-->

Conservative Daily News - The best news, analysis and opinion articles written by a collection of citizen journalists. Covering a range of important topics in blogs, op-ed, and news posts, these upstanding patriots are bringing back American exceptionalism with every entry..

Republicans voting for cloture on Hagel MUST be voted out of office

By the time of this writing (Feb. 22nd), several RINO Senators – Mike Johanns and Deb Fischer of Nebraska, Thad Cochran of Mississippi, John McCain-Feingold of Arizona, Lindsey Gramnesty of South Carolina, Richard Shelby of Alabama, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Susan Collins of Maine, intend to vote for cloture (i.e. breaking the filibuster) on Chuck Hagel’s nomination for SECDEF, thus allowing it to proceed to the floor, where it is sure to pass as the Democrats have 55 votes.

If these RINO traitors vote for cloture and thus vote to allow the Democrats to confirm Hagel along party lines (which, BTW, would be a first for a SECDEF nominee), we must vote them out of office. All of them. No ifs, no buts.

We must primary all of them (including the pseudo-conservative Deb Fischer) and, if they somehow survive the primary, support their general election opponents.

No forgiveness, no ifs or buts, and no get-outta-jail-free-cards for McCain.

But first: why should Hagel’s nomination be filibustered?

As myself and many other conservative writers have chronicled in great detail over the past several weeks, Chuck Hagel is a strident leftist (despite being a nominal Republican) who is implacably hostile to Israel (and to Jews in general), friendly to Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran (which has endorsed him), supports the gutting of America’s defense and deep unilateral cuts in America’s nuclear deterrent, and is totally unqualified to be SECDEF due to his lack of high-level executive experience, ignorance of defense issues, and inability to perform well even before the Senate (as his confirmation hearing proved).

And yet, despite all of these facts, and despite more Americans opposing than supporting Hagel, Senate Democrats, pressured by the Obama Administration, are marching in partisan lockstep with each other and with the White House and all intend to vote to confirm Hagel.

And they have 55 seats in the Senate – enough to confirm Hagel.

Make no mistake: if the filibuster is ended (i.e. if cloture is invoked) on Hagel’s nomination, the Dems will be able to confirm him along party lines with their 55 votes.

A vote to end the filibuster (i.e. invote cloture) on Hagel’s nomination is therefore a vote to confirm Hagel as SECDEF. There is no material difference between the two.

Those Republicans who intend to vote to end the filibuster thus essentially plan to vote to allow the Democrats to confirm Hagel.

These Republican traitors must NOT be allowed to hide behind a meaningless final, nominal vote against Hagel’s confirmation, when it will be too late to stop his nomination as the Democrats have the votes to confirm him.

Make no mistake: a vote to invoke cloture on Hagel is a vote to confirm Hagel.

So what can we do?

Niceties won’t work with these worthless RINOs. Nor will reason and facts. They are immune to reason and facts.

The only thing they understand and fear is a credible threat of losing their seats – because the only thing Washington politicians – including newcomers – care about is getting reelected. And if a credible threat to vote them out of office is made, they usually DO really start voting against Democratic proposals.

So you MUST call or write to both of your Senators (especially if one of your Senators is one of the worthless RINOs listed above, i.e. if you live in Arizona, SC, Nebraska, Alabama, Alaska, Maine, or Mississippi) and tell them that you will NEVER vote for them again if they vote to invoke cloture on Hagel’s nomination, and that you will not be fooled by a meaningless final vote against Hagel’s confirmation when it will already be a done deal.

Tell them that if they vote to invoke cloture on Hagel, you will wholeheartedly support primary challengers against them and if they somehow survive their primaries you will support their general election opponents.

And if these worthless RINOs nonetheless ignore this warning, we must follow it through and throw each one of them out of the Senate. No ifs, no buts.

Johanns is retiring in 2014, so we can’t hold him accountable, but we can hold the rest of these RINOs accountable.

