Senator Chuck Schumer hasn’t publicly taken a side in the Chuck Hagel debate yet, but as Politico reports, his final decision could tip the scales:
Schumer, the most powerful Jewish Democrat in Congress, has been noncommittal in his public statements on Hagel’s nomination. But privately, several sources say he has told senators it would be “very hard” for him to support Hagel as the next defense secretary because of his positions on Israel over the years. In New York, Schumer has told allies and power brokers in the Jewish community that he’s uneasy about Hagel’s nomination, a concern he reiterated at a private breakfast in Manhattan’s posh Park Avenue Winter restaurant on Wednesday.
If Schumer were to oppose Hagel, it would almost certainly amount to a fatal blow to his candidacy since a number of pro-Israel Democrats who are squeamish about the nominee could very well be influenced by the No. 3 Democrat’s position. It would also give bipartisan political cover to Republicans and neocons fighting Hagel’s nomination.
Still, Schumer could also provide critical support for Hagel’s nomination. Should he support Hagel, it very likely would ride on what the former Nebraska GOP senator eventually says on Israel at an upcoming one-on-one meeting with the New York Democrat and during his confirmation hearings before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Schumer declined to be interviewed Thursday for this story. The White House also declined to comment.
It’s hard to overstate Schumer’s power in this debate. Pro-Israel Senate Democrats who aren’t getting much guidance on this issue from AIPAC (at least not officially) will look to Schumer for cues. This is particularly important in the case of his fellow New York Senator, Kirstin Gillibrand, whose vote on the Armed Services Committee could be the deciding factor in whether Hagel’s nomination is referred to the floor.
But If Schumer backs him, it would essentially give Hagel’s views the kosher seal of approval, letting the White House claim that any criticism of his Israel record is a faux controversy drummed up by the GOP. Politically, Schumer probably has an interest in doing this: the White House would owe him a major favor, and he’d be able to dodge a high-profile fight he has a real possibility of losing.
Pro-Israel Democrats should ask themselves this. How did they get to a point where the leader of their party is nominating one of the most anti-Israel senators who ever walked the halls of the Capitol–a man who routinely made the anti-Semitic Washington Report of Middle East Affairs’ annual Congressional Hall of Fame list?
The party is shifting around them. The ranks of the pro-Israel Democrats in Congress are shrinking. Representatives Rothman, Frank, Berman, Ackerman, Weiner, and Senator Joe Lieberman are gone. The advocacy groups and think tanks incubating the next generation of Democratic leaders are increasingly moving against Israel.
There is still a strong up-and-coming generation of pro-Israel Democrats. But they have fewer leaders to look to and fewer roles to fill in the party. If people like Schumer won’t stand up against Hagel, what message would this send to these young activists and operatives working in the trenches? That they should either change their opinions or their party affiliation?
Hagel is the red line. He is the most anti-Israel defense secretary nominee in memory, chosen at a time when Iran is on the verge of nuclear weapons capability. If pro-Israel Democrats cave on his confirmation, what would they possibly stand against?
hellooooooooooooooooooooooooo n nHagel has nothing to do with Israel n ngot that?? n nHagel is a disaster for America-Barry is a disaster for America n nHagel is Barry;s puppet n nStop tying to pretend Hagel can have any power to do anything to Israel or Israel interests. n nit is all about Barry n nSchumer is a 20$ whore n nfeh
Obama's reelection has obviously driven some GOPers over the edge. Sad to watch.
say what?
Actually, I am inclined to agree that the Hagel matter really has nothing to do with Israel — but for a very different reason — Israel qua Israel is really irrelevant in the context of the much larger issue of Israel being essential to AMERICAN national security and a safe/strong Israel being an essential AMERICAN vital interest for AMERICA's SELF INTEREST. n nWhat I am saying is that not only are there a bunch of reasons for American to be supportive of Israel for Israel's sake (including the very real debts from the Cold War era when they were there for us as friends when we needed them) –BUT that there are MORE IMPORTANT reasons for us having a safe & strong Israel — we need them too. WE NEED THEM…. n nThe expression "second star to the right and straight home 'till morning" may come from _Peter Pan_ but the concept dates from the 19th Century Cod Fisheries on Georges' Bank. After a storm goes through the Gulf of Maine, a clear steady NorthWest wind often follows — and the men would be exhausted and tell the 10-12 year old boy (or often girl, the Captain's daughter) to steer by the North Star (which is the only one that doesn't move as the night progresses) and keep the boat running straight (don't tack or anything) "towards home" and we will figure out where we are in the morning. And more importantly — wake us up if anything happens… n nIsrael can not defend the United States, but Israel can "watch our back" and that is something we (America) vitally need. Hence if BHO seeks to weaken AMERICA, weakening Israel could well be part of the means of doing so. n
he represents a Jewish district. They're not whores.
