Friday, February 1, 2013

Chuck Hagel's Nomination to Secretary of Defense Far From Certain...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty
-vs- Tyranny


RHINOS and Neocons working hard to ensure Chuck Hagel's nomination by President Obama for the position of Secretary of Defense goes down in flames. I guess the Neocons are looking for a war hawk to keep the Military Industrial Complex well oiled and satisfied.

The only question now is whether the Obama administration will pull the plug after Hagel's relatively weak showing during his confirmation hearings. Personally I am still hoping he is confirmed. It's time to let the Neocons know the nation ain't behind their BS.

The Weekly Standard - On October 3, 2005, President George W. Bush announced his intention to nominate his White House counsel, Harriet Miers, to succeed Sandra Day O’Connor as an associate justice of the Supreme Court. On October 27, after vigorous statements of opposition from conservatives and quiet expressions of dismay from Republican senators, Miers withdrew her nomination.

Conservatives and Republicans had no grudge against Harriet Miers. They simply thought she wasn’t a first-rate candidate. They were confident that Bush, the Court, and the country could do better. They were right. President Bush then nominated Samuel Alito for the position. Alito was confirmed by the Senate, and now serves with great distinction on the Court.

We may, as George Orwell observed, “have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men.” But there isn’t an intelligent liberal, or for that matter a sentient one, who doesn’t know, after last week’s confirmation hearing, that Chuck Hagel isn’t a first-rate candidate for secretary of defense. He isn’t even a second-rate candidate. Has there ever been a more embarrassing confirmation hearing than Hagel’s for a major cabinet position? For a minor cabinet position? For a sub-cabinet position? We don’t know of one.

Yet so far liberals seem to be trying to pretend that all is well. Or they have simply averted their gaze from the ghastly train wreck. Or, they tell us (and themselves)—well, the secretary of defense doesn’t really make policy, and there are lots of capable bureaucrats who can run the department. Or, they grumble—well, we can’t give Hagel’s critics the satisfaction of acknowledging that this appointment is a disaster.

There isn't an intelligent liberal? Well, to me it looks like the conservative Neocons are the ones that ain't too intelligent these days. Damn it's too bad there isn't a  Dwight David Eisenhower , Barry Goldwater, or William F. Buckley in the modern rEpublican Neocon- Socon coalition party these days.  It is almost certain the way the rEpublican party is moving it will soon be irrelevant in the minds of the majority of Americans.

Apparently the Obama administration is not pleased with their nominees weak performance either. Reporting from CBS...

White House officials told CBS' Major Garrett that they're disappointed with defense secretary nominee Chuck Hagel's performance at his confirmation hearing before the Senate on Thursday.

One of the most damaging exchanges during the hearing came from Hagel's onetime ally, Sen. John McCain, over Hagel's opposition to the Iraq troop surge.

CBS News' Chief Washington correspondent and host of "Face the Nation," Bob Schieffer, said the heated round of questioning was one of the most surprising details to emerge from the hearing.

"Let's not forget, Chuck Hagel was the co-chairman of John McCain's presidential campaign when John McCain ran the first time. This is stunning."

"He says it's policy. It's all policy," Schieffer said, speaking to McCain's harsh line of questioning.

Typically, when a nominee comes under fire during a hearing, Schieffer explained, "The White House will come back and stoutly defend the guy and ... [yesterday] they started leaking all these reports, they're disappointed."

The move by the Obama administration may signal that they are confident Hagel will "get confirmed by a narrow margin" and that they are "absolutely certain of every Democratic vote in the Senate," Schieffer said, before adding, "I've never seen a White House react quite the way they did to this."

Even if the White House remains confident Hagel will be confirmed, Hagel's rocky performance "You knew these were the questions they were going to get. And he did not seem able to really answer them. I think his nomination may be in trouble."



Yes, Iraq was indeed the greatest military and political blunder since Vietnam. The country is still paying for the blunder today and will be for some time to come. It is indeed time to reel in the Neocon Military Industrial Complex.

