Thank You Chuck Hagel: It’s Been Real
When Chuck Hagel announces his retirement from politics tomorrow, Congress will lose that rarest of men — a principled maverick who was not afraid to stand up to his party and his president.
In an era when politics in America has slouched inextricably to the right, the 60-year-old Nebraskan was difficult to pigeonhole. No mistake about it, Hagel was a conservative and usually reliable Republican vote over two terms, but charted his own course on Social Security and foreign policy — and most notably on Iraq.
The decorated Vietnam veteran’s break with the president on the war and his fierce opposition to the surge, which he called “the worst foreign policy blunder since Vietnam,” had a gravitas few congressfolk can claim.
When Hagel stood in the Senate to declare in his deep and somber voice that
“Any president who says ‘I don’t care’ or ‘I will not respond to what the people of this country are saying about Iraq or anything else’ or ‘I don’t care what the Congress does, I am going to proceed’ — if a president really believes that, then there are . . . .ways to deal with that”
people listened to him, especially the independents whom pundits thought he would attract if he ran for president.
Hagel, who won reelection in 2002 with 83 percent of the vote and indeed flirted with a presidential run, surely returns to private life a disappointed if not bitter man. While he and four or five other Republicans voted with the Democrats in a series of largely symbolic end-the-war votes earlier this year, the war he has so vehemently opposed shows no signs of ending anytime soon.
His maverick status aside, Hagel’s retirement will provoke further chest pains for the GOP.
He would become the third Republican senator to announce his retirement, following Senators John W. Warner of Virginia and Wayne Allard of Colorado. The party will be defending 22 Senate seats to the Democrats’ 12.
Nebraska was once a reliably safe state for Republicans, but anger over the war and Bush’s presidency in general may provide an opening for former Democratic senator Bob Kerrey, who says he is interested in returning to Washington.
7 Responses to “Thank You Chuck Hagel: It’s Been Real”
I find it odd that liberals define courage as Republicans going along with Democrats. You would have more credibility if you could provide an example of a principled Democrat who went against his party.
Also, Kerrey running again in Nebraska demonstrates again how brain dead politics has become. He has not lived in Nebraska since he left office. What would anyone want someone who know calls Manhatten home to represent their state. Are there no real Nebraskans who can do the job?
SD:
Joe “Bomb ‘Em Back to the Stone Age” Lieberman for openers.
superdestroyer…it’s not an issue of “going against” a party. Hegel had courage because he did the right thing, even when there was huge pressure not to. History will treat him well because he had the balls to think independently and didn’t care if he offended the so-called “base”.
Shaun, nice post. I am sure you don’t mean Congress will LOOSE anybody but rather, LOSE. There is some kind of Larry Craig joke in there somewhere but it’s too early in the morning to FIND it.
What’s amazing about Hagel is that he came from the farming Midwest and made foreign affairs one of his big goals and interests. He brings real analysis to the Iraq debate without the emotional baggage of Walter “Freedom Fries” Jones. His ratings on abortion and other issues put him firmly in the conservative camp, I believe even more than McCain.
Canusa:
Typo fixed. Thank you.
I respect the man, and believe he is drawing from his experience on the ground in Vietnam when he speaks out about Iraq. He knows firsthand the folly of sending an army to war iwithout an exit strategy. The Senate has lost two principled Republicans in two weeks- Warner and Hagel -that is truly sad. They truly understand what we are facing , and truly care about the troops.
Hagel dropped out because polling showed he was very unlikely to survive the GOP primary against Bruning. Or because he’s keeping his promise to not serve more than two terms. Or both. Pick’ em. But he’s PO’d his constituents enough over the last few years that his re-election chances look decidedly poor.