Schumer doesn't represent a district. he's in the Senate.
Yes, in the Senate, representing a State (New York) that has a significant Jewish population, does it not?
I am shocked. It never dawned on me that so-called pro-Israel Democrats would not adamantly oppose the nomination of Chuck Hagel. I prefer to consider myself a cynical observer who is rarely surprised by such behavior. People now have the right to ridicule me. We are finding out that their commitment to left-wing ideology trumps everything else.
If Biden spews any gun control stuff of significance on Tuesday, that may well help the pro-Israel Democrats find their spines. Some, not all, of these pro-Israel Democrats are also in the pro-gun areas of the country, and the gun issue is generally considered what cost Al Gore the 2000 election, it was the one issue that made voters leaning Democrat instead go Republican. n nTake even the two Senators from New York — New York is not a Maine or Vermont — both states where gun ownership is a universally accepted thing — but there is a significant pro-gun fragment of New York State and both Senators have to be worried about being the candidate from the party that is generally perceived to be "wrong" on both Israel and gun rights — and when the Boy President tosses the equivalent of a Molotov Cocktail at both groups at the same time, one has to wonder how many of these Democrats will choose him over their Pro-Israel and Pro-Gun constituent interests. n nI can imagine what Ms. Goodman is hearing from the Pro-Israel Democrats of her age group and I think that her implied assessment is absolutely on the mark. I have no doubt what would happen to a lot of working-class "Union" Democrats were Obama to try some stunt like impose gun control via an Executive Order — I have no doubt that there will be an immediate call for his impeachment, would actually be surprised if it doesn't include several Congressmen if they don't outright introduce something themselves immediately. n nSenators are not stupid. He may be President, but at some point, even Barry Goldwater let go of Nixon and I suspect the Dems will do likewise…
Exactly! Well said!
Yes, Hagel is a disaster for America, and yes so is Obama. If you need further proof, just look who he nominated for this position, for Sec. of State, and for head of the CIA. n nBut in some ways it is even worse for Israel. We in the US have more defenses and resources than Israel, such as distance, strategic depth. a larger pool for military service, and neightbors who are both smaller than our country and at peace with us. Those facts may give the US more time to recover from Obama's mistakes. n nAnd if as you seem to suggest, Hagel's ideas are all Obama's, having Hagel there helps insulate Obama from public pressure. If, as Alana seems to suggest (and as I believe), Hagel is even further off the deep end than Obama, having Hagel in there gives Hagel the opportunity to push Obama to even worse choices than he has already made.
Sometimes I think we need Israel as much as (if not more than) Israel needs us. See above for analogy to the schooner heading back from Georges Bank (due north of the tip of Cape Cod) — and the 10-year-old son or daughter (the Cod fisheries were family businesses) and whose abilities literally are nothing more than holding a wheel, watching a star, and waking the adults up if anything changes — and if you have ever been totally exhausted to the point where you start hallucinating, you will understand how vitally important the 10-year-old was to everyone else. n nIt is not the best of analogies, and I am not being disrespectful to Israel, nor unaware of all the other reasons to support Israel, which I do. But we need allies — and Israel is and has been a dependable one. We need allies in that part of the world, and they are there. And we face a common foe — folks like the nuts in Iran are quite serious about "Little Satan and Big Satan" — the world learned what appeasement does with Hitler — and we need Israel now as much as we needed England during WW-II.
In Maryland, Senator Cardin has a reputation of being pro-Israel. He says the right things but with little enthusiasm. My guess is that if someone asked him how he really felt, he'd be more of a J-Street type than AIPAC. nBut the other question is this: what would be the consequences for these senators to buck the President? They'd probably pay a high price for their perfidy among their colleagues. Is Schumer really going to risk it, even for Israel? nAs you noted with the NJDC's reversal on Hagel, it's becoming more and more difficult to be a pro-Israel Democrat. It's not a good state of affairs for Israel. But the internal contradictions of being pro-Israel and liberal are becoming too great to co-exist at the highest levels.
Certainly the consequences among Jewish Democrat voters would be close to zero if their representatives confirmed Hagel. This election made it crystal clear that most American Jews care zilch about Israel – defined as a willingness to make at least a minor change in their behavior to support Israel. Cardin would lose the Jewish vote if he voted against abortion, gay marriage and leftist Supreme Court nominees, not against Israel. And both he Obama know it.