Worthless RINO Waterboarding-Is-Torture-Bush-Tax-Cuts-For-The-Rich-Cap-And-Trade-My-Good-Friend-Ted-Kennedy’s-Amnesty-John-McCain-Feingold must be voted out of office, no matter what the National Establishment Review says. We must support whoever his primary challenger will be, and if he somehow survives the primary, we must support his general election opponent. By 2016, Republicans should have a secure Senate majority, so if need be, we can afford to sacrifice this one seat.

The same must also apply to all other RINOs listed above. McCain and Murkowski are up for reelection in 2016. But Lindsey Gramnasty and Susan Collins are up for reelection next year. Not in 2016, not in 2018, but next year – in 2014!

We must make it unmistakably clear to them that BOTH of them (and the other RINOs listed above) will be voted out of office if they vote to invoke cloture on Hagel.

Already, there is talk about primarying Gramnasty, and his endorsement of the McCain-Schumer amnesty proposal will certainly not endear him anyone. We must join hands with those who oppose amnesty for illegal aliens (among whom I count myself) to oust Gramnasty and McCain out of office.

And remember: with the sole exception of Maine, all of the states which these RINOs represent are solidly-red, Republican states. It is totally unacceptable that these states are represented by RINOs. Whoever wins the Republican nomination there – unless it’s a Todd Akin clone – should be able to easily win the general election there as well. This is not Maine, Wisconsin, Illinois, or Delaware that we’re talking about, this is the red-hot states of Arizona, South Carolina, Mississippi, Nebraska, Alaska, and Alabama.

Politicians must be held accountable for EVERY vote they cast. And the only way to hold them accountable is to vote them out of office. Which is what must happen to the worthless RINOs listed above.

Conservative Daily News allows a great deal of latitude in the topics contributors choose and their approaches to the content. This is due to our approach that citizens have a voice, not only the mass media. Readers will likely not agree with every contributor or every post, but find reasons to think about the topic and respond with comments. We value differing opinions as well as those that agree. Opinions of contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of CDN, Anomalous Media or staff. Click here if you'd like to write for CDN.
Put This Story in your Circles and Share with your Friends

Previous Article

Comments (16)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Zbigniew Mazurak says:

    Well, lookie here. I thought that Chuck Hagel, as an anti-Semite, would be in good company with David Duke.

    Evidently, Duke thinks so as well, because he has ENDORSED Chuck Hagel for SECDEF, as has Louis Farrakhan (the leader of “The Nation of Islam”):
    http://ow.ly/i23Ky

  2. Bobloblaw says:

    You think Obama will nominate someone better?

    • Jon says:

      Better than a decorated war hero?

      • Zbigniew Mazurak says:

        Being a decorated war veteran does not qualify anyone for Secretary of Defense (or even for a low-level administrator). There are hundreds of thousands of decorated combat veterans who are not qualified to be a Cabinet Secretary. Hagel is one of them. Whether Hagel is a decorated combat vet or not is completely irrelevant to the question of whether he’s qualified to be SECDEF. Which he evidently isn’t.

        A SECDEF does not need to be a decorated combat veteran (or even a veteran at all). What he DOES need, however, is long managerial experience at the highest levels of the business world, the academia, the government, or the military, and the executive skills required of a top-level executive, as well as good “people skills” so that he can work well with his subordinates and indeed, work with ALL SORTS OF PEOPLE for the common good. Significant experience in managing large budgets is also a must, as is ability to act under pressure (gosh, I should start writing job openings for Cabinet posts ;) ).

        Yet, Hagel completely LACKS all of these traits. He has never managed anything larger than a mid-sized cell-phone company, has never managed a large budget (VA had a small budget under the Reagan Admin and he was only the deputy administrator), and has never held any top-level job in the business world, the academia, the government, or the military. His ability to act as the DOD’s CEO is completely untested.

        His confirmation hearing proved beyond reasonable and unreasonable doubt that Hagel is utterly unqualified to be SECDEF.

