After more than a month of argument over his nomination as secretary of defense, Chuck Hagel faces the first day of his Senate confirmation hearings on Thursday. The administration’s preparation for this event has been thorough, as the former senator has flipped on most of his controversial positions on Israel, Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas and gained the support of some key pro-Israel Democrats like Chuck Schumer. That ought to have been enough to secure his confirmation and the expectation right now is that while the Nebraskan will be roughed up a bit in the hearings, he will still win easily when the votes are counted.
But even the most careful preparations and political groundwork with individual members of the Senate can be blown up by a hearing in which a nominee gives critics new and perhaps damaging ammunition. The advise and consent process can be gamed by a nominee who is willing to disavow many of his previously cherished viewpoints as Hagel has done. Yet if Hagel’s responses to questions lack credibility or come across as obviously insincere, the rumblings about Hagel’s unsuitability to run the Pentagon will get louder. Should the notoriously prickly politician, who is far more used to bullying witnesses at Senate hearings than he is to meekly submitting to such abuse, fire back at his tormentors the result could change the conversation about his nomination.
Those who want to get to the truth about Hagel’s views need to press him closely about what he meant when he bragged about standing up to pressure about the “Jewish lobby.” Does he think, as he previously argued, that the pro-Israel community has disproportionate or wrongful influence over Congress, as he implied? And why did he single out “Jewish” lobbyists as a threat to congressional independence and not other more powerful forces such as the oil lobby (not to mention the pressure put on Congress from the agricultural and corn lobby that drains the federal treasury with unnecessary subsidies)?
The public needs to know why he previously opposed sanctions on Iran. He needs to explain what, other than being nominated to run the Defense Department, made him change his mind about engaging the Islamist regime and protecting it from international pressure to drop its nuclear program. Why did he endorse a study published only a few months ago that sought to rally opposition to using force as even a last resort to stop Iran?
Hagel also must elaborate on why he favored engagement with the terrorists of Hamas and Hezbollah.
These are not minor points or details. While any candidate for high office can be expected to modify their positions on some issues in order to conform to those of the president, it is rare for any nominee to do a 180 on as many issues as Hagel has done in only a few weeks.
As Seth wrote earlier this week, the belief that Hagel is the president’s soul mate on war and peace issues ought to scare the country silly as details of the nominee’s out-of-the-mainstream views on key issues are explored. It may well be that Hagel will control himself and stick to his not-terribly-credible story about a change of heart and skate to confirmation. But should he succumb to the temptation to candidly explain himself, the ensuing fireworks may bring President Obama the first real setback of his second term.
does it matter? n nIf the MSM is in the tank for Barry, and they are n nthe low information voter is only aware of the Republicans kvetching at everything,,and obstructing anything Saint Barry wants to do n nThe non stop lying and spinning, that is characteristic of this administration is becoming depressing and scary. n nWe are watching how a country can be taken over by an unscrupulous demagogue.
Obama's approval is now up to 60%, and the country has never been in worse shape! I just don't get it. I mean, I know we're dealing with a whole lotta low-information voters, but this is getting ridiculous.
Obama is the head of a Cult of Personality. Low information voters are the perfect target for him. All he has to do is play on emotion and wants. Something the Progressives have perfected. Don't confuse them with facts, keep them in a highly agitated state, and give them a target for their rage.
Agree totally with 'charleston' above. Obama is a demagogue, no question. His naming this incompetent nut (I'm being kind) for this crucial position should make everyone in this country frightened. I'm particularly disgusted with (supposed) Jewish congressmen, Boxer, Feinstein, and Schumer. Hagel's record is so dismal, it is really a dangerous insult for him to be offered ANY government post.
His supposedly horrendous statements are mostly accurate.
like what, grumpy n ngive us examples
Very well then. If that's what you believe, but let's see if Hagel has the honesty to reaffirm those statements at the confirmation hearings. Of course , he has already backtracked considerably so he can get his coveted job. What does that make him? Let me tell you what that makes him: Not only is he a little tin pot Nazi, he is a gutless and cowardly one as well. That should be about your speed Grumpy_Old_Man.
The guy's a "nazi"? A senator won't sign some silly AIPAC letter, and he's a nazi? n nA bit unhinged, I'd say.
eat shit, your brain-o-meter's running low. time to recharge n nthat's a pun, also mostly accurate
actually Jonathan, the first major setback of Obama's second term was the circuit (or appeals?) court ruling that Obama's recess appointments were unconstitutional. (paging Chief Justice Roberts: that's how it's done!)
Churchill said , " In a democracy, the people get what the majority deserve." Judging from the low quality intellects leading this nation, one can draw the inevitable conclusions regarding the electorate.
Beinhart's "red diaper baby burblings". You pegged Beinhart to a tee.
Michael row your boat ashore, aleleujah, Michael row your boat ashore… n n
Beinart's tweet that Hagel makes Biden look articulate (my paraphrase) is the only true thing Beinart has expressed, ever.
Wow! This Hagel is one truly evil SOB. Can we please have Panetta back? This second Obama administration is shaping up in such a way that the seemingly impossible has occurred: I'm actually waxing nostalgic for the FIRST Obama administration. My goodness!