Via: Memorandum
Via: Memorandum

14 comments:

  1. I think the Weekly Standard (the best conservative magazine out there) is being a little liberal (intended) here with the power of the Neocons over this nomination.

    Odds are Hagel gets the seat. The Neocon movement is coming to an end. Their only bulwark remains a conservative Israel. As long as Israelis stick to the strange and irrational governments they've been electing lately, America will have no choice but to remain "Neocon" on the important issues over there.

    It's a pain the arse, and I can only hope that the recent Israeli election is a sign that they're starting to come around from that.

    Great posts, Les. Heavy stuff.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not a Netanyahu fan, ether, Jersey. But you can blame the Palestinian terrorists for creating the conditions that make it so guys like Benjie can get elected. The Israelis back in 2000 offered the Palestinians recognition and 96% of the occupied territories and the loathsome and murderous Arafat told them to stuff it (I really thought that Clinton was going to murder Arafat he was so pissed). Couple that with the thousands of rockets that have been raining down on them from Gaza and, hell, even I might consider voting for Netanhahu.

      Delete
    2. The Palestinians IMNHO bear at least as much responsibility, if not more, than do the Israelis for the circumstances that exist. Arafat was nothing more than a terrorist and it would have been almost justified had Clinton taken him out of the equation in 2000. And yes I do mean physically out of the equation.

      Delete
    3. It's all well and fine to be upset with the Palestinians, but there are two parties involved and Israel is one of them. And I blame Israel for their sleazy, backdoor invasion of the West Bank just as much as I blame the Palestinians for their stupid, counter-productive violent reaction to their plight. The Palestinians would be in a far better situation had they taken the Ghandi strategy instead of the Arafat one. But the Israelis are the ones starting the trouble in the first place. They invaded Palestine, they displaced the natives, and they continue to do so without even a hint of remorse. For that, I feel very little sympathy for them.

      dmarks, meanwhile, sounds like a Neocon himself.

      JMJ

      Delete
    4. Your sense of history needs some fine tuning jmj. I was alive and remember 1967 quite well. The damn Palestinians as well as the rest of the Arab governments and Iran want Israel destroyed. And it seems you would be fine with that. The frigging reason Israel responds as they is essentially self defense. I know you don't get but it is a fact. Israel in fact has IMNHO shown considerable restraint.

      The world pressure should be on the Palestinians and extremist Arab Persian factions not Israel.

      Delete
    5. Israel is not without its fair share of dirty secrets, just like the USA. But to consider that they are culpable with the Palestinians for all the sh*t going on over there is laughable and ignorant.

      Les said that Israel has shown considerable restraint. What will happen the day that they don't? What will happen the day when they finally have had enough of the Palestinian terrorism and really show them what war is?

      Throwing rocks at an armed Israel is never a good idea. Strapping bombs to your women so they can kill Jews is never a good idea. Having been in The Sandbox and having to work alongside "friendly Muslims who are assets", I can tell you up front and without reservation that I have yet to meet a Muslim, a real Muslim and not these Americanized versions we see here, who wasn't hygienically-challenged, dim-witted, and rabidly religious.

      Delete
    6. If a bunch of Europeans landed in your hometown tomorrow, took over, threw you out, and then followed you to your next town, only to do the same, you probably wouldn't be very pleased with them, Les. I agree that the Palestinians have reacted in about the dumbest way imaginable, but it's not incomprehensible. Israel may have shown some "restraint," but it is incumbent on them, the invader, to make the peace in humane, rational, fair way.

      JMJ

      Delete
    7. Time to cut apart Jersey's invalid analogy:

      "If a bunch of Europeans landed in your hometown tomorrow, took over"

      Actually, the Israelis started out just buying land. You also overlook the fact that so many of the Palestinians immigrated from Egypt and other places.

      "threw you out"

      None of this happened until the Arabs decided to commit genocide and exterminate both immigrant Israelis and native born ones alike.

      ' and then followed you to your next town, only to do the same'

      The "next town" is Lebanon, Syria, and the other Arab countries... which deny citizens of Palestinian descent all rights of citizens. Unlike Israel, which grants citizenship to Arabs in its borders.