        He’s unable to work with other people because he has a difficult character. During his time as Senator, he had the second-highest staff turnover rate of any Senator, trailing only George Allen. Several of his staffers have said how impolite, rude, and mean he was. This is the last kind of person any department needs as its Secretary. Government departments do need tough bosses, but not impolite, rude, mean people who will only cause good people to resign (or fire them because he doesn’t agree with their opinions or can’t work with them in a polite manner).

        The kind of boss that a department or the entire government would need would be General Dwight Eisenhower – a tough boss to be sure, and sometimes wrong on the policy, but able to work with all sorts of people and to bring them together to work for the common good.

        Excluding maybe Bill Cohen, Hagel is the least qualified SECDEF nominee since at least Melvin Laird (1969). His three immediate predecessors – Rumsfeld, Gates, and Panetta – all had significant high-level managerial and budgetary experience before being nominated for SECDEF, and all (especially Panetta) were able to work well with their subordinates and indeed, with all sorts of people, for the common good.

        Hagel is not qualified to be dog catcher, let alone SECDEF.

        • Jon says:

          Your claim that Senator Hagel is “evidently” not qualified to be SECDEF is not backed up by actual “evidence.” Everything you have put up here has been really manufactured outrage. The big problem that Conservatives have with Hagel is that Obama likes him, which means he has cooties.

          I would also suggest that being a decorated combat vet does give Hagel some perspective of actual, you know, combat–unlike a bunch of chickenhawk bozos like Senator Cruz, who have no problem questioning the loyalty of a man who has shrapnel in his chest from the Vietnam war.

          I would put forward that Hagel’s experience in the Senate on the Foreign Affairs Committee, Committee of Banking, Housing and Urban Development, Committee on Intelligence, and Committee on Rules and Organization give him experience in managerial situations. Not to mention his work in the Reagan Administration. At the very least, he has a resume that should put him in the running for that elusive plum dog catcher spot. And what do you mean he hasn’t held a top government post? He was a Senator? No, I know for some that’s only a few rungs over the Capital Janitorial staff, but most people consider that a fairly significant office.

          He has a difficult character? You’re basing this on what? His staff turnover rate? Who cares? Maybe that means he is a demanding boss. Is that not a quality you would want as Secretary of Defense? Also, the Secretary does not set policy, he or she carries it out.

          See, this is why this country really needs Obamacare. Cootie shots for all!

          • Zbigniew Mazurak says:

            Once again, you’re proving your utter ignorance.

            Being a combat vet does not qualify one to be a SECDEF. What the DOD needs is not a combat vet, but a highly-experienced manager who can manage this huge, complex organization with a $600bn+ budget (and to lead it throughout a period of defense budget cuts with the least possible damage to America’s defense capability) and who can work with all sorts of people for the common good.

            Honorable past service as a footsoldier is completely irrelevant to this job, and thus to the argument. That you bring it up only shows how weak (in fact, nonexistent) the case for Hagel is. He’s utterly unqualified to be SECDEF.

            A good SECDEF does not need to be a veteran. That is irrelevant to his job. A good SECDEF needs to be a very experienced manager, with many years of executive experience at the highest levels of executive leadership, and have excellent “people skills” so that he can work with all sorts of people for the common good and be a boss that everyone genuinely respects, admires, and is loyal to – not a rude, mean asshole whom his employees merely FEAR for the fear of being fired. (Having worked for various people at various companies, I know the difference very well. You clearly don’t.)

            Hagel UTTERLY LACKS all of these traits. He has never served in any high-level managerial post, whether in the business, the academia, the government, or the military. His ability to act as the DOD’s CEO is completely untested. If we put a decorated combat vet in charge of Walmart, Merck, or Pfizer, the company would’ve gone bankrupt in no more than 2 years. But then again, if this were the business world, and not a Senate dominated by 55 obedient slaves of Obama, we wouldn’t even be having this argument. People would’ve laughed you out of town.

            What counts as “top-level managerial experience”? Being Governor, Secretary of a federal or state department, being the CEO of a large company, commanding a large military formation (e.g. a division), being Director of the CIA, OMB, or WH CoS, being president of a large university system, or being an Ambassador.

