« The show must go on |
| Ukiyo-e »
Jan 07, 2013 at 01:19 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341cc33e53ef017c35689d36970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Peeance freeance:
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Assuming he makes it to confirmation, it will be interesting, if not fascinating, to watch conservative Republicans eat one of their own on national television - a decorated combat veteran to boot.
Jan 07, 2013 at 05:06 PM
Hagel's sin, in the eyes of Kristol, etc., is that he was less than 100 percent of a lip-syncing conservative drone on each and every day of his stay in the Senate. Independent thought threatens their orthodoxy. That, and the fact that the man they hate nominated him, is more than enough to stir their frigid little hearts.
They don't particularly care who runs DOD or CIA. They care that they've got themselves a new club to swing around.
Jan 07, 2013 at 06:14 PM
There are plenty of good reasons not to like Hagel.
David Wharton |
Jan 08, 2013 at 08:35 AM
Why did Japan bomb Pearl Harbor?
Why did Hitler invade Russia?
Was Mohammad Mosaddeq overthrown in Iran for oil?
All the same thing only different.
Jan 08, 2013 at 08:36 AM
"There are plenty of good reasons not to like Hagel."
....none of which really matters when it interrupts the favored selective narrative at this blog.
Jan 08, 2013 at 04:53 PM
Bubba, correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought your views on gays in the military aligned with Hagel's. No?
Jan 08, 2013 at 05:20 PM
"Bubba, correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought your views on gays in the military aligned with Hagel's. No?"
How is that relevant to the comment I made above, and the general topic of this thread?
Jan 08, 2013 at 07:27 PM
Bubba doesn't seem to think that his opinion about Hagel is relevant to a thread about Hagel.
And I think most would agree with that.
Andrew Brod |
Jan 08, 2013 at 07:54 PM
"Bubba doesn't seem to think that his opinion about Hagel is relevant to a thread about Hagel."
Hagel's views on gays and the military have little to do with the likely impact a Hagel appointment to be Secretary of Defense would have on this nation. That's the reason for my reply to Roch.
The material presented in David Wharton's link does matter, but no one here (including you, apparently) seems to think any of those items listed in that article pose any impediment to Hagel's appointment.
As usual, there's no big surprise in understanding that.
Jan 08, 2013 at 09:47 PM
In addition, Hagel's nomination stands a chance of dying in committee.
Jan 08, 2013 at 09:54 PM
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
(You can use HTML tags like <b> <i> and <ul> to style your text.)
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Name is required to post a comment
Please enter a valid email address