Follow by Email

Friday, February 1, 2013

David Sanger, "On Iran, Hagel Muddles the Message": The Obama Administration Acknowledges It Nominated a Moron

In a New York Times article entitled "On Iran, Hagel Muddles the Message" (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/01/on-iran-hagel-muddles-the-message/), David Sanger writes:

"He [Hagel] became the latest official to send what many inside the administration fear has been an inconsistent and confusing message to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamanei, about whether the Obama administration would, if there was no other option, take military measures to prevent Iran from possessing a weapon.

'It’s somewhere between baffling and incomprehensible,' a member of Mr. Obama’s own team of advisers on Iran said on Thursday night when asked about Mr. Hagel’s stumbling performance on the question during the all-day hearing. The worry was evident in the voice of the official, who would not speak on the record while criticizing the performance of the president’s nominee. For those who question whether the no-containment cornerstone of the Obama approach to Tehran is for real, or just diplomatic rhetoric, Mr. Hagel clearly muddled the message, he said."

What a surprise! And what about Hagel's claim that Iran has an "elected legitimate government"?

Do you think for even one moment that The New York Times will now reflect on its intense lobbying on Hagel's behalf? Thomas Friedman wrote a sordid op-ed on Christmas, blasting opponents of Hagel as "disgusting" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2012/12/thomas-friedman-give-chuck-chance.html). This was immediately followed by a Times guest op-ed by James Besser (Who is he?), asking us not to allow "pro-Israel extremists sink Chuck Hagel (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2012/12/james-besser-dont-let-pro-israel.html). Next we were treated to Myra MacPherson's Times guest op-ed (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/opinion/chuck-hagel-under-attack-in-vietnam-and-on-capitol-hill.html?_r=0), telling us that Hagel needs to be secretary of defense because he was a Vietnam War hero. And then came Nicholas Kristof's op-ed entitled "In Defense of Hagel for Defense" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/opinion/chuck-hagel-under-attack-in-vietnam-and-on-capitol-hill.html?_r=0), again reminding us that Hagel is a Vietnam War hero and assuring us that Hagel is not an anti-Semite.

Yesterday, although it recognized that "Hagel was disappointingly unsure of himself at times" during his confirmation hearing, a New York Times editorial (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/01/new-york-times-editorial-confirmation.html) cheerfully concluded that the Senate "should now confirm Mr. Hagel."

Good to know that The New York Times is willing to foist someone so intellectually challenged upon the United States as secretary of defense during such troubled times.

Care to comment, Chuck Schumer?

3 comments:

  1. You can bet that 'anonymous official' quoted by Sanger had already gotten the 10-15 emails [sorry - forget where I read that today] from Democratic Senate staffers while the hearing was happening.

    Tutorials on Schumer available offline :) but there IS a reason why he has never sat on either the Senate Foreign Relations or Armed Services Committees.

    K2K

    ReplyDelete
  2. If Hagel spoke like a warped duck why on earth would anyone (except the NY Times and Obama) be led to believe that he would not perform like a warped duck?

    It would be comic were the implications not so appalling.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes, Hagel is a moron, but I am not. I started to study Arabic and Farsi the moment I heard of his nomination.
    Yes, it's always a good idea to have an idiotic bigot in charge of defense, but now, in times of the world disintegration, it's a brilliant idea.
    It also proves that we have a quality thinker in the White House. Now, they all will close the ranks behind our quality President and his quality people.
    Well, we know that elites tend to betray their nations. So, now the WH, the NYT and the like join the line of historical traitors.

    ReplyDelete