Chuck Hagel the right man at the right time
Chuck Hagel has always defied categorization, which is one reason I’ve liked and respected him.
Of course, that also explains why Hagel’s nomination as defense secretary faces opposition from elements of both political parties. Washington likes people who can be “counted on,” meaning that they adhere to the brightly defined lines that are used to distinguish “us” from “them.” People such as Hagel, who pay little attention to such lines, are viewed with suspicion and distrust by some.
In Hagel’s case, he is Republican, but according to conservatives not a “real” Republican. He is a war veteran who earned two Purple Hearts in Vietnam as an enlisted Army infantryman, but his thoughts on foreign policy reveal a sophisticated doubt about the usefulness of war. Although he voted in favor of the invasion of Iraq, he quickly became a harsh critic of the conduct of that war. Most of all, Hagel is a questioner by nature, and he is more willing to follow where the answers lead him than are most in the nation’s Capitol.
I strongly disagree with Hagel on some points, particularly on his willingness to defer to intelligence and law enforcement when constitutional rights supposedly conflict with national security concerns. Back in the late ’90s, Hagel also publicly opposed the nomination of James Hormel as a U.S. ambassador on the grounds that Hormel was “”openly, aggressively gay.”
Those words reflected a depth of homophobia that did not speak well of Hagel. But it is also true that the country as a whole has moved a long way on gay rights in the past two decades, and if Hagel has moved along with it, as he now claims, that should not disqualify him from high service.
On the other hand, the claim by some that Hagel is somehow anti-Israel or even anti-Semitic because he has been willing to question the decisions of Israeli political leadership is and always has been nonsense. Nothing that Hagel has said or done on such issues places him outside the mainstream in this country or even in Israel itself, and certainly do not disqualify him from service as U.S. defense secretary.
Hagel’s nomination comes at an important point in this nation’s military and foreign-policy history. The world has changed; our relative position in the world has changed as well. But those changes are not yet reflected in our defense structure, policy and ideology. By his background, intellect and questioning nature, Hagel is well-suited to that role.
Politically speaking, the Hagel nomination also plays into the meta-narrative that the White House appears to be spinning these days. By nominating a Republican ex-senator to a top Cabinet position, Obama can claim credit for a gesture of bipartisanship. To the degree that Senate Republicans erupt in outrage, attempting to bar their former colleague from service on grounds of being insufficiently conservative, they cement their image as extremists unwilling to compromise. So it will be interesting to watch how they play this.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
448 comments Add your comment
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 8th, 2013
8:56 am
A comment from my friend Gabe: “And Forrest Gump is continuing to kick Rudy’s ass.”
stands for decibels
January 8th, 2013
8:56 am
UnU @ 8.48, nice find, thanks. (Jean Genie is kind of a throwaway tune, to me, but it’s off my favorite DB lp, Alladin Sane…)
DannyX
January 8th, 2013
8:56 am
“You mean like blaming Bush for pretty much everything wrong in the the country 4 years after he left office?”
You poor thing, you really have been traumatized.
RB from Gwinnett
January 8th, 2013
8:58 am
“Obama is the President of Tunisia???”
No, and apparently his diplomatic standing there ain’t worth a crap either.
I wonder if ignoring stuff like this is what he meant by a “new tone” in our relations in the region. “new tone” must be code for “bury your head in the sand and do nothing”
Mick
January 8th, 2013
8:58 am
rb
Yes, it’s true, bush is the gift that keeps on giving
Jm
January 8th, 2013
8:58 am
“This is becoming so customary—seven SEC teams crowned national champions in a row. All of that conference braggadocio doesn’t sound like braggadocio anymore. It sounds like common sense.”
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 8th, 2013
8:59 am
“No, and apparently his diplomatic standing there ain’t worth a crap either.”
diplomatic schmiplomatic – he is not the president of that country and can’t control what they do.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
January 8th, 2013
9:01 am
alex
January 8th, 2013
8:43 am
I think you will get your fill during senate confirmation process. I like his positions on prior involvement in middle east and his seemingly contrarian pespective. We will know more in short order..
I think the Brennan nomination will be more contentious..
Mick
January 8th, 2013
9:02 am
Rep allan greyson tells it like it is-
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/07/rep-grayson-mocks-bath-salts-caucus-for-voting-against-sandy-relief/
Granny Godzilla
January 8th, 2013
9:03 am
RB
Wanna bomb Tunisia?
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 8th, 2013
9:04 am
“Wanna bomb Tunisia?”
noooooooooooo!!! Star Wars!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Star_Wars_in_Tunisia.jpg
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
January 8th, 2013
9:05 am
Mick
January 8th, 2013
8:58 am
Bush is a low bar and you BO supporters should bear this in mind…last thing you want is to have BO’s legacy become (continue perhaps)a comparision to BUSH. Why not compare your guy to Clinton?