Make that pro-Israel, pro-gun, and Liberal. n nThe pro-gun people and the pro-Israel people are not the *same* people in most cases, but both will eventually give up on the Liberal Democrat, even if for different reasons, with the result being the same…
If Israel explodes, its just another "bump in the road" for 0bama..
Hit enough bumps, or one really big one, and you drop the transmission out of the car.
Hagel really believes that the policy of President Obama "all options are on the table" should be eliminated and no military option should be considered towards Iran even if it achieves it's nuclear bombs and even if it builds ICBM's pointed at America. n nHe has said on several occasions that a military option would always be wrong. n nHagel has recently changed his views on several untenable major issues, including this one, but he cannot change the perception that his true view is the one he held just before this position made it too costly for him. n nJohn Glaser and Justin Raimondo, who have been leaders in the campaign for Hagel nprecisely because they believe Hagel's true policy is no military option, believe his conversion on this issue is just politics and continue to support him. n nA nuclear Iran has sworn to eliminate Israel and every mosque in Iran has a poster "Death To Israel." n nAfter Iran drops an atomic bomb over Tel Aviv, the issue of whether Hagel is anti-Israel or pro-Israel becomes mute. n nIran has a high tolerance for the deaths of huge numbers of people. The war between Iran and Iraq ostensibly over a territorial dispute concerning 0.1% of Iran's land mass had a million casualties. nIran has spread it's terror all over the globe and has murdered more than a thousand Americans. nIt's ideology is identical to Al Quaeda, amd certainly has America, the Great Satan in it's cross hairs. n nA Hagel confirmation kills any chance of Iran agreeing to stop it's nuclear weapons program through negotiations. why would they take the tremendous political risk of telling their people that years of sanctions privations was for nothing when they know their is no risk of an American military action? n nI believe President Obama's primary motivation in nominating Hagel is that he thinks he would help to deeply cut the Pentagon budget, and not to poke a finger in the eye of the pro-Israel constituency. n nBut it is a very serious miscalculation of unintended consequences. n nSeveral Senators and Congresspeople have made exactly the same objections. n nThe Senate should not confirm Hagel. Senators Gildebrand, Schumer. Lautenberg, Menendez, Boxer, Cardin and many more that take seriously the Iranian threat and have made promises to their constituents on this issue should vote no just for this reason.
The issue is not Hagel but the President program. He will find someone else to carry his agenda. Worst come to worst he may even find a Jew to screw the Jews. There are plenty of them on the left. nThe program is the issue.
Hagel's appeal to Obama is that he is more than alright with a diminished American ability to resist third world crack pots.That they also share Antisemitism is only a plus.
yet another fool calling Obama an anti-Semite. n ngo squat in the ocean. n n
would you settle for anti-israel?
that would be an improvement, but anti-Israeli right-wing would be closer to the truth.
How about anti-Israel except the extreme left wing that has been widely rejected edited by the electorate? That would certainly be even closer to the truth than anti-Israeli right-wing.
maybe you would also say that the Israeli left is anti-Israel? n nwhy can't we agree to say that Hagel strongly disagrees with the positions urged upon the US by the Israeli government and their American supporters…and not make the leap to calling him anti-Israel until there's some actual evidence for the claim?
I read that Politico piece on the two Chucks before this, and before I wrote to my Senators Schumer and Gillibrand to suggest different nominations for SecDef and SecTreas. n nBut, I still disagree that Chuck Hagel as SecDef would be such a "disaster" for either the USA or Israel, even more so after hearing Danny Ayalon's view on PJTV. I just think Ashton Carter or Evan Bayh would be far better choices at the Pentagon, and I have wanted Sheila Bair as SecTreas since 2008. n nCommentary has been over the top on Hagel. He deserves a fair hearing, away from the shrieks of neocons and those who think the USA can not cut a penny from the Defense budget. n nThe battles over Treasury, and EPA, are far more important. n n
fair hearing on what? n nare we not to take what he says seriously? n nI don;t understand what you mean by a fair hearing?
maybe in your memory Alana, you young thing. n ngo and look up Cap Weinberger.
Towards what end? First, the times were different, and second, well, what????
My perspective is entirely political. Since Obama is TROLLING us with every one of his appointees we'd be silly not to fight tooth and nail every step of the way. it needs to get so vicious so cruel so personal that even Balloonhead Chris Matthews will think twice.
personally, Trudy you're troll enough to eat outhouse rats….. by choice.
those rats make their home in uranus. what is your problem?
and it's pretty fair to say that Trudy's home is the same as their's…. and my problem is with the grandiosity of the Empress's pronouncements.
