HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Chuck Hagel Loses Altitud...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:33 PM

Chuck Hagel Loses Altitude

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Lasher (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: BuzzFeed


Critics say White House silence “telling.”

Zeke Miller
BuzzFeed Staff

Posted Dec 24, 2012 4:28pm EST

WASHINGTON — Former Sen. Chuck Hagel’s chances of being Barack Obama’s Secretary of Defense are quickly dimming, as critics point to the White House’s silence in the face of questions about the Nebraska Republican’s record.

“I think was Chuck Hegel's obituary on the morning shows,” said senior GOP senate aide and frequent Hagel critic in reference to Democrats, including Sen. Chuck Schumer refusing to say if they would support him. “The White House got final answer that a Hagel nomination would be dead on arrival so now they move on to Carter or Flournoy. Either of those two would get Republican support.”

Hagel, a Republican realist skeptical of American military action in Iran and elsewhere, has drawn fierce criticism from Republican and Democratic hawks. He has faced questions, in particular, about his support for Israel, and criticism for referring to the “Jewish lobby” and a Clinton-era ambassadorial nominee as “openly aggressively gay." But the White House has offered few words of support for Hagel, an Obama administration appointee and an ally of the president’s.

“What I can tell you is that Sen. Hagel fought and bled for his country,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters last week, refusing to comment on specific criticisms. “He served his country well. He was an excellent senator.” But unlike Susan Rice, who withdrew her name for consideration to head the State Department amid Republican criticism of her statements after the Benghazi attack in September, Hagel is all on his own, making an organized and forceful defense from the Obama administration even more necessary.

-snip-



Read more: http://www.buzzfeed.com/zekejmiller/chuck-hagel-loses-altitude

24 replies, 4036 views

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 24 replies Author Time Post
Reply Chuck Hagel Loses Altitude (Original post)
DonViejo Dec 2012 OP
DJ13 Dec 2012 #1
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #19
politicaljunkie41910 Dec 2012 #2
William769 Dec 2012 #11
doc03 Dec 2012 #3
bigdarryl Dec 2012 #5
doc03 Dec 2012 #7
JI7 Dec 2012 #8
graham4anything Dec 2012 #14
JI7 Dec 2012 #9
David__77 Dec 2012 #4
Cha Dec 2012 #6
Kolesar Dec 2012 #15
Ash_F Dec 2012 #10
DonCoquixote Dec 2012 #12
Superbot Dec 2012 #13
flpoljunkie Dec 2012 #16
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #20
William Seger Dec 2012 #23
Kyad06 Dec 2012 #17
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #18
pscot Dec 2012 #21
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #22
Lasher Dec 2012 #24

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:37 PM

1. I would really hate to be a potential nominee of this WH

They have a lousy record of standing behind them.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DJ13 (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 10:19 AM

19. They really treat their people like shit, I agree. Disappointed in

Prez O.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:47 PM

2. The "Critics" are the same people who like to keep crap going.

If Obama allows another potential nominee to go down in flames behind a bunch of BS, than this is going to be an agonizingly long, disappointing 4 years. Hagel's criticism of the 'Jewish lobby' was spot on, and the comment about the gay ambassadorial nominee is 13 years old. For Christ's sake, the man was a republican and the “openly aggressively gay" comment appears rather tame particularly for the time, and for a member of the republican party. We've all heard much worse. I'm surprised this is the best stuff they could find to throw up against the wall.

Look, if President Obama wants to 'play Lincoln', he had better learn how to play Lincoln.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to politicaljunkie41910 (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 01:46 AM

11. "the comment about the gay ambassadorial nominee is 13 years old."

But it didn't stop there.

And between 2001 and 2006, Hagel received a score of zero from the Human Rights Council, with no votes on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, a job discrimination bill, and the Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which eventually was passed into law as part of the National Defense Authorization Act in 2009.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2012/12/20/is-chuck-hagel-toast/

I am so tired of hearing it was 13 years ago, that is complete utter bullshit it's just one remark and the only reason he apologized for that is to try to get the Secretary of Defense position.