Despite BO’s carrying on about how Clintons economic policies are the template for growth, the contrast suggests he has already forgotten those particular tactics..
Welcome to the Occupation
January 8th, 2013
9:13 am
alex: “And what is a “meta-narrative”. Moronic writing as usual…..”
Wow, cranky this morning, aren’t we?
Mick
January 8th, 2013
9:14 am
stevie
I was just reminicing about the bad old days under bush, it just always seemed that everything wrong was always his fault. Kind of nice to have that punching bag. Of course, he did leave the country bankrupt and in disgrace. Obama is no where close to that. I do apologize for one thing that I always thought bush had power over and that’s gas prices – I was wrong! Big oil is more powerful than any president of the united states. When it comes to oil prices, they and speculators have a free hand…
St Simons - aboriginal Bootakook 2014
January 8th, 2013
9:15 am
“plays into the meta-narrative”
i don’t know why, but that just creeps me out, knowing that AM talk
radio gobbledy-gook has crept so far into ‘merka’s cultural lexicon.
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 8th, 2013
9:16 am
“And what is a “meta-narrative”
I never meta-narrative I didn’t like?
Regnad Kcin
January 8th, 2013
9:19 am
“Nope! If td determines something, then, by his all powerful knowledge, he is never wrong. So, do not question the wise and great one lest ye be pounded by his vast depository of fact”
Bro – I’m sure you meant “suppository of fact”…
Joe Hussein Mama
January 8th, 2013
9:20 am
Towncrier — “And don’t we all know that.”
Pretty clearly *you* don’t, since you sought to do it yet again.
“Let’s establish where we are on this debate. I think this Wiki article summarizes it well enough:”
Where we are on this debate is that you asserted that I was taking Lembcke’s position. You were wrong, since I either don’t care about Lembcke’s position or outright disagree with it on three of four counts, PLUS I didn’t even bring him up. You did.
You then cited an extensive postby a gentleman named Lindgren on Eugene Volokh’s blog as being evidence that Vietnam vets *had* been spit on, so I followed up on the first three claims in his post.
Not a single one panned out; in fact, at least one of them may possibly have been fabricated.
You then became conciliatory and suggested that I contact Volokh (or the author of the post) directly. I attempted to do just that; neither man responded (assuming I even have their correct e-mail addresses).
Long story short, you *still* haven’t presented any substantive, documentary evidence, and despite your apparent emotional investment in the topic, you clearly can’t be bothered to follow up on any of Volokh’s evidence *yourself,* as I’ve suggested you do on more than one occasion. I’m not the only one here who can perform web searches or pick up a telephone, and I think it’s high time you did just that rather than continuing to demand that others dance to your tune.
“Last time we discussed this, I suggested you actually contact Lindgren and see if he could not provide you with copies (if he had them of the articles he cites). If you haven’t, perhaps I will.”
I’ve made the attempt, and I recommend you do the same. While you’re at it, why don’t you also try substantiating some of the claims he made in that post, as I’ve asked you to do more than once?
“As I said, I have a hard time imagining how a prominent law professor would publicly cite articles as evidence (with the name of the paper and dates) that did not actually exist – to publicly make things up, in other words”
So do I, which is why I haven’t accused him of making anything up in the first place.
I’ve questioned his evidence and I’ve suggested that you try to follow up on some of his claims as well.
“But you apparently do not.”
You are a liar, sir. I have never once suggested that any of Lindgren’s ‘evidence’ was made up.
“That has been the main point of contention between us. I am surprised that, if Lindgren was lying, he has not been debunked by now. Perhaps no one cares enough to investigate. Or maybe he wasn’t lying. Ina any case, we cannot both be right, just as Lembcke and Lindgren cannot be right. Since the former is essentially trying to prove a negative, all that is required to invalidate his claims is to validate even some of Lindgren’s.”
Which I’ve challenged you to do more than once.
“Let me see if I cannot validate two or three of his sources independently (if I am unable to contact Lindgren). Obviously, it will be hard to do if archived articles are not freely available on the Internet. It will require calling the publishers (if they still exist) and seeing if they will mail me a copy of the article(s) or paying for subscriptions.”
I wish you good luck in your search. Had you been as forthcoming and collegial in conducting your own search several months ago, I’d probably have a much better opinion of you today.
The other half of your brain.
January 8th, 2013
9:22 am
Jay would support Adolph Hitler if Obama nominated him.
