Susan Rice is a Democrat

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #35)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:44 PM

48. And a lady

Isn't that what you were asking about?

Why on earth would there be any need to appoint a "moderate Republican" or a Republican of any stripe?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #48)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:02 PM

54. The poster said something about a female Republican moderate.

I was wondering if those types of people still existed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lamonte (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:53 PM

30. They don't exist

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lamonte (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:36 PM

45. Um, now where would you put this lady?

And, would you just pick someone simply because they were a lady? And, just for appearance sake?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:49 PM

26. Why not a DEMOCRAT who "Got-It-Right" on Itaq and voted NO?

Not a single Democrat who opposed the Invasion of Iraq
received an appointment to a position in Obama's cabinet, or an appointment to ANY position of Power in the Obama Administration.

I would GO with someone who Got-It-Right on this critical issue,
but thats just me.


The Democratic Party Honor Roll

These Democrats should be remembered for their principled stand against the WAR Machine.

Authorization to use Military Force in Iraq
(Iraq War Resolution)


United States Senate

In the Senate, the 21 Democrats, one Republican and one Independent courageously voted their consciences in 2002 against the War in Iraq :

Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii)
Jeff Bingaman (D-New Mexico)
Barbara Boxer (D-California)
Robert Byrd (D-West Virginia)
Kent Conrad (D-North Dakota)
Jon Corzine (D-New Jersey)
Mark Dayton (D-Minnesota)
Dick Durbin (D-Illinois)
Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin)
Bob Graham (D-Florida)
Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii)
Jim Jeffords (I-Vermont)
Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts)
Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont)
Carl Levin (D-Michigan)
Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland)
Patty Murray (D-Washington)
Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island)
Paul Sarbanes (D-Maryland)
Debbie Stabenow (D-Michigan)
The late Paul Wellstone (D-Minnesota)
Ron Wyden (D-Oregon)

Lincoln Chaffee (R-Rhode Island)


United States House of Representatives

Six House Republicans and one independent joined 126 Democratic members of the House of Represenatives:

Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii)
Tom Allen (D-Maine)
Joe Baca (D-California)
Brian Baird (D-Washington DC)
John Baldacci (D-Maine, now governor of Maine)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin)
Xavier Becerra (D-California)
Earl Blumenauer (D-Oregon)
David Bonior (D-Michigan, retired from office)
Robert Brady (D-Pennsylvania)
Corinne Brown (D-Florida)
Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Lois Capps (D-California)
Michael Capuano (D-Massachusetts)
Benjamin Cardin (D-Maryland)
Julia Carson (D-Indiana)
William Clay, Jr. (D-Missouri)
Eva Clayton (D-North Carolina, retired from office)
James Clyburn (D-South Carolina)
Gary Condit (D-California, retired from office)
John Conyers, Jr. (D-Michigan)
Jerry Costello (D-Illinois)
William Coyne (D-Pennsylvania, retired from office)
Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland)
Susan Davis (D-California)
Danny Davis (D-Illinois)
Peter DeFazio (D-Oregon)
Diana DeGette (D-Colorado)
Bill Delahunt (D-Massachusetts)
Rosa DeLauro (D-Connecticut)
John Dingell (D-Michigan)
Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas)
Mike Doyle (D-Pennsylvania)
Anna Eshoo (D-California)
Lane Evans (D-Illinois)
Sam Farr (D-California)
Chaka Fattah (D-Pennsylvania)
Bob Filner (D-California)
Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts)
Charles Gonzalez (D-Texas)
Luis Gutierrez (D-Illinois)
Alice Hastings (D-Florida)
Earl Hilliard (D-Alabama, retired from office)
Maurice Hinchey (D-New York)
Ruben Hinojosa (D-Texas)
Rush Holt (D-New Jersey)
Mike Honda (D-California)
Darlene Hooley (D-Oregon)
Inslee
Jackson (Il.)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson, E.B.
Jones (OH)
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kleczka
Kucinich
LaFalce
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Maloney (CT)
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McKinney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller
Mollohan
Moran (Va)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Scott
Serrano
Slaughter
Snyder
Solis
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (NM)
Udall (CO)
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Woolsey
Wu



If I wanted REPUBLICANS holding important positions in our country,
I would have voted for them!