            Hagel has not served in any of these (or any other high-level managerial) offices. He has ZERO meaningful managerial experience (note the word “meaningful” carefully). Thus, he’s utterly unqualified.

            Heck, Hagel’s confirmation hearing by itself proved how utterly unqualifed he is.

            Calling him “qualified” is an insult to all truly qualified SECDEFs who preceded him. It is no coincidence that all three previous SECDEFs (Rumsfeld, Gates, and Panetta) had lots of high-level managerial experience under their belts.

            Sen. Ted Cruz is not a chickenhawk; he’s a patriot who has unmasked Hagel and shown him for whom he really is: an extremely leftist politician who spits on his own country. For that outing of Hagel, Cruz should be praised, not smeared.

            And yes, the Secretary DOES make policy. Your denial that he doesn’t only proves how ignorant you are. How much autonomy a SECDEF enjoys depends on what President he serves under, but no serious person would claim that the SECDEF does not make any policy and merely carries it out.

            Hagel had the 2nd highest staff turnover rate not because he’s a “demanding boss”, but because he’s a rude, mean, arrogant jerk whom almost no one wants to work with or for. People were leaving his office en masse.

            Your claim that

            “I would put forward that Hagel’s experience in the Senate on the Foreign Affairs Committee, Committee of Banking, Housing and Urban Development, Committee on Intelligence, and Committee on Rules and Organization give him experience in managerial situations.”

            is downright laughable and ridiculous. Once again, you’re only proving your utter ignorance, in a very clownish manner. Being one of the many members of a Congressional Committee does not qualify anyone for anything. Members of Congress do nothing but pass (mostly stupid and unconstitutional) laws and hold hearings – that is, if they bother to show up at all.

            None of these functions is an executive one. In none of these functions was Hagel responsible for anything other than voting, writing legislation (but he has never authored any landmark piece of legislation), and asking a few questions in the short time the committee chairman allowed him. In none of these functions was Hagel responsible for managing organizations, people, or budgets.

            That you even bring up such childish arguments only proves how little (to be exact, nothing) you know – about American politics, government, managing organizations, the US military, or the world in general.

            Get lost, boy.

        • Jon says:

          Mr. Mazurak,

          I am a husband, father, and homeowner. I hold two college degrees and two jobs. I do not have a criminal record, and my credit is good. Do not call me boy. It is not dismissive, since you have absolutely no power or authority to dismiss me. It just makes you appear insane and weak.

          Does Ted Cruz support a provocative stance against Iran? The answer is yes. Did he ever serve in the military? The answer is no. Ted Cruz is a chickenhawk.

          Whatever issues you have with Hagel’s resume are ultimately immaterial, since he is the choice for Secretary of Defense of the President of the United States. I have heard of no reason aside from manufactured outrage that he should be denied that spot, and the right seems so willing to believe anything that they think he has tea parties with the Hezbollah Junior League.

          What a joke.

          • Zbigniew Mazurak says:

            “I am a husband, father, and homeowner. I hold two college degrees and two jobs.”

            And I’m Steven Spielberg. :)

            “It is not dismissive, since you have absolutely no power or authority to dismiss me. ”
            Everyone on Earth has the authority to dismiss you, because you’re proving your utter ignorance here, arguing for an extremely leftist and unqualified candidate, and making a clown of yourself while you’re at it. 12-year-olds know to behave better than that. :) If you’re not physically a child, you’re certainly a manchild – and a very ignorant one at that. You don’t even know the basic facts of the issues being discussed here, yet you pontificate about these issues as if you were the Pope.

            Ted Cruz does not support a provocative stance against Iran. He supports keeping and, if necessary, exercising the military option against Iran (which Pres. Obama officially says he keeps on the table), whose Islamic government continues to develop nuclear weapons in open defiance of the NPT and UNSC Resolutions, international sanctions, etc., which has sponsored terrrist attacks against the US (on US soil and abroad) and against Israel (via Hezbollah), which has openly stated its goal of destroying Israel, and which doesn’t respect diplomatic immunity or any of the other concepts of the civilized world. Such a regime must not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons under any circumstances. Yet, Hagel wants to shift to a “containment” position on Iran – a fringe position.