      "you probably wouldn't be very pleased with them, Les."

      If I did what they did, which was entirely unprovoked and unjust, I would stop doing it and apologize and pay reparations.

      "I agree that the Palestinians have reacted in about the dumbest way imaginable"

      Making genocide the Number One priority is more than dumb. And consider that it has been this way for a very long time. Whatever Palestine had for a government in the 1940s allied with Nazi Germany, and even sent soldiers into Eastern Europe to hunt down and kill Jews.

      "but it's not incomprehensible."

      It certainly is entirely incomprehennsible. Unless, of course, you are a person who think that things like gangs of youths going out and raping women in Chicago is "comprehensible".

      "Israel may have shown some "restraint," but it is incumbent on them, the invader"

      They are the defender, not the invader.

      "to make the peace in humane, rational, fair way."

      They have. But the Palestinian government, which still insists on invasion, conquest of Israel, and extermination of its people, does not want peace.

      Delete
    8. Confire said: "...that I have yet to meet a Muslim, a real Muslim and not these Americanized versions we see here, who wasn't hygienically-challenged, dim-witted, and rabidly religious."

      I know and have known many Muslims ... and yes, in the Middle East. So many of them bright and sharp witted, and certainly none I have known is no less so than the average "Americanized" American I know.

      Not sure what you are getting at, Confire. Are you running under some sort of definition under which any Muslim who is reasonable is not a real Muslim?

      Delete
    9. dmarks,

      I am referring to the toothless rabble that 'assisted' my military cohorts and myself while in The Sandbox. These guys were not watered-down or Americanized. I should have been more clear.

      Are there reasonable Muslims? Sure. I reckon. I have met Americanized Muslims who are more secular in their religion (not a contradiction- I know you understand what I am saying), and well-dressed and hygienically clean. But they would also eat pork and drink beer. To them Islam was a cultural thing and they didn't have any true fealty.

      But whilst in The Sandbox, the Muslims I encountered were filthy barbarians, one step above Third World.

      Like I said, I should have clarified this.

      Delete
  2. I think he will be confirmed. But it does bother me that the terrorists endorse him.

    Will said: "But you can blame the Palestinian terrorists for creating the conditions that make it so guys like Benjie can get elected."

    You are entirely right. All the decades of unrelenting one-sided aggression from the Palestinians and their loud forever demand to exterminate all Israelis damages their cause. A lot. Look at Egypt. They called off their war, and got their land back. And peace.

    Imagine if the Japanese were still sending kamikazes against us after the end of WW2 and demanding the death of all Americans. Rest assured the occupation of Japan would be rather harsh and continous to this day.

    "Couple that with the thousands of rockets that have been raining down on them from Gaza"

    Every one of these is an act of genocide. As they targeted Israeli civilians. The only reason the aggressors haven't killed off millions of Israeli Jews isn't for their lack of trying. It is because of our aid to Israei that this genocide has not been completed.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This isn't surprising. The problem with neoconservatives is that they are not conservative at all in any sense; at least in the Goldwater/Ron Paul sense. They are big government statists that could care a whit about limited government.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tim,

      "They are big government statists that could care a whit about limited government."

      *gasp!* How dare you speak against the GOP and the beltway Republican Machine! Know your role, Tim! You need to remember that it is about The Big To, has always been about The Big Two, and people like you, with your "libertarian sensibilities" only serve to disrupt the GOP narrative!

      Bad Tim! Bad! No dessert for you. Now off to bed and be sure to take the time to think about your foolish statements.

      Ha! I'm being facetious, of course.

      Delete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that have no value but to demean another commenter or spread fallacious statements meant to result in a food fight or crap fest.

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

A note to ALL, the blog Lying Lester, a spoof blog designed and set up by one extremely unscrupulous lying asshat is not the property of this site and there is ABSOLUTELY no connection between the two.

It is disturbed and dishonest individuals like Dervish Sanders of Sleeping with The Devil progressive blog that over time has caused this this unfortunate situation.



LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails