Would this guy be qualified to be Secretary of Defense?

[monomach]

-Combat veteran

-Former Deputy Administrator of the Veterans Administration, resigned when his boss wanted to cut funding and referred to veteran's groups as "greedy"

-Former CEO of the USO

-12-year career in the Senate

-Member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations

-Has repeatedly attacked George W. Bush and Dick Cheney in the media over the Iraq War, the Patriot Act, and the troop surge

-Voted FOR removing the troops within 120 days and has stated that he will support whatever plan the party puts out there for getting out of Iraq ASAP

Thoughts?

[taterguy]

1. Why not just tell us who it is?

[stahbrett]

6. Chuck Hagel (nt)

[Neshanic]

2. Because it may be a republican.

[yardwork]

3. No Republicans in the Cabinet.

Your guy may be "qualified." He's not as good as numerous Democratic options.

No sale. No Republicans. Period.

[monomach]

10. Bill Clinton's Sec. of Defense was a Republican

What was so horrible about it?

[stahbrett]

4. Chuck Hagel for VP? No. For Secretary of Defense possibly? Maybe.

I don't see it happening for VP - don't you have to be a Democrat? I suppose he can switch parties, but otherwise I don't think it has any chance at all.

[monomach]

11. I don't think anyone wants him as our VP

We really don't want him being involved in anything other than the military, I'd think.

[stop the bleeding]

5. stop messing around

:hurts:

[dysfunctional press]

7. possibly- as long as he's a democrat.

:shrug:

[monomach]

9. What does being a Democrat have to do with qualification for Sec. of Defense?

It's not like he'll be making any policy regarding Abortion, Health Care, etc.

[dysfunctional press]

22. everyone in the cabinet is in the line of succession to the presidency, for one thing.

and, it's not just abortions and health-care -democrats and republicans DO have differences in opinions on defense matters too.
for instance- the evangelical fundy virtual take-over of the air force- is that the kind of thing that would happen under a democratic administration? :shrug:

[monomach]

24. If the number seven guy in the line of succession gets to be President...

...we'll be in such deep frap that it won't matter what party he's in. Hagel is pretty much a Dem when it comes to defense. That won't be a problem.

[dysfunctional press]

25. 7th in line is still closer to the big chair than i want any republican getting for now.

if hagel wants to be considered, he should consider switching party affiliation.

[babylonsister]

8. One of the stand-out qualities of Hagel is his support of the military

and his disgust at this illegal occupation. We could do worse. On other issues, I distinctly don't like where he stands.

[Neshanic]

12. What's Clark? Chopped liver? Why not him?

[monomach]

13. What if Clark is too busy being Vice President?

Ever thought of that?
(and he can't be Sec. of Defense, not eligible, as I was just reminded)

[TwilightGardener]

14. Clark is not eligible to be Sec Def until 2010.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

15. WTF?!?...supporting Rethuglicans for an Obama WH is way across the line....

and out of the question...Obama will lose most of his Democratic voters if this is even talked about.

[monomach]

17. Did it lose Bill Clinton any Democratic voters?

Go look up William Cohen.

[tabasco]

16. He would make a fine SecDef.

I'm not sure if he is the best choice but Hagel certainly would be a good choice.

[TwilightGardener]

18. Hell no, read THIS garbage...

"Loose talk of World War III, intimidation, threats, bellicose speeches only heighten the dangers we face in the world. Without offering solutions and building international alliances we only strengthen the hand of those who prey upon and play to a confused, frightened and disorganized world...

America is the great power -- not Iran. Because of that awesome responsibility that comes with great power, we must be more mature in testing the proposition that the United States and Iran can overcome decades of mutual mistrust, suspicion and hostility....

America must not allow itself to become paralyzed by a fear that erodes our self confidence and trust in our Constitution and each other....

Rather than acting like a nation riddled with the insecurities of a schoolyard bully, we ought to carry ourselves with the confidence that should come from the dignity of our heritage. . .from the experience of our history. . .and from the strength of our humanity. . .not from the power of our military.

Now is the time for the United States to actively pursue an offer of direct, unconditional, and comprehensive talks with Iran. We cannot afford to refuse to consider this strategic choice any longer. We should make clear that everything is on the table -- our issues and Iran's. . .similar to the opportunity that we squandered in 2003 for comprehensive talks with Iran. This should include offering Iran a credible way back in from the fringes of the international community, security guarantees if it is willing to give up nuclear weapons ambitions, as well as other incentives. This will require the day-to-day efforts and presence of a very senior administration official, higher ranking than the American Ambassador to Iraq..."

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/002510.php


The nerve of Obama to even suggest this clown!

[monomach]

20. But he WANTS TO KILL YOU AND YOUR ENTIRE FAMILY OMG RUN RUN RUN!

He's a Republican, after all. Didn't you know that they're not even human? I heard they have poisonous fangs!

[TwilightGardener]

21. It's ridiculous. If Obama wanted Ted Stevens or Denny Hastert, THEN I'd be apoplectic--

but Hagel and Lugar? I don't get the controversy.

[ClayZ]

19. A rose, by any other name....

K and R

[NCarolinawoman]

23. A Republican SOD plays into the presumption that ONLY Republicans can do National Security.

We have got to get away from that. The Democrats have a wealth of people to choose from.

I really hope that Obama would not go down that road.

[dysfunctional press]

26. Bingo. that's a VERY important consideration.

and probably the BEST reason NOT to consider a republican, ANY republican, for that particular cabinet post.

thanks for thinking it through. :thumbsup:

[Pathwalker]

27. Eight years of Republican cronyism is ENOUGH!

and you want it to continue? WHY? What's next - asking us to French-kiss our inner cheese-eating surrender monkeys? If he does that, I WILL change my party registration. Heck-of-a-job you're doing!

[TheDoorbellRang]

28. Think "Team of Rivals"

Take a look at this over at dkos:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/21/235416/346/623/459079
Obama will probably make lots of heads explode with his cabinet choices because I'm guessing there will be a few Republicans on it. JMO, he will pick people based on their qualifications rather than their party affiliation, and do a damned fine job as president because of it.

[Fox Mulder]

29. If it's not a Democrat, then no.

And he's not a Democrat.