The world of politics is increasingly bizarre. Republicans are leading the battle against confirmation of President Obama's nomination of Republican Chuck Hagel for Secretary of Defense.
Readers of this column know that I'm a card-carrying Democrat. But I have liked Chuck Hagel since his days as a Nebraska senator. Think of it - a former Army infantry squad leader, Vietnam veteran with two Purple Hearts, solid record as a senator from America's heartland, thoughtful, and sees war as only a last resort. And opposed by neo-cons and conservatives as "too soft," reluctant to go to war.
Yes, some Democrats, including New York's Sen. Schumer, one of the more intelligent of that august body, are luke warm, at best. But the opposition is led by Republicans.
I'm not a combat veteran, but as a former enlisted Marine, confess to an enlisted man's bias. It would be refreshing and good for the country to have the nation's top defense post filled by an enlisted combat veteran who sees war as something beyond an abstraction. Being an infantry squad leader is not by itself qualification for Secretary of Defense, but Hagel has a track record that makes him an ideal choice for this difficult post.
Let's take a look at some of the disingenuous attacks on this choice.
There are some rumblings about Obama's "lack of diversity" in his recent nominees. How asinine can his critics get? Half of Obama's White House staff is female, both his choices for the Supreme Court were female, and the list of women, African-Americans, Hispanics and other minorities for cabinet and other high posts is too long to list here. The last thing this president can be criticized for is his recent nominations of a couple of white males.
Then there is a remark that Hagel made a decade or more ago discouraging appointment of a gay man to a major post. Hagel has long since apologized. The attitude of the entire nation has, thankfully, progressed in these matters. First, it's a matter of fairness. If that isn't enough, it's a matter of pragmatism. We need all the talent we can get; especially for the volunteer military when war is no longer a matter of shared national sacrifice. Let's accept Hagel's apology and changed attitude as sincere, and move forward.
Critics charge that Hagel is "anti-Semitic," and insufficiently supportive of Israel. This doubtlessly stems partly from an observation he once made of the power of the "Jewish Lobby." It is actually the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
Critics charge him with making a "stupid mistake." Considering stupidity and mistakes in Washington, on a scale of one to 10 with 10 being the most stupid, Hagel's "mistake" rates no more than a one or a two.
The AIPAC is very powerful and effective. Politicians listen to it. Hagel was stating a well-known fact. How terrible.
Now, the real reason for his opposition. Although as senator he voted in favor of the invasion of Iraq, he did so reluctantly, to retain ostensibly more diplomatic bargaining power. Much to the chagrin of fellow Republicans, he was critical of "The Surge," and doubts the wisdom of invading Iran.
It is his opposing philosophy relative to neo-cons, people like Richard Cheney, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and Paul Wolfowitz, chief architects of the invasion of Iraq that rankles Republicans. This group also includes Elliot Abrams, former National Security Advisor under Bush, and hard right opinion leader, William Kristol.
This entire crew does not between them have five minutes in a military chow line. The firearms experience of Mr. Cheney includes peppering his hunting pal with birdshot on a hunting preserve. Heck, we all make mistakes. Mr. Cheney's buddy apologized for getting in the way.
No kidding - you can't make this stuff up. It would be accepted by a Hollywood scriptwriter only as high comedy or farce. This crew of neo-cons who love war, as long as they can remain at safe distance, preferably on the opposite side of the planet, see combat veteran Chuck Hagel as "too soft," too cautious regarding possible invasion of Iran, reluctant to commit young men and women to war.
Then there is South Carolina's Sen. Graham who occasionally shows inklings of intelligence, but not lately. He opines that Mr. Hagel's views are too far "out of the mainstream." Heaven forbid that we should have a high political appointee who can think independently and offer more than the usual bromides, platitudes, and clichés of the accepted wisdom.
As a professor at the University of Minnesota, I was on loan to the Feds for a year as Economic Advisor to the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works). Having followed this stuff, and run for public office myself, I have a pretty good idea of how it works.
During the confirmation process, the senators, Republican and Democrat alike, will thoroughly grill him on each of the above points, and more. Television media stars will put each question and answer under the microscope, blow much of it way out of proportion and, with furrowed brow, treat us to their "expert analysis."
In the end, Hagel will be confirmed. I predict that even the normally sane and intelligent Schumer - actually, I like the guy - having duly played to his constituency, will, out of loyalty to the president, vote "aye."
I don't know about Graham. As an Air Force Reserve officer, he certainly must know that Hagel is superbly qualified for the post.
In the Marine Corps, senior NCOs used to, in their inimitable fashion, admonish us privates and PFCs to "Knock off the grabass." OK, Senators, go through your charade. Then, knock off the grabass and confirm Hagel for Secretary of Defense.
A man in charge of the Defense Department who knows what war is about - good for the military and good for the nation at large.
- John Waelti's column appears every Friday in the Times. He can be reached at jjwaelti1@tds.net.
Readers of this column know that I'm a card-carrying Democrat. But I have liked Chuck Hagel since his days as a Nebraska senator. Think of it - a former Army infantry squad leader, Vietnam veteran with two Purple Hearts, solid record as a senator from America's heartland, thoughtful, and sees war as only a last resort. And opposed by neo-cons and conservatives as "too soft," reluctant to go to war.
Yes, some Democrats, including New York's Sen. Schumer, one of the more intelligent of that august body, are luke warm, at best. But the opposition is led by Republicans.
I'm not a combat veteran, but as a former enlisted Marine, confess to an enlisted man's bias. It would be refreshing and good for the country to have the nation's top defense post filled by an enlisted combat veteran who sees war as something beyond an abstraction. Being an infantry squad leader is not by itself qualification for Secretary of Defense, but Hagel has a track record that makes him an ideal choice for this difficult post.
Let's take a look at some of the disingenuous attacks on this choice.
There are some rumblings about Obama's "lack of diversity" in his recent nominees. How asinine can his critics get? Half of Obama's White House staff is female, both his choices for the Supreme Court were female, and the list of women, African-Americans, Hispanics and other minorities for cabinet and other high posts is too long to list here. The last thing this president can be criticized for is his recent nominations of a couple of white males.
Then there is a remark that Hagel made a decade or more ago discouraging appointment of a gay man to a major post. Hagel has long since apologized. The attitude of the entire nation has, thankfully, progressed in these matters. First, it's a matter of fairness. If that isn't enough, it's a matter of pragmatism. We need all the talent we can get; especially for the volunteer military when war is no longer a matter of shared national sacrifice. Let's accept Hagel's apology and changed attitude as sincere, and move forward.
Critics charge that Hagel is "anti-Semitic," and insufficiently supportive of Israel. This doubtlessly stems partly from an observation he once made of the power of the "Jewish Lobby." It is actually the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
Critics charge him with making a "stupid mistake." Considering stupidity and mistakes in Washington, on a scale of one to 10 with 10 being the most stupid, Hagel's "mistake" rates no more than a one or a two.
The AIPAC is very powerful and effective. Politicians listen to it. Hagel was stating a well-known fact. How terrible.
Now, the real reason for his opposition. Although as senator he voted in favor of the invasion of Iraq, he did so reluctantly, to retain ostensibly more diplomatic bargaining power. Much to the chagrin of fellow Republicans, he was critical of "The Surge," and doubts the wisdom of invading Iran.
It is his opposing philosophy relative to neo-cons, people like Richard Cheney, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and Paul Wolfowitz, chief architects of the invasion of Iraq that rankles Republicans. This group also includes Elliot Abrams, former National Security Advisor under Bush, and hard right opinion leader, William Kristol.
This entire crew does not between them have five minutes in a military chow line. The firearms experience of Mr. Cheney includes peppering his hunting pal with birdshot on a hunting preserve. Heck, we all make mistakes. Mr. Cheney's buddy apologized for getting in the way.
No kidding - you can't make this stuff up. It would be accepted by a Hollywood scriptwriter only as high comedy or farce. This crew of neo-cons who love war, as long as they can remain at safe distance, preferably on the opposite side of the planet, see combat veteran Chuck Hagel as "too soft," too cautious regarding possible invasion of Iran, reluctant to commit young men and women to war.
Then there is South Carolina's Sen. Graham who occasionally shows inklings of intelligence, but not lately. He opines that Mr. Hagel's views are too far "out of the mainstream." Heaven forbid that we should have a high political appointee who can think independently and offer more than the usual bromides, platitudes, and clichés of the accepted wisdom.
As a professor at the University of Minnesota, I was on loan to the Feds for a year as Economic Advisor to the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works). Having followed this stuff, and run for public office myself, I have a pretty good idea of how it works.
During the confirmation process, the senators, Republican and Democrat alike, will thoroughly grill him on each of the above points, and more. Television media stars will put each question and answer under the microscope, blow much of it way out of proportion and, with furrowed brow, treat us to their "expert analysis."
In the end, Hagel will be confirmed. I predict that even the normally sane and intelligent Schumer - actually, I like the guy - having duly played to his constituency, will, out of loyalty to the president, vote "aye."
I don't know about Graham. As an Air Force Reserve officer, he certainly must know that Hagel is superbly qualified for the post.
In the Marine Corps, senior NCOs used to, in their inimitable fashion, admonish us privates and PFCs to "Knock off the grabass." OK, Senators, go through your charade. Then, knock off the grabass and confirm Hagel for Secretary of Defense.
A man in charge of the Defense Department who knows what war is about - good for the military and good for the nation at large.
- John Waelti's column appears every Friday in the Times. He can be reached at jjwaelti1@tds.net.