            There may yet be a way to solve this problem w/out going to war with Iran, but it seems increasingly unlikely.

            So no, Cruz is not a chickenhawk. He only supports, WRT Iran, a policy that most of his colleagues support.

            “I have heard of no reason aside from manufactured outrage that he should be denied that spot”

            Of course not, because you are a completely ignorant extreme leftist. You are completely immune and deaf to reason and facts. Ergo, you have not heard any reason why Hagel should be denied the post of SECDEF – because you don’t want to. In the real world, however, there is every reason to reject Hagel, his extremely leftist views, numerous flip-flops, and utter lack of qualifications for SECDEF. But of course, you are deaf to the facts, so you have not heard of these issues.

            And there has been no “manufactured” outrage over Hagel’s nomination. One does not have to manufacture outrage to oppose his nomination and to have good reasons to do so. He’s his own worst enemy. Speaking of manufacturing, Obama would be well advised to terminate “free trade” talks now and save what little is left of the US manufacturing base. :)

    • Zbigniew Mazurak says:

      I don’t know what Obama will do. But Obama COULD have nominated someone better, such as former USD(P) Michele Flournoy or current Deputy SECDEF Ashton Carter, both of whom are far more qualified and moderate in their views than Hagel is.

  3. Jon says:

    A couple of things real quick…
    Iran has not endorsed Hagel. An Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson, when asked about Hagel, said that he hoped that U.S. foreign policy would be more respectful of other nations, which is not an endorsement or a condemnation but a comment. Considering a cabinet member doesn’t set policy, the comment doesn’t really mean anything.
    Also, the idea that Hagel is friendly with Hamas and Hezbollah is so absurd that it should have sent up some sort of red flag that it COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE TRUE. Which, of course, it isn’t. A New York Daily News reporter, talking about Hagel to a Republican senate staffer jokingly asked if Hagel had gotten money from “Friends of Hamas” or “The Hezbollah Junior League” two groups that he made up on the spot because they sound like jokes. Because Republicans are immune to humor and assume the absolute worst of anything President Obama wants, this Republican staffer didn’t pick up on the satire. He passed this along to a Breitbart reporter, who also had no sense of irony or self awareness. The Breitbart reporter called the White House for a comment, and apparently the White House staffer believed he was being pranked because WHO WOULD ASK SUCH A PATENTLY RIDICULOUS QUESTION and he hung up. This was all the Breitbart reporter needed to think he had a scoop, and this ended up in Conservative media as fact.

    • Zbigniew Mazurak says:

      Iran HAS endorsed Hagel. Proof:
      http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/01/iranian_government_overjoyed_at_anti-israeli_hagel_choice_for_defense.html
      They wholeheartedly support his nomination. They say they are overjoyed because he’s (at least in their opinion) “anti-Israeli.”

      Hagel is VERY FRIENDLY to Hamas and Hezbollah. That is a fact. He has advocated that the US and Israel should negotiate directly and unconditionally with these terrorist groups. Moreover, during his tenure as Senator, he was one of the few Senators to refuse to sign a letter calling on the EU to add Hezbollah to its list of terrorist organizations (which, by Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah’s own admission, would dry up the organization’s funding sources).

      So my claims were correct.

      • Jon says:

        So I read the article in the link, and it is essentially a news story, without–I might add–any sort of editorial bent. Is this your proof that Iran approves of Hagel? That would be like saying the New York Times running a story on 9/12/01 about terrorist attacks approves of terrorist attacks.

        He didn’t sign a letter to the EU–this along with 9 other Republicans. Do they all hate Israel as well? Or could it be simply that Hagel does not, as he said at his hearing, think that it would have been appropriate as a Senator to dictate to a foreign leader? By the way, when Southern Belle Lindsey Graham suggested there was a double standard because during another point in his life Hagel did sign a letter, the letter he brought up was to Bill Clinton, urging him to discuss Russia’s treatment of their Jewish population. Hardly the actions of a committed anti-semite, no?