Tundra Dude
January 8th, 2013
9:22 am
Thomas heyward Jr., wrote:
Hagel’s peace/anti-empire backers will be silenced when Hagel does as he is told (as he must) and continues, possibly expands, the disastrous policies of this administration.
Exactly. As one former White House operative (whose name escapes me) put it: “Foreign Policy is always passed seamlessly from one administration to the next”.
Imo, if the truth were known, neither the prez nor the Sec of Defense are the real Deciders.
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 8th, 2013
9:24 am
“Jay would support Adolph Hitler if Obama nominated him”
and once again, half-a-brain lives up to his name.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 8th, 2013
9:24 am
J. Reb — “If you, Jay and other Moonbats are OK with that, then that’s your choice. I am not.”
Dude, I simply asked you what you meant.
Grow a thicker skin if you’re going to hang around on the Internet.
Granny Godzilla
January 8th, 2013
9:24 am
The other half of your brain.
January 8th, 2013
9:22 am
Jay would support Adolph Hitler if Obama nominated him.
.
.
.
.
When pigs fly.
Got wings?
GT
January 8th, 2013
9:24 am
Obama is once again brilliant in his selections. He puts into the debate elements of the Republican mantra that they themselves have to either defend or object to. Hagel nomination is a good one in that he is very capable, but the right has to object to his gay comments. His CIA candidate has supported water boarding another awkward position for the right to object to. O is almost comical he is so brilliant.
Paul
January 8th, 2013
9:26 am
“Jay would support Adolph Hitler if Obama nominated him.”
Another stellar example by a regular here who just knows he’s saying something stunningly stupid but just can’t help himself, who does have the minimal presence of mind to know that if he used his regular moniker he’d be thought of even less than he already is.
Welcome to the Occupation
January 8th, 2013
9:28 am
Tundra Dude: “Foreign Policy is always passed seamlessly from one administration to the next”
As does almost every other major area of policy, the only exception any more being certain matterws of identity politics (DMA, DODT, etc.).
In general, the Democrats and the Republicans are just two sides of the same hand doing the same work for the US ruling government elite and their cohorts in the financial sphere.
I’m with USin and FOR a meta-narrative-free zone here at the Bookman blog.
The other half of your brain.
January 8th, 2013
9:28 am
Mick
January 8th, 2013
9:14 am
stevie
I was just reminicing about the bad old days under bush, it just always seemed that everything wrong was always his fault. Kind of nice to have that punching bag. Of course, he did leave the country bankrupt and in disgrace. Obama is no where close to that. I do apologize for one thing that I always thought bush had power over and that’s gas prices – I was wrong! Big oil is more powerful than any president of the united states. When it comes to oil prices, they and speculators have a free hand…
” Mickey, Did you return the 2 checks that Bush sent you? thought not! Obama has us deeper in depth than all the Bush’s put together, I guess you also forgot about Fast & Furious and Benghazi.
Mick
January 8th, 2013
9:32 am
half
Yeah, those checks helped put us deeper in debt for sure…where was the iced tea party then? Oh, right, we didn’t have an african american president then…
The other half of your brain.
January 8th, 2013
9:33 am
Paul
January 8th, 2013
9:26 am
“Jay would support Adolph Hitler if Obama nominated him.”
Another stellar example by a regular here who just knows he’s saying something stunningly stupid but just can’t help himself, who does have the minimal presence of mind to know that if he used his regular moniker he’d be thought of even less than he already is.
” Pauly, if the truth hurts, try an anal ointment. I don’t support anyone who doesn’t like Gays or the Jewish race.
I still believe that Jay would support anyone who Obama appointments, and your wrong about who you think I am, I wish I had your crystal ball.
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 8th, 2013
9:34 am
“Fast & Furious and Benghazi”
both added together are nowhere NEAR the mendacity of the Iraq war.
The other half of your brain.
January 8th, 2013
9:34 am
Mick
January 8th, 2013
9:32 am
half
Yeah, those checks helped put us deeper in debt for sure…where was the iced tea party then? Oh, right, we didn’t have an african american president then…
” Mick, would you rather the checks go to Wall Street & the Bankers?
The other half of your brain.
January 8th, 2013
9:37 am
USinUK – not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 8th, 2013
9:34 am
“Fast & Furious and Benghazi”
both added together are nowhere NEAR the mendacity of the Iraq war.
Usin, Absolutely true, but Obama still has us in Afghanistan and he promised to bring our troops home, I guess he just didn’t say when, until a year ago. I have stated on here that the war was wrong.
weetamoe
January 8th, 2013
9:38 am
Hagel is a very angry, not too bright political opportunist. His positions on don’t ask don’t tell and abortion (he has consistently opposed it even in cases of rape and incest) would seem to be at odds with Obama’s views. But then who knows what Obama’s views are. He pivots so often, he might one day find himself spinning in the opposite direction or straight into the ground. In the meantime, you might want to ask Ambassador Hormel about Hagel’s *courage.*
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 8th, 2013
9:38 am
“” Mick, would you rather the checks go to Wall Street & the Bankers?”
I love people who live in a binary world.
Welcome to the Occupation
January 8th, 2013
9:39 am
For that matter, Tundra, very little of government is actually about solving problems, but is rather more about preserving a status quo by making gestures and nice sounds to the people sort of in the manner of a snake charmer, Their goal is to simply make a status quo which is based on the privilege of certain groups at the expense of other groups last on into the future indefinitely. And to the extent that they undertake certain actions, it is almost always in the interest of some larger project to re-consolidate their power (e.g. the US ruling elite’s efforts to end Jim Crow in the South in the 1950s was not in the end so much about moral outrage at the injustice of that system but was more about consolidating the global project of capitalism in the Cold War when the presence of such injustice right in capitalism’s backyard as it were began to pose major problems in furthering the solidarity that was needed abroad to advance that struggle).
Joe Hussein Mama
January 8th, 2013
9:40 am
USinUK — “I left Girl Scouts because of macrame.”
There’s an ointment for that now.
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 8th, 2013
9:41 am
” abortion (he has consistently opposed it even in cases of rape and incest)”
last time I checked, SecDef doesn’t have any say in the abortion debate, so his opinions on the issue are moot.
what it DOES demonstrate (yet again), that the Dems are willing to work with people who have differing opinions than they do.
The other half of your brain.
January 8th, 2013
9:41 am
Well at least you love somebody.
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 8th, 2013
9:42 am
JHM – “There’s an ointment for that now.”
seriously. macrame. what kind of life skill is THAT, I ask you??!!
Paul
January 8th, 2013
9:44 am
other half
“and your wrong about who you think I am, I wish I had your crystal ball.”
Never said the moniker you normally post under.
Just described the characteristic: ” who just knows he’s saying something stunningly stupid but just can’t help himself”
Joe Hussein Mama
January 8th, 2013
9:45 am
Maher will donate $5 million to ‘Hair Club’ for proof Trump not ‘spawn’ of orangutan
HBO comedian Bill Maher on Monday mocked Donald Trump’s absurd offer of $5 million if President Barack Obama could prove that he was a U.S. citizen by pledging $5 million to the “Hair Club for Men” or “Institute for Incorrigible Douchebaggery” if the billionaire could simply provide evidence that his mother didn’t have sex with an orangutan.
In an interview on NBC’s Tonight Show, Maher told Jay Leno that he was glad Trump “lied” and never kept scheduled appearances on his HBO show “because he turned out to be such a terrible racist.”
“I’m not looking for a feud with Donald Trump and I certainly wish only the best for syphilitic monkey who does his Twitter feed,” he explained.
Read it all, plus see the video, right here: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/08/maher-will-donate-5-million-to-hair-club-for-proof-trump-not-spawn-of-orangutan/
Paul
January 8th, 2013
9:46 am
(other half – but your penchant for adding a ‘y’ to the end of other monikers and your obsession with anything anal does give a clue)
Joe Hussein Mama
January 8th, 2013
9:47 am
USinUK — “seriously. macrame. what kind of life skill is THAT, I ask you??!!”
Entry-level position on some sort of sailboat, perhaps? They need crew who know their knots, right?
Regnad Kcin
January 8th, 2013
9:47 am
““” Mick, would you rather the checks go to Wall Street & the Bankers?”’
I’d rather they go to charity, or research, or building roads. But why do you ask? It seems like such a silly question…
Regnad Kcin
January 8th, 2013
9:48 am
“seriously. macrame. what kind of life skill is THAT, I ask you??!!”
But what am I supposed to do with all these unhung plants?
Tundra Dude
January 8th, 2013
10:02 am
Welcome-Occupation:
For that matter, Tundra, very little of government is actually about solving problems, but is rather more about preserving a status quo by making gestures and nice sounds to the people sort of in the manner of a snake charmer,
Say it ain’t so….
(just hush…..ya might be accused of being a domestic terrorist)
GT
January 8th, 2013
10:11 am
One of the reasons I, and Jay, support Obama’s selection is we voted for him, we think like him and his selections many times reflect our and, more important, the majority of the nation’s beliefs. The right has no problem stopping a train full of people, so one passenger can get on or off, to us that train is going our direction and to our destination. That is why we both the ticket in the first place.
LarsX
January 9th, 2013
6:13 pm
“I guess Jay received his marching orders…”
Well, they certainly weren’t from AIPAC.