his attitudes/voting history regarding womens' rights, he might be really good at SOD.

ETA: And ultimately, no matter who gets the position, s/he won't be the one making final decisions -- Obama is the CIC.

In 2006, Webb was the VA primary choice thought to have the best chance to beat Allen. But, his record on women from when he was in the military was atrocious. Even worse, from my perspective at that time was that he, for all intents and purposes, swiftboated Kerry, in 2004, when he was already the defacto nominee. (He wrote a dishonest oped that attacked Kerry for the work he did reconciling with Vietnam and his protesting. I was further angered when I read the reason in Rolling Stone - Webb, who used incidents of atrocities in his fiction was NOT angry because he misunderstood Kerry's testimony. He was angry because he thought that in 1971 the war was still popular and could be won! (Apparently, he blamed Kerry's testimony with making it unpopular!) Even when Kerry endorsed Webb, graciously forgiving this, I still hoped he would have lost the nomination. He didn't and went on to win the election very narrowly even with a major Allen screw up. His winning may have been the ONLY way to get that seat that year -- and it gave the Democrats the majority.

Here, I wonder if Obama has some reason that is leading him to ignore the criticism and to maybe nominate Hagel. I was wrong in 2006 - there were bigger things than Webb being very sexist, stupid on Vietnam, and an ass with regards to Kerry. Obama. Biden and Kerry all know Hagel well. Biden and Kerry have outstanding records on women's rights and gay rights, if they are advising Obama that Hagel is good for the team (and we don't know if they are), I would assume it is because of something he could bring that others can't. At minimum, I would wait to see IF Obama nominates him, and if he does, what he states as his reasons.

And to think that Viet Nam could be WON? At least Hagel saw Iraq for the sham it was a little way into it -- that's a plus in my book in that regard.

I'm assuming Hagel would have voted to extend the Violence Against Women Act -- it does appear that he's rabidly anti-abortion, though. But as I said, that wouldn't be in his purview.

I like someone in that position who has strong opinions and lets them be known. Never got that impression from Panetta (but that was just my sense of him, have no idea if I'm correct or not). I'm thinking if Hagel had been SOD when Biden was advising Obama NOT to escalate in Afghanistan, maybe he would have listened and not defaulted to the Generals' wishes.

As for his ant-gay comment and voting record, I'm hopeful that he's evolved. I think if you asked Joe Biden 20 years ago if gays should marry he probably would have said no. The concern here is the gays in the military -- but if he's appointed, I'd hope that he'll see that repealing DADT made no negative impact in the military whatsoever.

It's tough. I don't think Obama is thinking of him because he's a Republican, because the Republicans don't like him, but maybe because he actually feels he would be the best person for the job.

I also think Biden may be in Hagel's corner -- I know he and Hagel are friends -- and I have faith that Joe is a good judge of character.

As I also posted, ultimately whoever gets this position does not have unilateral powers, has to get the nod from the WH.

Another drama.

Remember that Kerry, Biden and Hagel were together on the helicopter that needed to land in the snow in Afghanistan. While there, the three apparently worked on what became Kerry/Lugar/Berman.

I agree with you that Hagel (as Kerry) would have been closer to Biden's position than to the surge that Gates and Clinton supported.

I suspect that in addition to having a foreign policy expert, he sees in Hagel someone who understands what war really is. He also is a fisical conservative and that might become critical in reaching out to the Congress to cut back unneeded military spending.

I agree that there has been a major shift in opinion on gay rights in the last 20 years. Positions that were courageous then,now look embarrassingly too little. Remember that this was in the same time frame as the DOMA bill when only one Senator up for reelection voted for it - and he was from Massachusetts! (Biden voted against it) I assume hearings, if he is nominated, would ask questions about his willingness to promote gays in the military and to answer questions about various related issues.)

conservative.

I wonder what we would think of him as an apointee if we only knew the pertinent-to-the-job info. I think more would be supportive of him, even more Republicans!

It will be interesting, as always!

considering diverse issues in the military (rape, abortion, ...). I would expect a SecDef to have an influence a way or the other on these topics.

It seems the latest military spending bill helps somewhat in this respect, and I also know Hagel has the respect of people like Biden and Kerry, but still, even if SecDef does not make laws, we know that his influence will make or break the use of some of these laws.

http://www.usafa.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123331490

as I keep yammering about, it's ultimately not his call. I don't see Obama giving the green light to any of these more oppressive policies -- do you?

The reason I'm in his corner despite this crap is because I think he'd be good at the job. Any former military man who was vocal in his opposition of the Iraq war and stood up to his Party goes a long way in my book.

I'm not overlooking his past behavior/attitudes, and I have no idea if he still holds the same opinions, but again I don't think he would be able to implement anything that would pull back the progress we've made.

I can't think of anybody else for the position who might not be a war monger. Wes Clark, and that former guy who worked with Colin Powell, but they're not in the running, and I can't wish them onto the list for consideration.

What do you think we should do?

war is about and he has been in a combat zone. Just that notice alone he will use good judgement. All the other stuff he won't have the control over. I would vote for him.

The Secretary of Defense is directly responsible for providing health care to over 200,000 female soldiers, military wives and their daughters. In any given year 10% of women on active duty in the military experience an unwanted pregnancy.

http://news.yahoo.com/unplanned-pregnancies-higheramong-military-women-221607698--abc-news-health.html

Federal law prohibits them from receiving self-paid abortion services on military bases.
(http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc83823/m1/1/high_res_d/95-387_2010Dec16.pdf). Hagel repeatedly blocked efforts to repeal this venal law and his last "0" rating from NARAL was in 2008.

