I watched part of this specitical….
His fellow Republican’s grandstanded on him heavy today about things he said back in the day….
He even had a few Democrats not happy….
But that said….
He still has the votes….
Maybe it was ther fact that Chuck Hagel has been cozy with the nation’s Democratic Prsident….
The long pauses and agonizingly careful answers held up for the most part when it came to substance—though he did fumble once on whether he supported “containment” against Iran—but Hagel was moving at the pace of a tortoise while some of his harshest critics, like Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., were darting around him like hares.
Graham’s cross-examination was particularly devastating. For all the world, Hagel looked like the guilty suspect who is nailed in the final minutes of Matlock or Perry Mason. He started off badly, and then things got worse, when Graham began by asking him if the nation was at war, and the nominee responded, “I’m sorry, what?” The South Carolina senator hammered Hagel on his previous criticism of the “Jewish lobby’s” influence in Washington—which Hagel had partially taken back—asking the former senator if he could “name one person intimidated” by the Israeli lobby. Hagel couldn’t. “I didn’t have in mind a single person,” he said. Graham followed up by asking Hagel if he could name “something that was dumb” that the Israeli lobby had forced U.S. legislators to do, and Hagel said he couldn’t say what that was either. Graham, dripping contempt, then declared that Hagel’s combined votes over the years—against harsher unilateral sanctions on Iran, against designating Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a terrorist group, among others—“send the worst possible signal to our enemies and friends at the worst possible time in world history.”
Perhaps one of the worst moments in a fairly bad day for Hagel came when even one of his apparent supporters, committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., was forced to restate his position for him after Hagel twice misspoke about a critical issue: whether the Obama administration would accept mere “containment” of Iran’s nuclear program, rather than prevention of it. Hagel, handed a piece of paper, said, “I misspoke and said I supported the president’s position on containment. If I said that, I meant to say we don’t have a position on containment,” Hagel said. That’s when Levin interjected: “We do have a position on containment, and that is we do not favor containment.”
Not good. Hagel’s biggest problem was that many of his past positions were well-thought-out, but he was not given much of a chance to explain them, and he rarely seized the moment to do so aggressively…..Share on Facebook