What would happen if Mitt Romney won the election—and picked Chuck Hagel? Let's not kid ourselves. Most of these people who refuse to rebuke Obama would savage a Republican president. Romney would pay an awful political price. These Democrats are intellectual dishonest. They are first, last, and foremost Democratic Party loyalists. It is absurd to allow them to pretend otherwise.
hurray! at least one sane voice! If anyone thinks that Schumer or any other jewish senator will vote against Hagel, thenI have a very big bridge to sell you. Jewish democrats and their voters have sold out their jewish roots long time ago and they would barely shrug if israel-god forbid- goes down the tubes. lots of handwringing and then , please pass the salt, mr. president
Obama will go ahead with his "nuclear-free Middle East" monstrosity whether or not the Senate approves the Hagel nomination. n nObama means to reduce Israel's ability to defend itself against an overwhelming attack. In return for Iran's "promising" to cease enriching uranium (which it can buy from Syria or North Korea!) Israel will be told to dismantle its nuclear weapons, thus creating a "nuclear-free Middle East." If Israel refuses to do Obama's evil bidding, which Netanyahu most certainly will (which explains a good deal about why Obama hates the Israeli PM), then Obama and his new Secretary of State, John Kerry, as well as Susan Rice (still at the UN) will join the assault against Israel from every quarter, labeling the Jewish state "the only obstacle to lasting peace in the Middle East," etc. n nThink Obama wouldn't do something like this? Really? Obama's second term will show us who "Obama Unbound" is, and I'm betting it will be as frightening a prospect as any the United States has faced in all our history. This is not "your average American politician" after all. This is an enraged, Marxist black man, intent on finishing the business Radical Reconstruction never completed, the part about "redistributing white wealth and power," handing as much of both as possible to "former slaves," today joined by "former colonial subjects" and anyone else Obama and his pals deem to have been "oppressed and exploited" by—us. n nAnalyzing history and politics requires sticking to the facts, omitting none, no matter how awkward or "inconvenient." In Obama's case, the above scenario, no matter how outlandish and frightening it may seem, is the only one that explains who Obama is as president. If one regards his words and actions to date as "pieces of a puzzle," and then assembles them into a whole, the finished product will state what I have just written. There is no other way it's going to come out. But one must stick to the words and actions, and omit nothing—which is what the media do.
exactly
Absolutely correct. Obama's father, as portrayed in his revealing book Dreams from my Father, was an enraged Marxist black man bent on punishing white colonial powers (especially the USA and Israel), even more than redistributing their wealth` his son is determined to fulfill his father's "legacy". As several of the talkbacks have noted, Obama and his intentions are the real issue, not the useful (for Obama) idiot Hagel; thus blocking the Hagel nomination in the Senate might have some deterrent effect on Obama Unbound. Unfortunately, the party hack Chuck Schumer, who defended the travesty vote on Jerusalem at the Dem convention, will support Hagel after receiving "assurances" from him at their one-on-one meeting. Hagel will probably assure Schumer that he loves knishes and bagels. Thank you, American Jews, for abandoning and betraying Israel as you rush toward full assimilation and self-induced disappearance. We in Israel will have to somehow get by without you and the Democratic Party. (I'd like to say "with G-d's help", but I'm not sure where He stands on this issue.)
" Absolutely correct. Obama's father, as portrayed in his revealing book Dreams from my Father, was an enraged Marxist black man bent on punishing white colonial powers (especially the USA and Israel), even more than redistributing their wealth`" n nreally? n nObama;s father was a louche, womanizing lazy drunk- whose main characteristic was failure and selfish disregard for Obama for sure. n nToo easy to blame it on the British colonial rulers, or whatever other racist crap anyone wants to regurgitate. His rage, like Obamas' is that he knows he is entitled- n nand because he(they) is so special, it must be the fault of the successful (causasian) racists who have designed their whole civilization n nto deny the natural supremacy of the African (muslim)….whatever. n nAs the Rev Wright said in an amazing moment of total clarity and utter truthfulness: n n………..(insert name)……………………..is not my enemy. n nHe did not put me in chains, n nhe did not put me in slavery, n n and he didn't make me this color n nThese are the issues that cause their rage. n
Remember one other thing — the slaves were captured and sold BY OTHER AFRICANS — the Europeans never went beyond the shoreline, it was other Africans that brought the slaves out and sold them to the Europeans. Remember too that all of Africa is over 1000 feet in elevation which means that there are no natural harbors or ports — spectacular waterfalls, but no natural safe place to anchor a ship, so the captain and crew had to stay really near the ship and be ready to get it offshore if even a thunderstorm brewed. n nHence while American Blacks are said to be descendents of slaves (although not all are), AFRICAN Blacks are the descendents of slave TRADERS — they are the descendents of the people who captured other Africans into slavery and put them in America. Hence any "guilt" upon those who "profited from slavery", it would include folks like Obama. His father's folk profited from slavery by selling other folk into it. n nAnd as to racism — yes. While we consider all Africans to be "Black", they absolutely do not consider themselves to be that, they identify a variety of racial/tribal groups that are identifiable by physical characteristics. And those capturing/selling slaves didn't sell their own tribesmen, they sold persons of other races to the Europeans.
wow……frightening indeed. I must say that good lod Rush has been saying this for years but everyone labeled him an extremist..now, even mainstream commentators like Kraothammer is saying this.
