To get high paying payoffs once they do their job for whoever when they work inside the Beltway.

A message has been sent. No matter how qualified, no matter how free of scandal, no matter how important the job, there is no nominee that is safe from being strung along for months to be used as a political ploy or just out of pure spite. What sane person would sign up for that?

I do believe that that is exactly the strategy. Paralyze government by leaving vacant positions open and discouraging even what would previoiusly been considered concessionary nominees. Likely a warning to other former Republican office-holders who might be open to a cabinet or other appointment.

Don’t worry. This will be mitigated by Democrats approving without filibuster the most unqualified, corrupt and extreme appointees of the next Republican president.

Legislative jobs are already not appealing to anyone who has a soul and a conscience.

Beat me to it.

Why? Power. Money. Control.

Pretty much in that order, but take your pick. Hagel was “in” on the Kabuki show for the most part, although it did appear from the outside that there was some sort of behind the scenes shit-fit going on. Who knows? Why should Hagel endure this? Why not? He’ll be highly bought off for any “inconveniences.”

Certainly. Without a doubt.

Um…so they can get on “Morning Joe?” Hey, just spitballin’ here…

Yes, this.

Jon’s question should’ve been “After Hagel’s Ordeal, Why Would Anyone Honest Want to Serve in Washington.”

To which my answer is “I’m not sure why anyone honest would’ve wanted to serve in Washington BEFORE Hagel’s ordeal.”

Chuck Hagel is a Jew-hating loony who described the famously pro-Arab State Department as an output of Israel. He’s also a vote thief who stole his first election to the US Senate.

It’s a sure sign of liberalism morphing into its polar opposite that so many “liberals” are defending this dirtbag.

While I’m not personally the biggest fan of Hagel, there was zero legitimate justification for Republicans to block his nomination

You might want to upgrade your reading skills. Most of the commentary around here, at least, has certainly not expressed any huge “love” for Hagel getting this, or any other, post. This article, for me, is discussing the lunacy of what passes for “governance” these days.

I don’t know if Hagel is a “Jew-hater” or not, but you certainly seem to protest with a lot of pre-conceived biases.

Can’t slip one past YOU can they?

You know what “they” say, “everybody has a price“.

Have you ever noticed how often “they” are right about things????

Gotta admit, the datardly, despicable, government freezing bastards that are today’s republican party are very good at what they do.

Goes without saying. “Useless anda Clueless, today’s Democratic party. But, we suck less.”

I think it’s about forcing Democratic presidents to do the GOP’s bidding. Since the Democrats, being in general a bit more ethical, almost never fight back in kind, the Republicans know they can get away with stunts like this every time.

Go read his comments history. In his lexicon, “Pro-Arab” means “they write a sternly worded letter each time Israel levels a few blocks of Gaza”.

I agree, the democrats are bunch of wusses. The GOP a bunch of unethical, unpricipaled bullies. GREAT makeup for a “government of the people, by the people and for the people”. NOT!!!!!

They got Boehner, McConnell, and Cantor. WE got Reid, Pelosi and Chuck Schumer.

“Serve” in Washington? Well, in the “To Serve Man” sense, maybe.

I figured as much, but I felt compelled to say something that pointed out the idiocy & diatribe nature of that ridiculous comment. One of those days for me, I guess… ;-)

snort! Cue the Twilight Zone theme…

And, he’s a friend of Hamas, right, Randall? Keeps a secret Hezbollah decoder ring in his watch pocket, too.

I don’t know. It seems to me that Democrats might be called “differently unethical” from Republicans. Republicans lie about the facts and play hardball. Democratic leaders lie to their voters about what they plan to do and feign opposition while providing none.

It’s, it’s a cookbook!

Um, there are lots of people looking for jobs.

I sympathize with the point, but there’s simply no evidence that lengthy confirmation processes make the jobs less desirable by qualified people. Plus, making a case for functional governance around Chuck Hagel is like ordering McDonald’s for panel participants at a conference on childhood obesity.

In fact, many regular citizens would love the chance for an extended ‘vetting’ process like Hagel received because it would give them a platform for discussing important issues not otherwise afforded to ordinary Americans.

While I’m not personally the biggest fan of Hagel, there was zero legitimate justification for Republicans to block his nomination. Hagel was not involved in a scandal or had no issue that would prevent him from doing his job. As a former senator he clearly meets the minimum qualifications for the job.

“No legitimate justification” is a very subjective term. In whose eyes? If it had been up to me, I would have refused to confirm. You think he should have been confirmed.

Both our opinions are irrelevant, though The Constitution vouchsafes the decision to the U.S. Senate. A number of Senators thought they had legitimate justification. That is all that matters under the Constitution.

No scandal? What constitutes a scandal is also very subjective. For example, I thought Hagel’s very homophobic actions toward Ambassador Hormel were scandalous–and they bear directly on the Dept of Defense, which is having trouble implementing repeal of DADT as it is. Besides, the Constitution says nothing about scandal or no scandal.

Who ever said being a Senator is automatic qualification for any Cabinet position, let alone D of D? Have you ever listened to some of our Senators? Did you watch the Hagel confirmation hearings?

His performance in the hearings was pathetic. He showed no mastery of the subject matter or ability to think on his feet. And the questions he was asked were all on perfectly predictable topics and he had been prepared by the administration.

This is a guy who is supposed to be able to hold his own with Obama and the rest of the Cabinet in the event of a surprise attack or event, ala Bobby Kennedy advising his brother during the Cuban Missle crisis to, in essence, ignore the Pentagon’s urging to war. I saw no evidence of that kind of ability on the part of Hagel.

The Constitution puts no restrictions on whom Obama may nominate. However, it also puts no restrictions on whom the Senate may reject. It’s a system of checks and balances, not a system of rubber stamping anyone nominated by the President who seems educable and never got caught with his hand in the till (or whatever you consider a scandal).

I agree. Look how Hagel try to shred Hormel, yet people still want to be ambassadors. In fact, look how Hagel still wants to be Secretary of Defense.

Nothing is more vicious than a Presidential race. Not only are the candidates themselves gone after mercilessly, but so are their spouses, their adult and minor children, their parents, their pastors–anyone and anything that might reflect badly on the candidate. Yet, people still covet the position.