President Obama Wants Chuck Hagel to Run the Pentagon - pg.3 | allnurses

President Obama Wants Chuck Hagel to Run the Pentagon - page 3

"Chuck Hagel's leadership of our military would be historic," he said. "He'd be the first person of enlisted rank to serve as Secretary of Defense, one of the few secretaries who have been wounded in... Read More

  1. Visit  herring_RN profile page
    I cannot understand whi Bill Kristol is taken seriously any more. He was one of the PNAC people who worked for more than a decade to start a war in Iraq. He was wrong aboutr the need tor that war and other policies too. He has neveer been elected and is no expert (in my opinion)Yet he and other PNAC signers are all still over the Sunday political shows.
    Bill Kristol Is Charting Future Of GOP, Starting With Hagel Nomination
    With a leadership void in the Republican Party, neoconservative William Kristol, the Fox News commentator and founder/editor of the “neo-con bible” The Weekly Standard, is now driving much of the debate on important policy matters in Washington.

    The Emergency Committee for Israel, one of many non-profit groups under Kristol’s umbrella, is leading the campaign to paint former Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel as an inappropriate Defense Secretary because of his views on Israel and Iran. ...
    tewdles likes this.
  2. Visit  tewdles profile page
    I couldn't agree more about Mr. Kristol. Why do we put any weight on his opinions? Or those of Rush Limbaugh for that matter?
    herring_RN likes this.
  3. Visit  herring_RN profile page
    'Friends of Hamas': My role in the birth of a rumor

    A Daily News reporter explains how he inadvertently created the myth that Chuck Hagel spoke to a non-existent group.

    By Dan Friedman / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

    The revelation could have doomed President Obama's nomination of Chuck Hagel to be secretary of defense: He gave a paid speech to a group called "Friends of Hamas."
    Fortunately for Hagel, this claim, which galloped across the Internet, was bogus. I know, because I was the unwitting source. ...

    ... Here's what happened: When rumors swirled that Hagel received speaking fees from controversial organizations, I attempted to check them out.
    On Feb. 6, I called a Republican aide on Capitol Hill with a question: Did Hagel's Senate critics know of controversial groups that he had addressed?
    Hagel was in hot water for alleged hostility to Israel. So, I asked my source, had Hagel given a speech to, say, the "Junior League of Hezbollah, in France"? And: What about "Friends of Hamas"?

    The names were so over-the-top, so linked to terrorism in the Middle East, that it was clear I was talking hypothetically and hyperbolically. No one could take seriously the idea that organizations with those names existed-let alone that a former senator would speak to them. ...

    Or so I thought.
    The aide promised to get back to me. I followed up with an e-mail, as a reminder: "Did he get $25K speaking fee from Friends of Hamas?" I asked.
    The source never responded, and I moved on.

    I couldn't have imagined what would happen next. On Feb. 7, the conservative web site screamed this headline:


    The story read: "On Thursday, Senate sources told Breitbart News exclusively that they have been informed one of the reasons that President Barack Obama's nominee for Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel, has not turned over requested documents on his sources of foreign funding is that one of the names listed is a group purportedly called 'Friends of Hamas.'"

    The author, Ben Shapiro, wrote that a White House spokesman hung up on him when he called for comment. That went in the story-to buttress the assertion that the White House didn't deny the claim. ...

    Shapiro tweeted the link to his nearly 40,000 Twitter followers. Blogs like and the National Review's The Corner linked to it. In Israel, Mike Huckabee said "rumors of Chuck Hagel's having received funds from Friends of Hamas," would, if true, "disqualify him." ...

    ... Since the "Friends of Hamas" speech was imaginary, it was not like another reporter could confirm it, right?

    Not quite. Reached Tuesday, Shapiro acknowledged "Friends of Hamas" might not exist. But he said his story used "very, very specific language" to avoid flatly claiming it did.
    "The story as reported is correct. Whether the information I was given by the source is correct I am not sure," he said.

    I am, it seems, the creator of the Friends of Hamas myth. Doing my job, I erred in counting on confidentiality and the understanding that my example was farcical-and by assuming no one would print an unchecked rumor.

    If anyone didn't know already: Partisan agendas, Internet reporting and old-fashioned carelessness can move complete crocks fast. If you see a story on Hagel addressing the Junior League of Hezbollah, that's fake too. ...

    Read more:

    tewdles and heron like this.
  4. Visit  heron profile page
    Then there are all those Gitmo prisoners getting GI benefits
    tewdles and herring_RN like this.
  5. Visit  herring_RN profile page

    I remember when my grandma realized the news on SNL was a joke.
  6. Visit  tewdles profile page
    pretty embarrassing for that office staff, eh?
    herring_RN likes this.
  7. Visit  MunoRN profile page
    Quote from Jolie

    I'm not attempting to speak for another poster, just posting my own impressions. I have read this thread from the perspective of one who was impressed by the history lesson that Hitler was once beloved by his people and viewed almost as a savior. I don't view these posts as inflammatory, but rather as accurate. Make comparisons or dismiss them as you wish. That's the beauty of this forum.

    Growing up, I was very close to 2 adults who were raised in pre-WWII Germany. They both vividly described Hitler's rise to prominence and authority as a beloved figure. The gentleman was able to objectively describe the effects of his rule. The woman went to her grave believing that he was a saint, demonized by those who distorted history to further their own agendas.

    That which we ignore, we are doomed to repeat. Does that apply here in modern day America? I don't know, but I don't fault people for questioning.
    Just to clarify, is Hagel the possible modern Hitler?
    tewdles likes this.
  8. Visit  Jolie profile page
    Quote from MunoRN
    Just to clarify, is Hagel the possible modern Hitler?
  9. Visit  imintrouble profile page
    I haven't read any of the posts, so if I'm redundant, forgive me.
    I don't know particulars about this guys politics, but I can guess by which news channel is promoting him. My feelings have nothing to do with his politics.
    I watched the hearings. If you consider the hearings as a kind of job interview, I wouldn't hire him to haul my trash.
    He was unprepared. He was listless. His responses were sometimes confused, and at one point somebody had to remind him what his position was. He didn't act like a guy who wanted the job.
    If he's the best we got to run the Pentagon, this country has bigger problems than what I thought. He flubbed his interview. How many of us would be hired for a job when the interview went that badly?
    Kylee B and tntrn like this.
  10. Visit  tewdles profile page
    I thought his interview had little to do with the job he was appointed to...
  11. Visit  imintrouble profile page
    Quote from tewdles
    I thought his interview had little to do with the job he was appointed to...
    So his interview performance is irrelevant?
    What do you think he would be qualified for, considering how poorly he did on his confirmation hearings?
  12. Visit  tewdles profile page
    I am not certain that there was a satisfactory answer to many of the questions he was asked during the confirmation. Many questions had to do with the State Office and not his role.
    herring_RN likes this.
  13. Visit  tewdles profile page

    Senate approves Hagel as new secretary of defense | Reuters

    "The Senate on Tuesday confirmed Chuck Hagel as President Barack Obama's new secretary of defense, ending an unusually acrimonious confirmation fight."
    herring_RN likes this.