        As for his thoughts that Hezbollah and Hamas should be negotiated with, could it be possible that someone who has shrapnel in his chest from a war that ended with negotiation can see the value of that?

        • Zbigniew Mazurak says:

          You’re blatantly lying.

          The AT story I linked to demonstrates that the Iranian GOVERNMENT endorsed Hagel for SECDEF (expressed jubiliation at his nomination and hope that he would be confirmed) because, the Iranian government believes, Hagel is “anti-Israeli” (their word, not mine).

          As for the letter – which only he and 9 other Republicans refused to sign (while 88 Senators from both parties signed it) – Senators and Congressmen signing letters – to their own government as well as foreign ones – is standard practice and does not infringe on the executive branch’s power in any way.

          And no, the signers of the letter did not “dictate” anything to anyone. They merely POLITELY REQUESTED that the EU designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization (which would’ve made supporting Hezbollah a crime in the EU and thus would’ve dried up its source of funding). And last time I checked, the EU doesn’t have a single “leader”, so I don’t know who would these letter signers dictate anything to. (No, Herman van Rumpuy is not the EU’s “leader.”)

          As for the letter about anti-Semitism in Russia – Hagel REFUSED to sign that letter as well. This time, he was the ONLY Senator to refuse to sign it. And it wasn’t addressed to Bill Clinton, but rather to Russia’s then-President Boris Yeltsin (you can’t even get such simple facts right). It did not dictate anything to Yeltsin, it merely politely asked him to act against anti-Semitism in Russia. (Politely asked – because unlike Hagel, his Senate counterparts knew and know how to speak politely and diplomatically when need be. Hagel does not.)

          As for his claim that Hezbollah and Hamas can and should be negotiated with – it only proves how naive (or more likely, evil and treason-minded) Hagel is. These terrorist organizations advocate the complete destruction of both the US and Israel. They adamantly refuse to negotiate with Washington and Jerusalem and instead advocate the destruction of both countries. They’d gladly kill every last American if they could. The US and Israel cannot negotiate with them any more than with Al Qaeda.

          Hell, the Hamas Charter even says “Every stone will say, ‘oh, Muslim, a Jew is hiding behind me, come and cut his head off’, and then we shall cut it off.” Those are NOT people that one can negotiate or reason with.

          And no, the Vietnam War did not end with “negotiation”; it ended with North Vietnam’s conquest of South Vietnam and with the Communists murdering thousands of innocent South Vietnamese citizens while sending another million into “reeducation camps” and imposing a Communist tyranny on the rest of South Vietnam’s population, a tyranny that continues to this day. This, of course, happened after the Democrat-controlled Congress of 1975 cut off any aid to South Vietnam while continuing to gut America’s own military and prohibiting it from coming to South Vietnam’s aid if North Vietnam violated the worthless peace accords of 1973 (the product of the kind of negotiation that you tout so loudly). Again, you can’t even get such basic facts right.

          You are a despicable, ignorant, arrogant person. You are just as despicable and ignorant as your “hero” Chuck Hagel, whose extremely leftist views, as we have seen, you share. You’re only proving my points.

          • Jon says:

            First of all, don’t ever call me a liar again. Here is the entire quoted article that the American Thinker provided:

            In recent days, Hagel’s top advisers have received “messages of reassurance” amid the critics’ campaign to derail his nomination, the source said.

            Hagel’s nomination is expected to spark a row in the Senate. Many pro-Israeli groups and neo-conservatives have spouted diatribe against Hagel over his criticism of Washington’s anti-Iran policies and Israel’s sway over the US political arena.

            The top nominee for the post of defense secretary was the first Republican senator to publicly criticize the war in Iraq, calling it the worst foreign policy blunder since the Vietnam War, and he has consistently opposed any plan to launch military strike against Iran.

            While Hagel was considering a presidential bid in 2007, he was criticized by the National Jewish Democratic Council which said the senator “has a lot of questions to answer about his commitment to Israel.”

