Hagel rebuts Cheney
By Michael J.W. Stickings
Last week, on FOX, Dick Cheney said that "attempts to stem President Bush's new Iraq plan... were undercutting U.S. troops in Iraq," according to E&P. Specifically, Cheney was referring to congressional attempts by Democrats and Republican critics like Chuck Hagel to block the surge.
This week, on CBS, Hagel said that it "is complete nonsense to say we're undercutting the support of the troops". Indeed: "We're Article 1 of the Constitution. We are co-equal branch of government. Are we not to participate? Are we not to say anything? Are we not to register our sense of where we're going in this country on foreign policy? Bottom line is this: Our young men and women and their families, these young men and women who are asked to fight and die deserve a policy worthy of those sacrifices. I don't think we have one now."
Eloquently put. And who has more credibility on whether or not U.S. troops are being undercut, a decorated veteran like Hagel or an armchair militarist who received five draft deferments during the Vietnam War, whose military experience consists largely of hunting quail, and who was a chief architect of the disaster that is the Iraq War?
Exactly.
(Think Progress has the video and transcript of Hagel on CBS here.)
Last week, on FOX, Dick Cheney said that "attempts to stem President Bush's new Iraq plan... were undercutting U.S. troops in Iraq," according to E&P. Specifically, Cheney was referring to congressional attempts by Democrats and Republican critics like Chuck Hagel to block the surge.
This week, on CBS, Hagel said that it "is complete nonsense to say we're undercutting the support of the troops". Indeed: "We're Article 1 of the Constitution. We are co-equal branch of government. Are we not to participate? Are we not to say anything? Are we not to register our sense of where we're going in this country on foreign policy? Bottom line is this: Our young men and women and their families, these young men and women who are asked to fight and die deserve a policy worthy of those sacrifices. I don't think we have one now."
Eloquently put. And who has more credibility on whether or not U.S. troops are being undercut, a decorated veteran like Hagel or an armchair militarist who received five draft deferments during the Vietnam War, whose military experience consists largely of hunting quail, and who was a chief architect of the disaster that is the Iraq War?
Exactly.
(Think Progress has the video and transcript of Hagel on CBS here.)
posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at
10:24 PM
2 Comments:
I couldn't agree more. Nothing more pathetic than watching an administration retreat to the "we're right because we're in charge" posture.
On a seperate note, are you the same Michael J.W. Stickings who spent his time at Tufts writing for the Primary Source? If so, you have made what can only be described as a impressive turn away from mean-spirited and conservative thinking and writing.
By
Anonymous, at 8:01 PM
I am he, yes. Although I only wrote for The Primary Source my freshman year -- and, even then, not all of it. I wrote a piece or two that didn't fit in with their conservatism (one was on rape, if I remember correctly) and ended up writing op-eds for the Daily. Then I joined the Daily as an editor and Viewpoints columnist my sophomore year and stayed there for good.
It's true, however, that I was a conservative of sorts, even at the Daily. That was the height of the culture wars, after all, and I did write a great deal about identity politics and multiculturalism. I did so from a liberal perspective -- focusing on the individual rather than the group -- but I suppose that was enough for some to label me a conservative. When I ventured outside of Tufts politics, though, my liberalism was apparent: I supported Clinton in '92. I suppose I've shifted to the left, but that's more a result of being out of a radicalized college environment than a major ideological shift.
May I ask how you know me? I assume you were there at the time. Do I know you?
By
Michael J.W. Stickings, at 11:51 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home