E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFormer Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) met with Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) on Capitol Hill Thursday. The two met in original Appropriations Committee hearing room in the Capitol.
A Democratic aide said Mikulski, as Appropriations chair, planned to discuss the looming sequester with Hagel.
The two took no questions during a brief photo opp. Hagel declined to answer questions about whether he would release additional documents to the Armed Services Committee, as Republicans are requesting.
A vote in the committee on his nomination, originally planned for today, was delayed, as Republicans are asking for more about his financials and speeches.
Leave a Comment:
Hagel is not required to answer any questions in a photo-op or in front of the Armed Services Committee for that matter. The weak and spineless republicans will cower and comply with any nomination Obama puts forward regardless of their past or their qualifications. He could put anyone in his cabinet. John Kerry is proof..
Yep, I couldn't agree more. The GOP/Tea Party are a bunch of spineless dopes. Condi Rice was confirmed for Secretary of State after failing miserably as National Security Adviser. Missed or was too stupid and lazy to read intelligence reports on Bin Laden which lead to 3000+ Americans dying on 9/11.
Hagel is just another example of 0bama's piss-poor judgement on anything.
It's interesting how Hagel's confirmation hearings are more about his past, irrelevant statements than about his views on the issues facing the Department of Defense today and in the future, such as the upcoming sequester.
'The Senate Sub-Committee would like to welcome Senator Hagel to this informal question and answer period'
"Huh?"
'Senator Hagel, today we'd like to discuss your position on the impending sequester process'
"Huh, oh you're talking to me? How about that Superbowl thing, real thriller huh?"
'Yes Senator, it was a good game, but what are your thoughts about sequester?'
"Well, I'm pretty sure they still play quarters in football, but heh, if you want to change that it's fine with us. I mean the President doesn't have a position on this but, whatever he wants, right?"
'Okay Seantor, let's discuss Iran then'
"Oh sure, I run everyday, gotta watch the waistline and keep the exercise routine up"
'Thank you for your cooperation Senator'
"No sweat"
I avoided the hearings because I knew they would be full of repukagan crap; repukagan because the "republican" party has become a self-rightious, fascist party. I did see Graham's questions later on C-Span, and I respect a roach more now. His questions regarding "fidelity" to "Israel" were insane, and reminded me of what McCarthy must have been like, everyone is a "commie", here everyone must "support" "our" insane fascist and religious baiting "foreign policy", but worse, because our "foreign policy" is assinine.
For all those "congresspeople" who stood and appauded netan yahoo when here, you are disgusting. This "hearing" is a travesty, and if our "foreign policy" was neutral, we would have a more peaceful world. As it is we have become a war infested, fascist, imperialistic killing machine. Israel is wrong in its policies of apartheid and killing, but "Congress" is bought and paid for, AIPAC is way out of line; politicians should not go there to kiss their butt, but should remain nuetral.
Graham types see the "Bible" as a war doctrine for killing, as if such a "God" wouldn't be insane. Hagel shouldn't have to put up with these "roach" questions to be confirmed. He is being forced to be less honest than he is, which is a bs shame, and only denigrates all involved.
stopbs...if you really believe the sign on you use, why don't you just stop, because it's about all you can do. I'm a big believer in the opposing argument concept. I've had my opinion changed by listening to folks make a reasoned argument. But people like you are just annoying, name calling, really crappy syntax, grammar and illogical streams of irrational thought make it tough to have anything like a reasoned discussion with you. You break it down to the most base, illogical child-like name calling contest.
Grow up, win with logic, win with making a reasoned argument. If you thought you were right, you'd work hard enough to make a logical argument. But I suspect you can't.
Nice "logic" in your "statements" above about Hagel, any of them true. I write colloquially. I take it you were being facetious. I'm glad to argue logic, give me some. I break things down to their base, it's true, but I'm "grown up" enough to get by here.
This is your 3 am wake up call to save the country! hello? is Obama there? OK! well, is Kerry there? well, ok, is Hagel there!!!! Holly guacamole is NO one there!!!!!We are dying out here!! OK is Looney Clooney there? ok, give me George Bush, he will answer the phone.
If Hagle has nothing to hide why not just All information asked for?
I love watching the laughable libs get moist with anger of this. There is no way in hell these same libs wouldn't be completely anti-Hagel if a Republican president had nominated. Oh those sanctimonious libs!!
Here is an idea: The congress could pass A bill to fund a plan with say fifty billion dollars to start the club If these 11 million people could form a mortgage free club, and each put a hundred dollars each month into it, they could raise over a billion dollars each month, holding the liens on the peoples homes, who get paid off. With this money, they could have a drawing, and pay off so many mortgages. Say the first month they paid off 150,000 homes, these150,000 could continue to pay a hundred dollars plus, say twenty percent, or say fifty percent of what they were paying on their mortgage before to help others keeping; a close record of all money transactions. this figure would grow each month, and become more effective. as people would have more income to use in their own lives's. They could work out a plan that would be more effective, also. for the ones who won the first months draw, 150,000 people then have those pay fifty percent of what they were paying plus a hundred. Or another more thought out plan. These people have the power to save billions of dollars in interest, if they were to somehow get something like this going. Also, this could be used in other things to, like paying off vehicles, or investing etc.!
If the banks want to sit on the money and not work with the recovery, lets bypass them, and become our own banks, by forming different groups around the country to help ourselves to be able to move up the ladder!
If ten thousand people would put a hundred dollars into a group, EACH MONTH, It would be a million dollars a month. they could invest, buy property, open franchise businesses buy stocks, and become big investment groups, who could eventually even, lend money to help people recover or just to start a business to get ahead,! The student s who have student loans could ban together, and put money each week or month to help each other become loan free! It all depends on if they would be willing to stand together and do it!
... I am a life-long Democrat, who fancies himself to be what I call an "enlightened capitalist". I am also a staunch Obama supporter. As a retired senior- management type, who now runs his own business, I've always set out to hire and/or appoint people I felt were smarter/better than me to key positions of responsibility, in organizations that I've run, over the years. As to President Obama's cabinet appointments, during his first and, now, his second term; frankly, I haven't been generally impressed. Save for Hillary Clinton (perhaps one of, if not the best, Secretaries of State in modern times) Leon Panetta and now, John Kerry, the rest (with the possible exception of Eric Holder) have been, at least to my eyes and ears, a rather pedestrian group, with the President standing "head & shoulders" above the lot of them. The "vibe" I've always gotten from our current President (and I may be completely wrong about this) is that he's rather partial to being the "brightest bulb in chandelier". As to the Hagel appointment, to my mind, the "jury is still out"; but, I'm getting a distinct feeling that in a "one-on-one / putting rank aside" discussion with the President, Hagel will turn-up at the "short-end of the intellectual "stick", more often than not. It is just a feeling I have, not even an opinion, just a niggling, premonitory kind of thing, like a shadowy reflection in a dark mirror, in a poorly lighted room. He, (Hagel) "feels", I don't know, rather tentative to me, kind of "off the mark", at times, or "not quite all there"; and I couldn't tell you, with certainty, what that means to me, in concrete terms, if I had to. The best way I can explain it, I guess, is by contrasting what I feel from Hagel, with what Hillary does for me, all the time. There is absolutely nothing tentative, nor uncertain, about "Madame Secretary", if you know what I mean. She's smart as they come, insightful, and "scrappy", when she needs to be. And you just know that she won't hesitate to face the baddest bull in the ring, sans both cape and sword, if has to. Anyway, that's my 2-cents on the subject. And, at 2-cents, you can bet that you've being grossly overcharged (and short-changed) for the time you've spent reading my meanderings on the subject.