Skip to main content

View Diary: The problem with Chuck Hagel (216 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  well (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Alexandre, poco, Not A Bot

    the primay job ois to lead the national defense, its not to determine lgbt policy. i suspect the social policy would be spearheaded by obama
    so if you are making your argument based on your perception of his attitude towards gays, that may not be the best metric.

    Obama 2012...going to win it with our support!!!

    by mattinjersey on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 06:19:08 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Not just LGBT people (7+ / 0-)

      He has 19th century social attitudes about women and racial minorities as well. You can't tell me that somebody thinking in such a backward manner is going to be an effective leader. WWII, for example, was a racist war. Hitler lost because he decided that England and America were soft. He thought Russians were sub human. Japan did the same thing, they assumed that the US didn't have a stomach for war so they attacked, even though everybody knew they couldn't compete with American industrial strength. They attacked based on the assumption that we were too "decadent" to fight back. Many Americans were slaughtered because they had some stupid, racist ideas about Japanese enemy soldiers and their own African American divisions. I don't want somebody in that position to be making similar assumptions about Iran, for example, based on stereotypes.

      "Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for a real Republican every time." Harry Truman

      by MargaretPOA on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 06:27:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, and his anti-gay comments (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Anorish, Alexandre

      were from the 90s. It was a different time. Clinton signed DOMA, and now he gets props from the LGBT community for recently coming out for gay marriage.

      Hagel's apology for his slurs against the ambassador seemed sincere, and the ambassador accepted the apology.

      Asking about his current views on DADT repeal are proper and important (he says he supports it), but I think we should move past the stuff from the 90s

      You never trust a millionaire/Quoting the sermon on the mount/I used to think I was not like them/But I'm beginning to have my doubts -- The Arcade Fire

      by tomjones on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 06:34:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Fair Enough (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        politicalceci, sidnora, LSophia

        I haven't researched his previous statements but say we give him the benefit of the doubt that he's changed and forgive his past statements?  That doesn't answer the question of (if Hagel is nominated) why President Obama didn't find a Democrat to fill the position.  

        I'm tired of Republican Presidents giving us Transportation while Democratic Presidents offer Republicans Defense and Treasury.

        If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid.

        by Senor Frog on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 06:54:14 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Correct me if I'm wrong (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LSophia, Zack from the SFV

          but Leon Panetta, current Sec of Def, is a Democrat.

          You never trust a millionaire/Quoting the sermon on the mount/I used to think I was not like them/But I'm beginning to have my doubts -- The Arcade Fire

          by tomjones on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 07:01:30 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  And Democrat Is How That Position (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            politicalceci, 4Freedom, LSophia, sfbob

            needs to stay.  There is no need to give such an important position back (see: previous SoD Gates) to Republicans so they can pat themselves on the back that they are still king of national security.

            Perception is important.  If Democratic Presidents continue to play this game, they handicap their own party.  

            If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid.

            by Senor Frog on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 07:18:37 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  He used to be my Representative (0+ / 0-)

               as a Democratic House member from the Monterey Bay area on the central California coast. I voted for him the first time he was elected when I was an eighteen year old freshman at UC Santa Cruz. Panetta was a good Congressman who kept in close contact with his district. He voted fairly progressively on issues which represented the views of his constituents.  Of course being in Congress is a very different job from being the head of the CIA or Defense Department.

            Diehard Swingnut, disgruntled Democrat, age 54, new CA-30

            by Zack from the SFV on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 11:23:08 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  he got 0% ratings (5+ / 0-)

        from the human rights campaign from 2005 to 2009. is that acceptable?

        The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

        by Laurence Lewis on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 06:56:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No (0+ / 0-)

          Its 2012.

          You never trust a millionaire/Quoting the sermon on the mount/I used to think I was not like them/But I'm beginning to have my doubts -- The Arcade Fire

          by tomjones on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 06:59:49 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Its worse than that (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sfbob, IM, Laurence Lewis, Skipbidder

          When he "apologized" he said his 1998 comments don't reflect "the totality of my public record." His public record in the United States Senate spanning two terms from the 105th through the 110th Congress shows his 1998 comments were more in line with the "totality of [his] public record" than his terse "apology."

          Let's be clear, Hagel opposed what is commonly know as the Hate Crimes Bill (variously known by other names through its history). He never sponsored it, favored watered down hate crime language that excluded sexual orientation in the military's hate crimes regulations and voted to filibuster motions to invoke cloture on the Hate Crimes bills when they came up in the Senate.

          Hagel's "public record" on employment non-discrimination is just as bad. Not only did he refuse to sponsor or vote for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, he voted against adding sexual orientation to the anti-discrimination portion of the Senate's Standing Rules on Employment Practices and refused to adopt a non-discrimination policy for his senatorial office that included sexual orientation and gender identity.

          He voted for the Federal Marriage Amendment and opposed bills that would lessen the impact of DOMA on same sex couples such as the Permanent Partners Immigration Act, Uniting American Families Act and the Tax Equity for Domestic Partner and Health Plan Beneficiaries Act.

          On HIV/AIDS, he declined to cosponsor the Ryan White Care Act and twice opposed legislation designed to expand medicaid to provide assistance to low-income people with HIV. The only time he voted to help the victims of HIV/AIDS was his vote for the Tuberculosis and Malaria Reauthorization Act in 2008 (his last full year in Congress), which reauthorized PEPFAR, President Bush's global HIV/AIDS initiative to treat mostly non-American HIV/AIDS victims (i.e. not TEH GAYs who constitute most American HIV/AIDS victims).

          Out of the 6 HRC scorecards from the 105th to 110th Congress, Hagel got 5 ZEROS and one 20 (in the 110th entirely earned on his PEPFAR vote). That's on a 100 point scale. That spans over 40 votes spanning 12 years with just one yea for the LGBT position.

          Sorry, his "apology" to Hormel and the LGBT community is entirely too tardy and politically expedient. If he has truly had an epiphany on LGBT equality, then he needs to do more than just issue a 54 word apology for heinous comments made 14 years earlier that slandered an entire community.

          I don't trust Hagel and quite frankly I don't believe him. His comments and votes on LGBT issues are reason enough oppose Hagel's nomination without even taking into consideration President Obama's (R-1982) misguided reaffirmation of the notion that Democrats are not capable of running the Pentagon.

          "Lesbian and gay people are a permanent part of the American workforce, who currently have no protection from the arbitrary abuse of their rights on the job." --Coretta Scott King

          by craigkg on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 09:06:44 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  The target of his comments said: (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        4Freedom, craigkg, sfbob, IM, Plox

        James Hormel said, upon being told there was an apology:

        “I have not received an apology,” Hormel, who is a major figure in Democratic politics, told me. “I thought this so-called apology, which I haven’t received, but which was made public, had the air of being a defensive move on his part.” Hormel added that the apology appeared to have been given “only in service of his attempt to get the nomination.”

        "The marriage fight is over when we say it's over, and it's over when we win."—Dan Savage

        by Scott Wooledge on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 07:22:05 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Scott: You quote WP, the newspaper that supported (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          IM

          the Iraq war and opposes Hagel on the ground that he believes the military budget is bloated and needed to scale back.  

          What WP reports is not exactly what Ambassador Hormel says on his Facebook:

          Senator Hagel's apology is significant--I can't remember a time when a potential presidential nominee apologized for anything. While the timing appears self-serving, the words themselves are unequivocal--they are a clear apology. Since 1998, fourteen years have passed, and public attitudes have shifted--perhaps Senator Hagel has progressed with the times, too. His action affords new stature to the LGBT constituency, whose members still are treated as second class citizens in innumerable ways. Senator Hagel stated in his remarks that he was willing to support open military service and LGBT military families. If that is a commitment to treat LGBT service members and their families like everybody else, I would support his nomination.
          I hope you will amend what you wrote above.
          •  I quoted Hormel himself. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            craigkg, sfbob

            You are contending that the Washington Post fabricated his quotes?

            I assure you that isn't the case.

            "The marriage fight is over when we say it's over, and it's over when we win."—Dan Savage

            by Scott Wooledge on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 08:26:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  My contention is that WP is hell bent to (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              IM

              torpedo Hagel's potential nomination. Its reporting on this matter is dishonest.  If you compare what Amb. Hormel says on his facebook with what is reported in WP, it is easy to see that they do not convey exactly the same message.

              It would be fairer if you mention in your writing that neocons Bill Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz, Jennifer Rubin, Dan Señor are all against Hagel.  One might ask why. Perhaps you should also mention that that Hagel supported President Obama over McCain and Mitt Romney and he endorsed Joe Sestak over Pat Toomey, and Bob Kerrey over his Republican opponent.  

              •  No it's not dishonest reporting. (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                craigkg, sfbob

                Hormel said it. He said it to several outlets. He said other things, but impinging the Post doesn't mean he didn't say it. I posted it because other people were speaking for him, so I thought I'd provide the actual words he said, however inconvenient they are.

                And I DID mention neocon opposition, did you not read the piece? I didn't read off the list names.

                I don't always believe the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

                That's foolish calculus. No matter who Obama nominated the right wing would bitch. That's a given.

                "The marriage fight is over when we say it's over, and it's over when we win."—Dan Savage

                by Scott Wooledge on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 09:10:42 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Hormel's Wapo comments (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Scott Wooledge

                were made before the White House probably leaned on Hormel to soften his position. The Facebook statement was made several hours after WaPo published his initial reaction and several people have surmised those comments prompted a call from someone high up in the administration telling Hormel to back off. Hormel's initial reaction is spot on IMO.

                "Lesbian and gay people are a permanent part of the American workforce, who currently have no protection from the arbitrary abuse of their rights on the job." --Coretta Scott King

                by craigkg on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 09:11:31 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  If you'd like to write all this, do so. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                craigkg

                I don't have to write the essay you'd like written, you're capable of doing it yourself. I wrote the essay that expressed my perspective on it.

                It would be fairer if you mention in your writing that neocons Bill Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz, Jennifer Rubin, Dan Señor are all against Hagel.  One might ask why. Perhaps you should also mention that that Hagel supported President Obama over McCain and Mitt Romney and he endorsed Joe Sestak over Pat Toomey, and Bob Kerrey over his Republican opponent.  

                "The marriage fight is over when we say it's over, and it's over when we win."—Dan Savage

                by Scott Wooledge on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 09:11:54 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  Some kossaks will tell any lie to win an argument (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        craigkg

        here. It would appear you are one of them.

        Hagel's apology for his slurs against the ambassador seemed sincere, and the ambassador accepted the apology.
        The first phrase of your blockquoted sentence represents your opinion, to which you are entitled. The purported recipient does not share your opinion, or even acknowledge such an apology was made. The bolded phrase is an easily disprovable LIE, which took less than 5 seconds to bust in a search. I add the link here for you, since you seem to have completely missed it in the diary post. You finish with
        Asking about his current views on DADT repeal are proper and important (he says he supports it), but I think we should move past the stuff from the 90s
        which (in my opinion) is an example of straight white male privilege rearing its ignorant head on a blog and in a post where it truly does not belong or have credence. The questions are important but his only history on the subjects isn't? Pfui, as Nero Wolfe would have said. That "reasoning" is similar to the kind of 'apples and oranges are both fruits' argument which you demonstrated in your comment here:
        Clinton signed DOMA, and now he gets props from the LGBT community for recently coming out for gay marriage.
        Clinton signed DOMA to avoid a further push for a constitutional amendment. This historical FACT from the '90s is known to every honest commenter on this blog. Hagel worked very actively to defend both DADT and DOMA during his 12 years as a senator. If you didn't know that, a search engine would have educated you prior to your writing that fatuously ignorant line.

        Scott Wooledge (great post, Scott, thanks) spent his entire post below the fold talking about why 'stuff from the '90s' which is still unresolved is very important in picking the next SecDef, which you blew off with that line.

        Enough fossil fuel remains on Earth to warm it 6 degrees C by 2100 AD if it is all used. A +6 C planet will only sustain half a billion humans. Human population will rise to 9 billion by 2050. Any questions?

        by davidincleveland on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 08:25:11 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I apologize for suggesting you were lying. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sfbob, IM, Skipbidder

          On that issue, I was mistaken, and had I followed my own advice (by double checking for an update) before excoriating you, I'd have saved myself the humiliation of having to publicly admit I am guilty of what I accused you of.

          The purported recipient does not share your opinion, or even acknowledge such an apology was made. The bolded phrase is an easily disprovable LIE, which took less than 5 seconds to bust in a search. I add the link here for you, since you seem to have completely missed it in the diary post.
          I was corrected by another kossak, which I acknowledged here. I am truly sorry for my affront to you.

          Enough fossil fuel remains on Earth to warm it 6 degrees C by 2100 AD if it is all used. A +6 C planet will only sustain half a billion humans. Human population will rise to 9 billion by 2050. Any questions?

          by davidincleveland on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 09:51:26 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  But as Secretary of Defense (5+ / 0-)

      he has a strong input on how policy is implemented in regards to the military. It wasn't a fluke that Bob Gates was left in charge at Defense to oversee the dismantling of DADT, and he did a credible job from what I can tell. We don't need someone who's going to stonewall and drag his feet on implementing changes, whether it's putting into place the programs that are acceptable under DOMA (Scott's Column 2) or expanding coverage to all military spouses if/when DOMA is declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

      "If we ever needed to vote we sure do need to vote now" -- Rev. William Barber, NAACP

      by Cali Scribe on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 07:19:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Say what? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WattleBreakfast
        It wasn't a fluke that Bob Gates was left in charge at Defense to oversee the dismantling of DADT, and he did a credible job from what I can tell.
        All hail Orwell!!!

        Bob F-ing Gates pushed to keep DADt off the agenda in 2009, opposed any sort of moratorium (Congressional or executive) on DADt discharges, fought tooth and nail against the California DADT case that twice resulted in a Federal Court Order barring DADT enforcement and stonewalled the "training" for DADt repeal to be complete after he left office so it wouldn't occur on his watch. Justr because he said some nice words about TEH GAYS in a January 2010 Senate hearing doesn't make him a saint on LGBT issues. His actions have spoken much louder than his words.

        "Lesbian and gay people are a permanent part of the American workforce, who currently have no protection from the arbitrary abuse of their rights on the job." --Coretta Scott King

        by craigkg on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 09:20:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site