Foam away. He's going to be confirmed, and the sky won't fall.
Piss off. You've been outed as a Jew hater.
sorry besht, Dov Hikind is not exactly part of Schumer's base. Borough Park, Brooklyn voted overwhelmingly for Romney, publicly endorsed by Hikind. n nHikind is Brooklyn's Naftali Bennett
n nIt will be much easier for Gillibrand, who sits on Armed Services, to focus on Hagel's abortion and DADT positions than make Israel the big issue. Meanwhile, Schumer will be far more worried about what to do if Jack Lew's nomination falters. n(Lew's home neighborhood in Riverdale voted about 50-50 for Obama/Romney) n nLast time I checked, about 13% of eligible New York voters self-identify as Jewish. n nBut the only real (in his kishkes) supporter of Israel in the New York delegation is Rep. Eliot Engel. n nRed Lines now appearing all over the world 
nAnd, I insist Hagel EAT kishkes at his confirmation hearing. nKnishes and bagels do not count – both have been assimilated into American nfood culture. nBut, kishkes prove you can eat with Jews 
n n n
K2K–thanks for the info–so Dov publicly had endorsed Romney–they don't need the Democratic machine in Brooklyn? I read somewhere that "guru" Arthur Finklestein encouraged Bibi to believe in the accuracy of Romney's internal polls showing a sure win for the Mittster. ha ha all around. n nAbsolutely! n nSEN CARL LEVIN: Senator Hagel, these clarifications about Iran and so forth are very interesting, but–could we have the plate brought to Mr. Hagel please, very good. n nCHUCK HAGEL: ? n nSENATOR BLUMENTHAL: Those are kishkes. n nSENATOR LEVIN: Have a taste. n nSENATOR BLUMENTHAL; It's OK, they won't bite, the fork is, it's on the napkin right there to your left. n nCHUCK HAGEL: Is it like Polish sausage? n nSENATOR BLUMENTHAL: Try it, you'll like it!
yes, Mark Styne is very astute-he says: n n..something is badly wrong with the American way of war. n nyes n nmake nice after you beat the sh*t out of the enemy and they admit defeat n nIf you go to war don;t go half ways and sacrifice our best and brightest, to the enemy whose major tactic is subterfuge. n nAnd admit and recognize the real enemy-now it is not terrorism-it is islam and the basis of islam, jihad.
You are correct; terrorism is a tactic. The enemy is a political/totalitarian form of religion called Islam. I just wish everyone could understand that and admit it.
eewww … pigs intestines.. all animals are equal, but some animals are more equals than others! n nK2K–again, thanks for the info!! n ncan a straight line be drawn connecting Bibi, Bobover, and fear and loathing over Hagel? I'm getting the-cossacks-are-coming fatigue…
Speaking of pig intestines — pork offal in general — I have long wanted to fill a C-5 with it, fly it over whatever city at maybe 100 feet off the ground in the middle of the night (if we were reasonably certain that no one would be ready/able to shoot it down at that low-vulnerable altitude), and just spin the entire load out the back door. n nSPLAT! n nIn addition to just falling, it is still going to have a forward speed almost that of the plane it came from — 400-500 MPH — and it is going to go absolutely *everywhere* — it will be virtually impossible to get it all cleaned up and within a day or two the city should become quite fragrant as well. And if you have ever heard/felt a C-5 at low altitude, it's impressive if know what it is — and would be truly terrifying if you were still living in the 12 Century. n nThis would be a very subtle statement of what America can do — and implicitly suggesting what more we could do if we wished to.
drop twinkies–not only would that be impressive but tonnage of such unbeatable tasty deliciousness would win hearts and minds away from the dark side
Reichsminister von Hagel will not be the red line for any Democrat, because Democrats only red-line is when you cut their 'gubmit' check off. Democrats are feral beasts, always have been and always will be. Trying to apply intelligence, common sense and logic to such filth as a Democrat voter is a forlorn and pointless effort.
and the DoD budget was about $270B in 2000
you won't be giving away any steaks, but Hagel isn't going to harm the US.