Skip to comments.Hagel: A Petty Pick (Did Obama choose him out of spite?)
Posted on 01/09/2013 6:34:29 AM PST by SeekAndFindEdited on 01/09/2013 6:41:12 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
It’s official. President Obama has named former senator Chuck Hagel (R., Neb.) as his nominee for secretary of defense. Hence, we may be in store for the worst defense-secretary-nomination fight since George H. W. Bush’s failed appointment of Senator John Tower (R., Texas) more than 20 years ago.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
He does every thing out of spite!
Did Jonah leave out an R in pick?
One of several reasons.
2) Telegraph to the Islamists that Obama wants one of those “long term truces” to give him breathing space to build his Socialist Nirvana.
3) Gut Defense spending while putting a GOP fig leaf on it.
4) Spark an early battle to light a fire under Harry Reid to do the nuclear option on filibusters.
People really have this wrong. Hagel is a leftist, that’s why he was chosen. His being a republican is meant to serve as cover.
This guy will get our allies killed and bring new strength to our enemies. That’s what they do.
The Republicans set the rules when they rubberstamped Obama’s SCourt nominee. Hagel is “qualified”. Let it go.
The sickest headline I think I’ve ever seen was last night as I went in the gas station to pay for my gas. I don’t know if it was the Lincoln Journal-Star or the Omaha World-Herald, but the headline was “Obama: Troops Deserve Hagel”
Obama has nothing but contempt for US troops - which stands to reason, for a foreign enemy combatant who was put into our White House through a communist-Islamist alliance making threats to the conservative media while committing myriads of crimes (all for the purpose of furthering the mutual goals of Islam and communism: the destruction of the US and Israel).
His open contempt for both Israel and US troops is disgusting. He is flaunting the fact that the entire Congress has been castrated. If any one of them had the guts to out the fact that Hawaii has indirectly certified that Obama’s HI BC is legally non-valid and Obama thus has no legally-established birth facts and cannot have ever “qualified” as required by the 20th Amendment... it would take that sickening smirk off the enemy’s face, at least for a moment.
Spot on......and the morons in the Senate who will vote for him ought to be ashamed of themselves.
National Review has no credibility in voicing concern over Hagel. Just two days ago NRO’s house muslim, Reihan Salam, wrote about how it would be a mistake for Republicans to go to war with Obama over Hagel’s nomination. This is Salam’s justification for going soft on Hagel:
“Hagel represents a symbolic departure, which might appeal to socially moderate former Republicans who see the contemporary GOP as too extreme or, in some cases, too invested in the U.S. partnership with Israel.”
RE: National Review has no credibility in voicing concern over Hagel.
National Review is NOT a monolith composed of columnist who always agree with each other. They even have in-house debates on issues which they publish PUBLICLY.
It’s exactly a “screw you” pick. Everything Obama does is going to be like that for the next four years. And he’ll succeed every time. The Dems are not going to oppose him and the Republicans don’t have the strength, unity, or determination to stop him.
Get used to saying “thank you Sir I’d like another.”
He’s “Republican” in the same sense that the Westboro aholes are “Baptists”.
“...the worst defense secretary-nomination fight since George H. W. Bushs failed appointment of Senator John Tower (R., Texas) more than 20 years ago.”
No comparison at all. John Tower was a patriot.
National Review used to have debates about different conservative perspectives. They now seem to be staffing their publication with various RINO and other squishy moderates for the purpose of having a debate over conservatism vs. liberalism. While a few writers like VDH and Andrew McCarthy remain unabashed conservatives, when Buckley moderated Firing Line there was never any question that he was taking the conservative perspective. With Lowry and Goldberg in charge, the real conservative writers now spend more time defending their views against other NRO writers than taking on the liberals. As a former long-time subscriber to NR, I have been very disappointed with the direction that publication has taken since Buckley passed away.