Luckily President Obama is seeing the error of his ways over this idiotic name being thrown in the ring.

He's toast alright, and I for one will not lose any sleep over it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 11:48 PM

3. The Republicans picked the SOS now they are going to

pick the Sec. of Defense. Obama needs to pick another Democratic Senator so the Republicans gain another seat.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 12:19 AM

5. Hate to say this and I really like Obama

But let's face it he is showing WEAK leadership here.The White House floats out these potential cabinet post and the rethugs and media begins to pounce on them and the White House and Obama says NOTHING to defend them WTF!!!! This is the first Adminastration I've seen where the other party is trying to pick there nominees for cabinet post.I stand correct Bill Clinton had this problem also with mostly African American nominees.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigdarryl (Reply #5)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 12:48 AM

7. That is the same thing that worries me about the fiscal cliff

I am afraid of what Obama will do to make a deal, he put SS on the table. He hasn't ever showed that he will draw a line in the sand at some point. I mean he started the fiscal cliff negotiations from the get go with I am willing to compromise. Since the 2010 election Rush Limbaugh said "We don't compromise, we won."

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 01:17 AM

8. no, unlike Hagel , Kerry was first choice and in consideration since 2008

before Obama became President. if not hillary in 2008 it would have been kerry for sure who became sec of state.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 05:22 AM

14. that is like saying, if not for the voters in 2004, Kerry would have become president

 

and if not for not running, Kerry would have been President in 2008 and 2012
and if not for not being born yet, Kerry would have signed the Declaration
and if not for not being a football player for the NY Jets, John Kerry would have been the MVP of Superbowl 3

God help Mass. if Vicky Kennedy decides for personal reasons not to run.
Everyone else running already either lost or chickened out in past races and won't win this time.
And even if they win now, there will be yet another in 2014, and the Gov. race shortly too.

it's 3AM, I sure hope when a call comes, Kerry is wanting to become something else at that very moment and not be happy with the job he so almost obsessively has wanted now for so many years.

Never in my life have i ever seen another example of someone craving a job that has so much less power than the job they have now. And leaving Mass. folk with two senators that in terms of seniorty are near the bottom, and one that will have her hands full with the singular issue the democratic liberals got her into the job for.


but remember,before you all once again start yelling at the President, it's not President Obama to blame for this-
the nominee has to get voted on and if the repubs and the dems won't vote someone on,
they won't get the job.
Remember, Obama fought very hard for Warren, and only because she couldn't get the vote
did he open the path for her to become Senator in the first place.
Without President Obama's coattails(and the job path to begin with, she would still just be someone with a strong opinion but no office).
I can only imagine what the SCOTUS fights are going to be the next 2 years.
(Thank God we got 2 stellar choices from him already, and let's hope he gets 3 or 5 more of them).
It is why all the stupid ass whining that people won't vote for the democratic candidates in2014 rings hollow.

Stay home and protest like in 2010, and it's your fault those that did that for what is in office now that won in 2010.

especially the Naderites and third party fans of people who won't caucus with democrats

and especially Ralph Nader himself for being the ultimate, perhaps, all time liar.
No, the parties are not the same

Having to get an a second string choice to replace the first one is directly because of that thinking.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 01:18 AM

9. James Hormel is a republican ?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 12:19 AM

4. I hope he is the nominee.

He's the best of the lot that has been floated, by far.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 12:45 AM

6. Yeah, "critics say WH silence is telling".. I'm

sure they do.. and I also think they don't know what the fuck they're talking about.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 06:09 AM

15. ^Best post on this thread...eom

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 01:32 AM

10. A repub attacked by Dems for not being RW enough...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 02:13 AM

12. silence?

like when he spoke out for Susan Rice (who actually, is more war hawkish than kerry)

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 02:16 AM

13. Obama has done more than most of these guys in their careers

 

Why can they support him?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 09:47 AM

16. Much prefer war reticent Hagel to 'leading counterinsurgency supporter' Michele Flournoy

How the Top 2 Candidates for Defense Secretary Differ
Chuck Hagel and Michele Flournoy, both haunted by the ghosts of Vietnam, represent a stark choice for Obama.

By Michael Hirsh
Updated: December 14, 2012 | 2:28 p.m.

Chuck Hagel is, by his own admission, haunted by Vietnam. When asked to explain his early opposition to George W. Bush’s 2003 Iraq invasion in an interview in 2011, the former Nebraska senator harked back to his experience as an Army private fighting the Tet offensive in 1968. That maverick stance cost Hagel his reputation as a leading Republican, and it may be one reason why President Obama is now considering him as his next Defense secretary, with Leon Panetta set to retire. “We sent home almost 16,000 body bags that year," Hagel told me. "And I always thought to myself, ‘If I get through this, if I have the opportunity to influence anyone, I owe it to those guys to never let this happen again to the country.’ ”

When Obama mounted a Bush-like “surge” in Afghanistan in 2009, Hagel wasn’t happy either. “I’m not sure we know what the hell we are doing in Afghanistan,” Hagel told me in 2010. “It’s not sustainable at all. I think we’re marking time as we slaughter more young people.” Hagel had also opposed the surge in Iraq. In a dramatic moment on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2007, Hagel implored his fellow Republicans to stop avoiding the truth about what he called the futile “grinder” of Iraq, and asked them not to send in more troops. “Don't hide anymore; none of us!” Hagel declared, raising his voice. Although several Republicans expressed misgivings, in the end only Hagel voted in favor of the nonbinding resolution.


Michele Flournoy, the former under secretary of Defense who is also a leading candidate to replace Panetta, is also somewhat haunted by the ghosts of Vietnam, by her own account, but in a very different way. Though far too young (she turned 52 on Friday) to have served there with the 66-year-old Hagel, Flournoy warned in a speech this week that military planners might still be too “risk-averse” because of the Vietnam experience. She said the military was endangered by a new "Vietnam syndrome" in which planners might seek to avoid the lessons of counterinsurgency and guerrilla warfare simply because the last decade of this kind of conflict has been so costly in Iraq and Afghanistan.

At a time when Hagel was worried about the cost of the Afghan surge in body bags, Flournoy was promoting the idea as a leading supporter of counterinsurgency strategy in 2009. During this period, a fierce debate occurred inside the Obama administration over whether to pare down the U.S. presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan to mere “counterterror operations”—the position taken by Vice President Joe Biden, a longtime Hagel ally—or whether to mount a larger counterinsurgency or “hearts-and-minds,” nation-building-type war. After leaving the Pentagon, Flournoy took over the Center for a New American Security, a think tank known for its work in counterinsurgency policy.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/how-the-top-2-candidates-for-defense-secretary-differ-20121214

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flpoljunkie (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 10:24 AM

20. I am angry that this woman, who did not serve and

certainly never served in Vietnam, is encouraging servicemembers who HAVE BEEN THERE that they should forget the terrible lessons they have learned. That is disgusting. I am opposed to her, as of now. Thank you for posting this, this is very eye-opening.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flpoljunkie (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 10:35 AM

23. "...a new 'Vietnam syndrome'..."

'... in which planners might seek to avoid the lessons of counterinsurgency and guerrilla warfare simply because the last decade of this kind of conflict has been so costly in Iraq and Afghanistan."

Got to hell, Michele Flournoy -- you are too fucking stupid for this job.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 09:47 AM

17. I like Hagel

We need some sane foreign policy after years of the neo con war machine. The fact that he is a realist who dosent kiss Isreals ass is a plus in my book. He had the guts to speak out against Bush back in '03.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 10:04 AM

18. To the Obama haters in this thread: President Clinton suffered from the same

problem. He seldom stood up for his nominees, especially the black ones.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #18)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 10:26 AM

21. Granted, Obama doesn't discriminate

on the basis of race or gender when it comes to not standing up for his nominees.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pscot (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 10:35 AM

22. Is that supposed to be a compliment to Clinton. You lower the bar don't you?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 11:01 AM

24. Locking...

I'm sorry, but opinion/analysis articles are prohibited in LBN. Please consider posting in Good Reads or GD.

Merry Christmas!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink