Hagel Forced To Eat His Own Shinola

Yeah, he was lying through his teeth, but he was also stuck. Is it hard to name names? No, but to do so publicly would hardly be a way to start a career as Sec Def. Could he point out the stupid stuff we do because we bend over backwards for Israel, sure but once again, he's burning bridges that he needs for the future. I thought Graham and McCain were really making sure he starts the job with two strikes, but if he fails to get confirmed and Obama picks someone else, I won't have an issue with that.

Funny how the lying of a presidential nominee for a cabinet position can be shrugged off as just the way it goes.

And what do the folks who are counting on him standing up to the "Jewish Lobby" think?

One has to assume they are OK with his lying through his teeth now so that he will have a chance to stand up to the Jews at a later date.

What a sad state of affairs.

The strange thing with the "Jew Lobby", at least the really fanatical part of the "Jew Lobby", is that they aren't Jewish.

They are people who believe that Jesus will come back when Israel conquers all of what they think the Bible says they should have. They are eagerly pushing for war in the Middle East based on a rather extreme interpretation of the Christian Bible. To them, peace would stand in the way of Jesus' reign on Earth.

These people have a disproportionate representation in US congress right now.

That being said, Hagel isn't my man.

Unless you think the "Jew Lobby" has a bottomless pit of money with which to buy off members of congress (and that members of congress only care about getting paid), they don't have a disproportionate influence on congress.

What motivates members of congress most is remaining in power. Money helps, but only to secure votes.

All the money in the world isn't going to influence a member of congress to accept a position that will lose him or her an election.

The primary influence of the NRA on congress isn't money, it's votes.

If the anti-semitism was as rampant in America as in is in the ranks of liberals, members of congress wouldn't be responsive to the wicked ways of the "Jew Lobby," even if it really is the "Christian Theocrat Lobby."

The trick is simple, Finn.

You can hold a position that is unpopular in the country as long as it is popular in your particular gerrymandered district. The Republican party, and the right wing that is currently running it, has been very good at fixing districts to their advantage to the point that they hold a majority in the House even though nationwide more Americans voted for Democrats.

And, to refer to people in favor of peace as "anti-semitic" is rather extreme (and ridiculous) given the fact that there is a peace movement in Israel. You are in fact implying that there are Anti-Semitic Jews.

Was Yitzhak Rabin Anti-Semitic in your view?

No, but their government is set up like the us where by the minority has as much or more power than the majority.

The US is at a point were the majority rules over the minority, this is the
dreaded 'democracy' our founding fathers feared, it's mob rule & it sucks.

But these folks represent the people in their districts, not everyone in the country (many of them need to keep this in mind), and if those people like the "Jewish Lobby" or the NRA, for example, they expect their representatives to support them.

If you can show evidence that there are a fair number of Representatives and Senators that support these groups depite the fact that their constituents, do not, then perhaps you might have a point about their having disproportionate influence.

As far as gerrymandering goes, both parties indulge in this practice. Faux outrage when the other guy's party if doing what your party would do if they had the power, is unbecoming.

Presumably a district that concentrates Republicans, leaves another with mainly Democrats. It doesn't seem as clever or sinister as many people think.

This is a truly ridiculous comment.

You are inferring I am saying there are anti-Semetic Jews to advance what you foolishly believe is a clever retort.

Yours was the ridiculous comment, implying that anti-Semitism was "rampant" among liberals. It isn't.

Good Grief: I know you are but what am I?

Here's a clue, stop transferring your inferrances to my implications.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/12/politics/hagel-senate-vote/index.html

Put Chuck Hagel out to pasture and move on.

I did hear that McCain stood up to a fellow Republican who was getting personal in his Hagel attack.