            In 2009, Hagel signed a statement calling on Obama to encourage a unity government between the two major Palestinian factions Fatah and Hamas.

            Pundits believe the appointment of Hagel could spark tensions between Washington and Tel Aviv, but they predict no considerable trouble in his confirmation process in the Congress as he enjoys bipartisan support.

            At no point in that article does the writer say that Iranian government comments one way or the other. The blogger interprets this as full throated support for Hagel, but that might be a reading comprehension issue on his part. If you want to find me an ACTUAL quote from an Iranian official weighing in on the Hagel nomination, that’s fine, but I would rather not accept cantankerous conservative tea leaf reading as full fledged truth.

            I don’t want to argue semantics, because it’s Sunday and it’s a nice day outside, but Hagel’s decision to not sign the letter to the EU seems to be consistent with what he thinks his job as a Senator to have been, and communicating to the EU or any foreign top level government official was not appropriate. As for the letter to Clinton, Hagel personally wrote the letter to Clinton to urge Yeltsin in that matter. Again, he did not sign the letter ADDRESSED to Yeltsin, because he was the head of a foreign body and did not think it was his place.

            By the way, please don’t throw the word treason around lightly, especially when discussing someone who has shrapnel taken in the chest in service of this country. You may disagree with someone, but to call someone treasonous over their wanting to avoid a conflict that could cost American lives for no good purpose is flat out stupid.

            As for your fascinating and one sided version of how the Vietnam war ended, I can see what lonely corner of reality you are calling from.

          • Zbigniew Mazurak says:

            Hagel has been endorsed by the Iranian government on the grounds that he is “anti-Israel” (their word, not mine) and even though the NYSlimes article pooh-poohs over this, it’s on the Iranian press agency’s website.

            BTW, here’s a real gem from the NYSlimes article:

            “but they predict no considerable trouble in his confirmation process in the Congress as he enjoys bipartisan support.”

            Oh yeah.

            Your excuse that “Hagel did not think it appropriate for a US Senator to sign a letter to foreign officials” is pathetic and desperate and has already been debunked here. It only shows how desperate you are. Here’s a newsflash for you, boy: US frequently Senators sign letters to foreign officials (as well as to American ones) asking them to do something and no one (besides Hagel and his supporters recently) has ever considered it improper. The 88 Senators who signed the letter to the EU (regarding Hezbollah) and the 99 Senators who signed the letter addressed directly to Yeltsin (regarding anti-Semitism in Russia) clearly didn’t consider it improper.

            Hagel’s refusal to sign them is therefore inexcusable – but it fits well into his many other anti-Semitic statements – more anti-Semitic than General Grant’s infamous Order to expel Jews from Union-liberated soil and more anti-Semitic than anything Der Stuermer ever printed.

            “You may disagree with someone, but to call someone treasonous over their wanting to avoid a conflict that could cost American lives for no good purpose is flat out stupid.”

            Hagel IS a traitor, but not for opposing war with Iran. Myself, I’m not 100% sold on the idea. Hagel is a traitor because he advocates unconditional talks with and bending to Islamic fanatics who want to kill every last one of us and completely destroy the US and Israel; Islamic fanatics who cannot be reasoned with, mollified, or negotiated with. He’s also a traitor because he advocates America’s unilateral disarmament. That he carries a shrapnel in his body is irrelevant; what matters is what he does and advocates now. Benedict Arnold was also an honorable soldier – until he joined the British side.

            “As for your fascinating and one sided version of how the Vietnam war ended”

            It’s not a one-sided version; it’s the truth. Something that you clearly don’t know, boy. You know absolutely nothing whatsoever about history, the US form of government, the standard practices in Washington, the terrorist groups threatening America and Israel, etc.

  4. L.E. Liesner says:

    I agree that all these RINOs need to be booted out of office. On the Kerry nomination only three Republicans voted nay. The Senate use to be called the body of wise old men, but today it is nothing but a body of old fools. And all this body of fools manages to do is scratch each others backs, while the country continues it’s downward sprial. Voter apathy is all that keeps this bunch in office.