Chuck Hagel in The New Yorker
"...For Hagel, almost as disturbing as Palin’s lack of experience is her willingness—in disparaging remarks about Joe Biden’s long Senate career, for example—to belittle the notion that experience is important. “There’s no question, she knows her market,” Hagel said. “She knows her audience, and she’s going right after them. And I’ll tell you why that’s dangerous. It’s dangerous because you don’t want to define down the standards in any institution, ever, in life. You want to always strive to define standards up. If you start defining standards down—‘Well, I don’t have a big education, I don’t have experience’—yes, there’s a point to be made that not all the smartest people come out of Yale or Harvard. But to intentionally define down in some kind of wild populism, that those things don’t count in a complicated, dangerous world—that’s dangerous in itself.
“There was a political party in this country called the Know-Nothings,” he continued. “And we’re getting on the fringe of that, with these one-issue voters—pro-choice or pro-life. Important issue, I know that. But, my goodness. The world is blowing up everywhere, and I just don’t think that is a responsible way to see the world, on that one issue. And, interestingly enough, that is one issue that stopped John McCain from picking one of the people he really wanted, Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge”—the Independent senator from Connecticut and the Republican former governor of Pennsylvania. (Both men are pro-choice.)
Several of Hagel’s close friends told me they believed that if McCain won the election he would ask Hagel to serve in his Cabinet, as either Secretary of Defense or Secretary of State, and that Hagel would agree, despite their differences. In February, 2006, in an article in the Times Magazine, Joseph Lelyveld asked McCain whether he would consider asking Hagel to be his running mate or a member of his Administration, and he quoted McCain as saying, “I’d be honored to have Chuck with me in any capacity. He’d make a great Secretary of State.”
I asked Hagel whether he would accept a post in a McCain Administration, and he said that he had thought about it. “But I don’t see John changing his position and direction and concept of the American role in the world, to adjust to mine,” he went on. “I’m not going to change mine to adjust to his. And I serve at the pleasure of the President. So it wouldn’t work.” ♦ "Odd Man Out," by Connie Bruck
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/03/081103fa_fact_bruck?printable=true
And equally as interesting, "How John McCain came to pick Sarah Palin" By Jane Mayer:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/10/27/081027fa_fact_mayer
“There was a political party in this country called the Know-Nothings,” he continued. “And we’re getting on the fringe of that, with these one-issue voters—pro-choice or pro-life. Important issue, I know that. But, my goodness. The world is blowing up everywhere, and I just don’t think that is a responsible way to see the world, on that one issue. And, interestingly enough, that is one issue that stopped John McCain from picking one of the people he really wanted, Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge”—the Independent senator from Connecticut and the Republican former governor of Pennsylvania. (Both men are pro-choice.)
Several of Hagel’s close friends told me they believed that if McCain won the election he would ask Hagel to serve in his Cabinet, as either Secretary of Defense or Secretary of State, and that Hagel would agree, despite their differences. In February, 2006, in an article in the Times Magazine, Joseph Lelyveld asked McCain whether he would consider asking Hagel to be his running mate or a member of his Administration, and he quoted McCain as saying, “I’d be honored to have Chuck with me in any capacity. He’d make a great Secretary of State.”
I asked Hagel whether he would accept a post in a McCain Administration, and he said that he had thought about it. “But I don’t see John changing his position and direction and concept of the American role in the world, to adjust to mine,” he went on. “I’m not going to change mine to adjust to his. And I serve at the pleasure of the President. So it wouldn’t work.” ♦ "Odd Man Out," by Connie Bruck
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/03/081103fa_fact_bruck?printable=true
And equally as interesting, "How John McCain came to pick Sarah Palin" By Jane Mayer:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/10/27/081027fa_fact_mayer

6 Comments:
ugh. ick. (scraping my tongue)
Okay. Over it. We knew it sucked, anyway.
BTW: LMAO that the B-on-the-face girl admitted to making the whole story up. And I noticed on Fox News at the gym this morning (it's really funny if you watch and read, but not so funny if you have to listen to their tone) they were working up the story of someone with a hanging Sarah Palin on their house for Halloween. Boo to the hoo. But no mention of the Obama assassination scare. I laughed. Not sure that I should have, though.
I see one of my favorite bloggers, The Field Negro, picked up on your blog.
AS, I laughed at hanging sarah, too! And I laughed when I read your comment lol. Fox and reading it, I can't imagine! How do they do the yelling parts?? lol (I know they don't yell as much in the morning :))
Bob, hey! Happy to see you. Yes, I heard about this. Loki mentioned it in yahooversation last night. I was all atwitter because I have a teeny little web-crush on Field. It's all physical :). I found him through you, btw.
Yes, I noticed it. But I don't think that it's something to be proud of.
well really, I didn't even know what you guys are talking about until about 3 minutes ago. I thought you meant that Field put me on the blog roll.
Which, eventually, I thought, "o.k. wait, how would Rix see me on a 1,017 people blog roll..." Now Loki, he would notice.. but...
So I went over to Field's site and ok, I see what you mean. I'm featured. (Imagine: pic of me here (at my best angle) with hearts for eyes) :)
I'm honored. I'm not sure how to say thanks to him without drawing attention, so if he sees this, well, you know...
Listening, K
One of the most disturbing recent phenomenons in our culture is this dumbing down of our country and leaders. I don't know exactly when or where it began but I can recall George Bush Sr. started talking about the "elite," intentionally pronouncing it "alite" to drive the insult home. The implication, of course, that being well educated is somehow "fancy or uppity."
Then there's this lack of tolerance for nuance and finesse which promulgates "black and white" solutions and declarations - such as "If you're not with us, you're against us." This is so dangerous, especially in foreign policy where nuance is sometimes the difference between success and abysmal failure which can cost thousands of lives.
We need a thinker and an open mind in the White House.
Post a Comment
<< Home