HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » Obama expected to pick Ha...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:11 PM

Obama expected to pick Hagel as opponents prepare for a fight

White House officials and sources close to Hagel declined to confirm to The Cable that Hagel is the president's choice to replace Leon Panetta at the helm of the Pentagon, but several sources close to the process have told The Cable that the White House and Hagel have been in touch on a regular basis and that Hagel is indeed the expected pick. Decisions about the timing and logistics of the announcement are being finalized now.The Cable had previously confirmed that Hagel successfully completed the vetting process, as have Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter and former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy.


Meanwhile, Hagel's detractors are moving forward with their campaign against the nomination, which has been expanding ever since The Cable first reported in November that Hagel was in consideration for the Pentagon post. That campaign has included anonymous Senate aides calling Hagel an anti-Semite, the Washington Post editorial board writing that, "Chuck Hagel is not the right choice for defense secretary," and the Emergency Committee for Israel, which counts among its board members Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, running a television ad criticizing Hagel's opposition to unilateral sanctions against Iran. "For secretary of defense, Chuck Hagel is not a responsible option," the ad claims.
"Even if one left aside Chuck Hagel's dangerous views on Iran and his unpleasant distaste for Israel and Jews, a dispassionate analyst would have to conclude that the case for Hagel is extraordinarily weak," Kristol wrote in an editorial Friday, in which he urged Obama to choose Carter, Flournoy, or Navy Secretary Ray Mabus.The Log Cabin Republicans took out a full page ad in the New York Times to oppose the potential Hagel nomination. Following the publication of the ad, the leader of the group, R. Clarke Cooper, resigned without explanation. He had previously expressed support for Hagel. Cooper and Hagel are both combat veterans.


Three Senate Republicans have come out firmly against Hagel's potential nomination, Sens. John Cornyn (R-TX), Dan Coats (R-IN), and Tom Coburn (R-OK). Cornyn said he can't vote for Hagel due to Hagel's "problem with Israel." Coats said Hagel "has had so much disrespect for the military." Coburn said Hagel "does not have the experience to manage a very large organization like the Pentagon."Other GOP senators have expressed reservations about Hagel without committing to a no vote. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who previously praised Hagel as a close and dear friend, suggested recently that Hagel is not a real Republican. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), said on Fox News Sunday, "There would be very little Republican support for his nomination. At the end of the day, there will be very few votes."

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/01/04/obama_expected_to_pick_hagel_as_opponents_prepare_for_a_fight

33 replies, 2475 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 33 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama expected to pick Hagel as opponents prepare for a fight (Original post)
octoberlib Jan 2013 OP
samsingh Jan 2013 #1
geek tragedy Jan 2013 #3
Pirate Smile Jan 2013 #26
samsingh Jan 2013 #33
TwilightGardener Jan 2013 #2
Cali_Democrat Jan 2013 #8
Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #9
TwilightGardener Jan 2013 #11
Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #12
TwilightGardener Jan 2013 #14
TroyD Jan 2013 #21
TwilightGardener Jan 2013 #22
Mojorabbit Jan 2013 #4
think Jan 2013 #6
Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #10
think Jan 2013 #15
Arkana Jan 2013 #5
Indykatie Jan 2013 #7
Jennicut Jan 2013 #13
leftynyc Jan 2013 #16
jenmito Jan 2013 #18
leftynyc Jan 2013 #19
jenmito Jan 2013 #23
Pirate Smile Jan 2013 #27
polichick Jan 2013 #17
Purveyor Jan 2013 #20
polichick Jan 2013 #24
Purveyor Jan 2013 #25
polichick Jan 2013 #31
LukeFL Jan 2013 #28
indepat Jan 2013 #30
Rosa Luxemburg Jan 2013 #29
davidpdx Jan 2013 #32

Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:12 PM

1. i'm still not sure why Obama wants him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to samsingh (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:24 PM

3. He's less militaristic than many Democrats. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to samsingh (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 08:09 PM

26. Neocons and the Defense Contractors hate him. Interesting tweet today:

@JacksonDiehl: Oddly, the nomination of Republican Chuck Hagel will be the strongest indication yet that Obama is moving to the left in his second term


He will help POTUS downsize the Defense Dept./Industry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pirate Smile (Reply #26)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 12:03 PM

33. that would be good then

Hagel never seemed left wing to me though

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:14 PM

2. Hope Chuck has a flak jacket handy. Such craziness over a SecDef pick, I have never seen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #2)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:56 PM