Female soldiers have a very difficult time getting access to safe reproductive health care when deployed overseas. See the Women's Health Issues journal article "Abortion Restrictions in the U.S. Military: Voices from Women Deployed Overseas" (http://www.whijournal.com/article/S1049-3867(11)00099-5/abstract)

I cannot understand why Obama is allowing so many women to fall under the direct authority of someone with Chuck Hagel's voting record. See:

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/chuck_hagel.htm

It is even more puzzling why NARAL isn't opposing this nomination given the potential consequences for so many service women. See:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/07/chuck-hagel-abortion_n_2427148.html

Christ almighty. Pretty sure Obama and Biden know who and what Hagel is. They worked with him in the Senate. They still want him for DoD. Gates was a Republican or Indy, he just didn't have a voting record and legislative history that made Democrats go "OMG HE IS A REPUBLICAN OMG!!!" Of all the arguments against Hagel, this is weak sauce. And as the wife of a career military member, whose son goes to college on the GI Bill that HAGEL and Jim Webb got for us, anyone who suggests that Hagel will be "bad for troops" is misguided.

Frankly, when I read Michael Moore clamoring for him, the hypocrisy is striking, considering how he is ready to bash Obama and Biden for a lot less. but all of a sudden, Hagel is fine.

Obviously, Obama can choose whom he wants and he should. But that does not mean people are forbidden to have an opinion.

with smart and capable people in their given roles. Ask yourself why he wants this particular person for THIS particular job (and not Labor or HHS). Is Kerry, who is arguably more liberal than Obama and has known Hagel a long time, objecting to him? I don't think so. Maybe Obama, Biden and Kerry personally know more about his fitness for SecDef than we do by looking at his voting record.

So the 'he's too smart to mess up when appointing Republicans' argument is rather thin. I mean, this is Obama who claimed marriage was a Sacrament, that he and his wife were sanctified and all straight couples are bound by God himself. Yet he placed a mendacious adulterous Republican in a place of the most extreme trust. This does not impress me.

problematic thing he did--I don't care that much how he got his sex jollies, once out of the military, where that sort of thing is against the UCMJ. It's hard to say how that directly impacted his CIA work, although I agree he had to resign. But Petraeus allowed crazy neocon nutcase think-tankers to basically run the war in Afghanistan for him--as UNPAID advisors, so there was no detection or accountability--that is a much bigger deal, IMO. SecDef Gates let Obama down on that one, and I generally think Gates was a competent man. Maybe Obama feels he needs someone who will be a better watchdog.

explain Rahm aka "Tiny Dancer"

controversial, that's for sure. But since he was a Chief of Staff, I have a hard time evaluating his performance--his value (or lack thereof) was primarily for Obama, and not a specific, concrete THING like the DoD or the State Dept.

Geitner? Salazar? Duncan? Holder? Petrayus? Gates? Fucking Chu wiping and dangling for BP? The EPA is so weak and toothless that Bush may as well still be running the show. Labor has had nothing but set backs.

He'll nominate who he wants to but they probably will be motherfuckers that either are TeaPubliKlan or that a TeaPubliKlan would "reach across the aisle" to install as a token that is actually on board with their agenda.

Congress has authority over this; the current law re military abortion ban is the creation of Congress. If he were being nominated for HHS, then it'd be an issue; he's not, so it isn't.

it's not like an ethical, moral, humanistic type would clamor to head up our war machine (i do understand the president is CIC, but you get the point).

And it says some really disturbing things about the Obama administration that he will probably be part of it.

Obama's nominating him for Sec Def, not Health and Human Services.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/17/max-cleland-memoir-former_n_287674.html

"In his detailed recounting of that hellish time, Cleland in particular expresses outrage at the negative ads that cost him his Senate seat. Republican challenger Saxby Chambliss ran TV commercials featuring Cleland alongside photos of Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, falsely implying that the Senator had voted against the proposed Department of Homeland Security,

Soon after the ad started running, GOP Senators John McCain and Chuck Hagel expressed their outrage at the dirty tactics. Cleland says that Hagel approached him and went so far as to offer to do a TV spot rebutting the hateful Chambliss ad "even though it was being aired by his own party."

"'Saxby Chambliss got wind of what Hagel had proposed. He called Chuck seven times in one day begging him not to side with me. Hagel asked him to take the ad down. Instead, Chambliss modified the ad somewhat, but still ran it.'"


When it comes to defending fellow veterans and active duty troops, Hagel has no equal. That is more important to me than the fact that he was a Senate Republican and often voted like one. I have no idea how Bob Gates (for example) really feels about abortion, or whether he deep-down likes gay people, or his feelings about the minimum wage or unions--we didn't need to know. He was a competent guy and pushed DADT repeal through at Obama's direction, and generally improved the DoD after the disaster of Rumsfeld.

and now the rest will be written by an out and out bigot. If you seriously think Obama is going to be the one to write these rules I have to say that you are quite likely wrong. I think at the very least, a deputy secretary should be given control of writing those rules with no input at all from Hagel. Trusting Hagel to write these rules would be like trusting Strom Thurmond to write the rules integrating blacks.

Really, bringing up his beliefs about abortion for a SecDef position sounds desperate at best.

and since our female service personnel still can't get abortions without a major league hassle this issue might come up.

the propaganda you're spewing makes sense.