Honestly, Hagel doesn't seem like the best candidate.
At a time of great national crisis resulting from a dysfunctional Congress, it seems silly that members of the Senate Arms Services Committee would walk out of a proceeding as a demonstration of protest against the President’s nominee for Secretary of Defense. That signals to the world of our enemies that the American government is broken and disjointed. It is vulnerable.
That act alone gives fuel to the al Qaeda, for instance, and to Iran as another.
Now, having listened to the hearings, Chuck Hagel’s answers and his history isn’t consistent, nor is it stellar. He is no John Kerry, though he might be more like John McCain only as a pacifist.
Whatever he is, it begins with being a confused Republican. Why President Obama chose him lies in politics. Obama is political and someone told him on appearance that selecting Hagel might appease some Republicans. No dice. He isn’t truly one of them any more than Joe Lieberman was ever a Democrat.
Nonetheless, antics by Republicans are immature and undermine the integrity of the nation. We are on a path of decline and disaster largely because the GOP cannot perform as they should.
President Obama picked up the wrong binder.
“GOP threatens walkout on Chuck Hagel vote
By TIM MAK | 2/10/13 8:56 PM EST
Defense secretary nominee Chuck Hagel could get a vote in committee as early as Tuesday, but Republican aides reacted to that idea by suggesting that some members could walk out in protest.
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) is considering a vote to coincide with a previously scheduled hearing on sequestration, and is “fed up” with Republicans after a boisterous hearing last week with Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, Democratic sources told POLITICO.
Meanwhile, two Senate Republican aides said that some GOP senators were considering the possibility of walking out during such a vote.
Levin faces a conundrum: He has the ability to force a Hagel vote through the committee on a party-line vote, since Democrats outnumber Republicans. But doing so could damage the committee’s longtime bipartisan spirit.
Last Thursday’s hearing with Panetta alarmed Levin, Democrats said. Levin worries the aggressive, pointed questioning that Republicans directed at Panetta over the Sept. 11 attacks in Benghazi, Libya, could signal some Republicans simply will not compromise on the issue of Hagel’s nomination.
“Fed up is the right term for [Levin’s mood],” said a Democratic source. “After the Benghazi hearing, it showed what we are dealing with on the Republican side.”
One Armed Services Committee member, South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, has made clear that he considers Benghazi and Hagel to be one issue — “no confirmation without information,” he said Sunday. Graham is demanding more details from the Obama administration about its response to the Benghazi attacks, without which, he says, he would block Hagel.
It was only his latest threat over Hagel — the Thursday Benghazi hearing that irked Levin had been convened partly to mollify Graham, who initially said he would hold up Hagel’s nomination process if Panetta didn’t testify. Sunday’s comments showed Graham was not mollified.
Democratic aides were unhappy with the week’s turn of events. The Senate Armed Services Committee has traditionally been collegial; it has passed a defense authorization bill for over 50 consecutive years, as defense advocates like to point out. But Republicans’ grilling of Panetta on Thursday seemed to indicate that the bipartisan feeling has diminished, and Republicans signaled again Sunday they were playing for keeps.
"There are two options: If Hagel doesn't fully disclose all the things in the letter [in which Republicans made requests for more disclosure] ... either you will see a party line vote or Republicans will stand up and leave the room in protest,” said a senior Republican Senate aide. “Does Levin really want that to happen on his watch as chairman? … It would really debilitate the committee.”