In response to:

The Senate Must Reject Hagel

Everett39 Wrote: Feb 05, 2013 1:39 PM
Apparently you missed the Senate hearing, or are happy with Hagel's stumbling, bumbling, unprepared fiasco of a testimony, from a man who is up for an important position, responsible for implementing a proper defense posture and policy for the USA. Or is that your idea, that such a man take this position, and be happy that he is the right man for the job ? Even some dems were not so happy with him. . . Wow, I have not heard that old lib talking point about Haliburton for a while - and sometimes, defending your country from aggression is not always a pretty, pain-free process. And I doubt that any dictator or leader could have kept Iran 'in check', as you said. .and do you recall how Hussein invaded Kuwait after fighting Iran for 8 years ?

The Senate's "advice and consent" role doesn't require it to rubber-stamp a presidential appointee for secretary of defense who senators believe would weaken America in this increasingly dangerous world.

Notwithstanding former Sen. Chuck Hagel's diminished view of the post -- "I won't be in a policymaking position" -- the secretary of defense is an exceedingly important position and must be filled with someone who understands the complexity and gravity of the threats we face.

In his testimony at his confirmation hearing, Hagel demonstrated a remarkable unwillingness to clarify his past statements, a stunning misapprehension of the identity, intentions and capabilities...