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone


photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.
Solidarity99!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #26)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 02:07 AM

61. nice noting the vote

but if you wanted him to pick from this list, some,like Ted, are no long with us. Only consolation is that Hagel is against war with iran, more so than many. I myself wanted Wes Clark.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonCoquixote (Reply #61)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:25 PM

64. Yes. Many of them are gone now.

The point of posting that List of Honor is to show that there ARE many Democrats who are NOT beholding to the Pentagon or the WAR Industries.
Most of them are in the Progressive Caucus.
I would LOVE to have some of them involved in making the decisions about the US involvement in Foreign Wars AND Military Spending.

If we populate our government offices and Positions of Power SOLELY with people who have PROVEN their subordination to the Pentagon and the War Industries,
Guess What the future hold for us?

Not ONE, SINGLE Democrat who opposed our Invasion of Iraq was appointed to a position of power in the Obama Administration.



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:50 PM

28. You think this guy will sit still for ginormous cuts to the defense budget?

We might not get stuck with him after all.

All that has to happen is for McCain to make one comment about his lack of qualifications or whatever, and Obama will drop him like a hot potato. There is a 90% chance that McCain would be so stupid and about a 60% chance that Obama would be that wimpy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:52 PM

29. Great, another goddamned conservative hack

and war monger in the administration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:54 PM

33. Good! Some sanity, even if he is a rethug. Bet he voted for Obama though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:08 PM

39. Yay! A republican. Why do we bother with the charade of elections?

 

With friends like these…

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:38 PM

46. Great choice

I like Hagel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:48 PM

49. There wasn't a Democrat that could do it? Couldn't he have found a

former Senator or something for the SOS so we wouldn't lose a seat in the Senate?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:01 PM

52. good! a wise and prudent choice!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:54 AM

59. as the Washington Post OP-ed points out he is way to the left of the Obama Admin on foreign policy

WaPo Editorial: Chuck Hagel is not the right choice for defense secretary
By Editorial Board, Published: December 18

FORMER SENATOR Chuck Hagel, whom President Obama is reportedly considering for defense secretary, is a Republican who would offer a veneer of bipartisanship to the national security team. He would not, however, move it toward the center, which is the usual role of such opposite-party nominees. On the contrary: Mr. Hagel’s stated positions on critical issues, ranging from defense spending to Iran, fall well to the left of those pursued by Mr. Obama during his first term — and place him near the fringe of the Senate that would be asked to confirm him.

The current secretary, Leon Panetta, has said the defense “sequester” cuts that Congress mandated to take effect Jan. 1 would have dire consequences for U.S. security. Mr. Hagel took a very different position when asked about Mr. Panetta’s comment during a September 2011 interview with the Financial Times. “The Defense Department, I think in many ways, has been bloated,” he responded. “So I think the Pentagon needs to be pared down.”

While both Republicans and Democrats accept that further cuts in defense may be inevitable, few have suggested that a reduction on the scale of the sequester is responsible. In congressional testimony delivered around the same time as Mr. Hagel’s interview, members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said the sequester would lead to “a severe and irreversible impact on the Navy’s future,” “a Marine Corps that’s below the end strength to support even one major contingency” and “an unacceptable level of strategic and operational risk” for the Army.

Mr. Hagel was similarly isolated in his views about Iran during his time in the Senate. He repeatedly voted against sanctions, opposing even those aimed at the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, which at the time was orchestrating devastating bomb attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq. Mr. Hagel argued that direct negotiations, rather than sanctions, were the best means to alter Iran’s behavior. The Obama administration offered diplomacy but has turned to tough sanctions as the only way to compel Iran to negotiate seriously.

-snip-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/chuck-hagel-is-not-right-for-defense-secretary/2012/12/18/07e03e20-493c-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_story.html?wpisrc=nl_headlines

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread