In response to:

The Senate Must Reject Hagel

michigander4 Wrote: Feb 05, 2013 7:59 AM
Phillup, don't get me wrong, I'm not defending Hagel. But just because he wasn't offered a commission (and maybe he was and turned it down) doesn't mean, in and of itself, that he would be unqualified for SOD. I have resigned myself that Hagel will be confirmed on an up-or-down partisan vote. The only possible bright spot I see coming out of it is the fact that he spent a fair amount of time crawling on his belly under fire in the jungles of Vietnam.... and that experience would guide him on the wisdom of placing women in a combat/infantry role. As SOD he could at least slow-walk if not reverse that policy.

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...