8. Same thing when Obama floated Susan Rice

The GOP gets offended when a Democratic President with brown skin has the gall to nominate people that don't 100% agree with GOP views.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:20 PM

9. An ironic comment considering Hagel attacked Clinton nominee Hormel in a bigoted, hate fueled

interview to the press. Not sure one can both oppose what Republicans did to Rice and suggest that what a Republican did to Hormel is not an equally bad thing without being highly selective about that which offends them. Either it is just fine for Republicans opposed to a nominee to use false, bigoted attacks or it is not. To suggest that McCain is bad for criticizing Rice but Hagel is fine although he went after Homel in far more directly bigoted terms which clearly suggested that all gay people are not fit to serve the US as diplomatic representatives is hypocritical in my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:34 PM

11. Yes--though I think the Rice thing was more of a strategic move

for Kerry's seat, rather than just the usual opposition for opposition's sake that the GOP does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #11)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:48 PM

12. Republican 'reasons' are not what I am talking about.

I see many of the same Democrats who were furious about the Rice attacks excusing Hagel's far worse attacks on another diplomatic nominee. It shows that they think it is 'understandable' to speak bigoted crap about gay people at the top of their profession, but at the same time it is a terrible horror for anyone to question Rice about anything, 'cause she's married to a man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #12)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:00 PM

14. There were plenty of people here who did not want Susan Rice

because of the Keystone investment factor. I went shaky on her myself because of it, but then figured it wasn't enough to take her out of the running. I don't think gender, sexuality or race entered into it, at least not very much. As for Hagel, nobody is excusing his objections to Hormel. But take the long view--I doubt it comes as a huge surprise that a Republican Senator from Nebraska would object to a gay activist as ambassador 15 years ago. It's disappointing that he couldn't rise above that way of thinking, but not a surprise at all--especially when he was being groomed for bigger things in the GOP at that time. And he did apologize, and pledge to do better by the LGBT community.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #11)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:32 PM

21. So why did Obama nominate Kerry for Secretary of State?

Why is he risking losing a Senate seat? Why not pick someone to be SOS whose Senate seat isn't at risk?

Btw, I also think it would be an insult to Elizabeth Warren if Scott Brown is let back into the Senate after she worked hard all year to put him out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TroyD (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 06:02 PM

22. I read that he liked both candidates almost equally, but once it became clear

that Republicans were determined to trash Rice, it seems it was just that easy for him to go with Kerry, who obviously has more stature, and would be an easy confirmation (since the Repubs want his seat). I do think he was torn between the two, because he is close with Rice and trusts her--but he probably thought the risk of that seat was worth getting a widely-applauded, high-profile SoS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:26 PM

4. Do we not have any Dems who can fill this post? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mojorabbit (Reply #4)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:38 PM

6. We do. But

when Hagel, a Republican calls for realistic cuts in military spending the GOP will have a hard time with it's usual schtick of calling him a traitor and blocking meaningful and needed spending cuts without suffering blow back for doing so.

As one who has been pretty critical of Obama in regards to military spending I actually applaud the president's choice in this matter.

JMO

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to think (Reply #6)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:26 PM

10. That's funny stuff. Republicans have called him a traitor for years on end now.

what gives you the impression they will suddenly offer him respect? Do you see Republicans as consistent, honorable people?
http://www.politikditto.com/2007/03/chuck-hagel-traitor.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #10)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:07 PM

15. Hagel doesn't give a rats ass if the GOP respects him

Last edited Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:33 PM - Edit history (1)

And neither do I.

It will be public appearance & perception of the GOP attacking one of their own that makes him desirable for the position. Hopefully Americans who normally don't follow politics will take notice of this.

I am betting Hagel is still pissed about Iraq and is ready willing, and able to fight back at the Republican/MIC attacks on cuts to spending. And after Iraq he sure won't be eager to have us engage in war elsewhere without overwhelming just cause.

Sorry if my post was misconstrued as to have anyone think the GOP gives a damn about anyone's opinion other than their own.....


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:36 PM

5. Chuck Hagel was an enlisted soldier and Dan Coats is a fucking retard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:43 PM

7. I am One Who Thinks PBO Should Move Ahead with Hagel's Nomination if That's His Choice

I hate Seeing nominees withdraw because different factions don't approve of our president's choices. Republicans and neo cons are fighting Hagel's nomination because they don't think he's a real republican, meaning he's not a big war crazy wing nut I guess. Putting republicans in posts demonstrates that PBO is serving as the president of all America and I think that's a good thing for Dems now and in the future. Of course I don't agree with Hagel's past positions on a lot of things but he was better on the war issues than most Dems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:56 PM

13. The Repubs have crazy views in general with Israel. They support only the right wing there.

Anyone else that goes against that thinking get's their ire. Obama should not back down on this because of differing views on Israel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jennicut (Reply #13)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:39 PM

16. How about the fact Hagel

is a fucking homophobe? Does criticism from the left count?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftynyc (Reply #16)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:31 PM

18. He apologized for his homophobic remark. The HRC accepted his apology. Even if you don't

believe his views have evolved on the issue, he SAID he has, and he'd follow OBAMA'S orders/policies. He's to the left of just about every Repub. and that's a GOOD thing for the Defense Dept.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jenmito (Reply #18)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:52 PM

19. When his name first came up

I asked the very simple question - isn't there a Democrat who can do this? Why reward a party that has done nothing but obstruct and insult this President and every single person in the administration. Fuck the republicans. I'd give them nothing. And the HRC can do whatever it wants. My gay friends aren't so forgiving and think he just wants a job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftynyc (Reply #19)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 06:32 PM

23. The Dems. who can do this are hawks compared to Hagel (who endorsed Obama in '08) and who

is hated by most Repubs. I'm sure he DOES want this job which he WOULDN'T want if he was against the repeal of DADT and if he disagreed with Obama's foreign policy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jennicut (Reply #13)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 08:13 PM

27. I saw a tweet today from a FP person which said - imagine trying to get Gates confirmed now. The RW

& Neocons would freak.

Robert Gates Says Israel Is an Ungrateful Ally
Jeffrey Goldberg

-snip-
But it was Robert M. Gates, the now-retired secretary of defense, who seemed most upset with Netanyahu. In a meeting of the National Security Council Principals Committee held not long before his retirement this summer, Gates coldly laid out the many steps the administration has taken to guarantee Israelís security -- access to top- quality weapons, assistance developing missile-defense systems, high-level intelligence sharing -- and then stated bluntly that the U.S. has received nothing in return, particularly with regard to the peace process.

Senior administration officials told me that Gates argued to the president directly that Netanyahu is not only ungrateful, but also endangering his country by refusing to grapple with Israelís growing isolation and with the demographic challenges it faces if it keeps control of the West Bank. According to these sources, Gatesís analysis met with no resistance from other members of the committee.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-06/robert-gates-says-israel-is-an-ungrateful-ally-jeffrey-goldberg.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:10 PM

17. Has a Republican president ever chosen a Dem for this position?

This choice perpetuates a false notion about Republicans being better at military functions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polichick (Reply #17)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:02 PM

20. Not that I can find, at least as far back as Truman. Clinton however named republican Cohen, and

of course President Obama named republican Gates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Reply #20)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 06:38 PM

24. Well, I sure don't vote for Dem presidents so that they can perpetuate...

...bullshit myths that do the party no good. Disappointing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polichick (Reply #24)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 07:24 PM

25. What are these 'bullshit myths'...may I ask? eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Reply #25)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:44 AM

31. That Dems can't handle the military and...

...the defense of this nation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polichick (Reply #24)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 09:20 PM

28. I agree

I am sure we have good Dems with honorable service and reputation that can be as good as hagle as Sec of Def.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LukeFL (Reply #28)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 10:16 PM

30. Pickin' a 'puke as SEC-DEF maybe kills many birds with one stone. If a Dem were picked,

'pukes would instantly paint BHO as weak on national security. They will anyway, but maybe BHO will get a few days before being so labeled. Besides, Dems in general seem to have a deathly fear of soiling their britches if labeled by 'pukes as weak on national security or soft on crime, or drugs, or terra.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 09:25 PM

29. I don't want him

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Original post)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 05:54 AM

32. I think Hagel is a good choice

People who bitch and moan about him being a Republican look back to what Lincoln did in his cabinet. Clinton also had a Republican SoD. If you accuse Obama of being a sellout, you are being a hypocrite not to say the same thing about Clinton. Most people won't criticize Clinton since he's considered the Democrat's goldenboy. As Steve Clements said on Maddow, that Hagel would be able to go into the Pentagon and cut the budget. Something that very badly is needed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread