OUTRAGEOUS COMMENT

This one just can’t wait for butthead of the week.

Yesterday the Supreme Court heard arguments on the renewal of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was passed unanimously by the Senate in 2006.  The appeal challenged the part of the Voting Rights Act (Section 5) that forces states with a history of discrimination to get approval from the Justice Department or a federal court before they make any change in the way elections are held and was brought by Shelby County, Alabama (no surprise there).  Justice Antonin Scalia referred to the the renewal of the law as the “perpetuation of racial entitlement.”  How totally out of touch with reality and ignorant that comment was!

Addressing the question of why Congress had extended Section 5 in 2006 with no opposition at all in the Senate, Justice Antonin Scalia said it was “very likely attributable, to a phenomenon that is called perpetuation of racial entitlement. Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes.” 

Justice Sonia Sotomayor challenged Scalia’s comments, asking “Do you think Section 5 was voted for because it was a racial entitlement?” She also asked “Do you think racial discrimination has ended?”

Justice Elena Kagan, appointed by President Barack Obama in 2010, said Alabama still deserved to be singled out for coverage under section 5.  She said section 5 “seems to work pretty well” in targeting the places where there are the most successful lawsuits under a separate section of the Voting Rights Act, section 2.  That part of the law, which isn’t being challenged in the Shelby County case, bans all voting procedures that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in a language minority group. Unlike Sections 4 and 5 of the law, Section 2 covers all 50 states.  “If Congress were to write a formula that looked to the number of successful Section 2 suits per million residents, Alabama would be the number one state on the list,” Kagan said.  (NBC News)

Discrimination in voting was the order of the day in 1965 when the Voting Rights Act was passed by Congress.  People were killed in the movement for change. 

Voter intimidation exists today where states have recently passed laws to impede voting, such as voter ID requirements, aimed mainly at minorities and the poor.  If states who make changes to voter laws have to clear it with the Justice Department or federal courts, so what!  That is less of a hurdle than what voters have to go through when states enact laws to restrict voting. 

No doubt because of the conservative majority on the Supreme Court this Court will eviscerate the Voting Rights Act.  That is unfortunate enough, but the comment by Scalia that it is a “perpetuation of racial entitlement” is outrageous and demeaning.  Just one day more...

CONSUMERS NEED A CHOICE

Something that has bothered me for some time now is the quantity of useless channels we are required to purchase with our subscription to Directv.  Here on the farm we have little choice since we don’t have access to cable.  It is either Directv or Dish.  That is, if we want channels other than limited traditional over-the-air channels we could receive with an outdoor antenna.

When we signed up for Directv a few years back we were enticed by the initial introductory price, which lasted about a year.  After that it went up to the regular price, which now is nearly $80 each month.  With it came about 150 channels.  At least 90% of those channels are useless, including shopping channels, game channels, church channels, sports channels, kids channels and on and on.  In order to get history, classic movie and news channels we have to “pay” for all the other unwatched channels.  I often wondered why they couldn’t bundle the channels according to their substance and allow the purchase of only the packaged channels we care to.  Granted, there would be a base price for service, but it makes no sense we have to pay for all the useless channels. 

My question about why we can’t simply purchase packaged channels of interest was answered by a recent court case.  Cablevision has filed an antirust lawsuit against Viacom.  Viacom provides channels to service providers like Cablevision, but Viacom bundles less popular channels with popular channels and requires that providers must pay a substantially higher price  for popular channels if they aren’t bundled.  Thus, providers purchase the bundles and that added cost is passed onto us, the end user.  Viacom argues that this allows less viable and unpopular channels to be subsidized, making them economically viable.  I say bunk!

Consumer advocate groups and the FCC need to file an amicus brief in this case.  Making consumers pay for the bundled channels they don’t want just to get service is unreasonable.  If unpopular channels don’t have the viewers they shouldn’t be part of a package deal.  Thirty or forty bucks a month is realistic for satellite television, but we are getting into the cost prohibitive range at $80 each month.  Just one day more...  

THERE IS A COMPELLING INTEREST IN GUN REGULATION

Notwithstanding the Second Amendment, the government does have a compelling interest in gun regulation.  

When making a case for unlimited and unrestricted guns, gun zealots parse a clause from the Second Amendment to assert there is a constitutional prohibition on any government regulation of guns.  Most recently the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that there is an individual right to possess a firearm (District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) and the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government  (McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010).  Suffice to say these decisions bolstered gun advocates, however it should be noted that both decisions were 5-4.  In each of these cases I feel the Supreme Court neglected the issue of the compelling interest of the government in regulation of guns.

Over a period of time the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the authority of law enforcement to conduct random traffic blockades or “checkpoints.”  These can be for various purposes, including informational (llinois v. Lidster, 540 U.S. 419 (2004), drugs and alcohol (Michigan v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444, 455 (1990), driver’s license (Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979), general crime control (City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32 (2000).

Basically whatever law enforcement can claim as being for public safety and enforcement.  While the Supreme Court has placed some standards for conducting random roadblocks, they have generally deferred to allowing them, contrary to the Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches.  The Court has determined that roadblocks and checkpoints can be conducted if:

1)  The crime about which information is sought must be serious.

2)  Checkpoints must be narrowly tailored (location, time of day and duration) to 

      the investigative purpose.

3)  Checkpoint stops must be brief and systematic, not arbitrary.

4)  Vehicles cannot be stopped to conduct general interrogation.

Even with these restrictions, in many instances “narrowly tailored” roadblocks evolve into more.  A good example is what occurs annually around July 4th in Nebraska.  Law enforcement sets up roadblocks with adjoining states who have more liberal laws regarding what fireworks may be sold.  Invariably, in checking for illegal fireworks, law enforcement comes up with a laundry list of other offenses (i.e. expired drivers license) “discovered” while conducting the fireworks check roadblock.  In many cases the other offenses exceed citations for illegal fireworks.

A case which is often cited to justify random roadblocks was decided by the Supreme Court and upheld sobriety checkpoints as not violating the Fourth Amendment (Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990).  In the 6-3 decision, the Court cited the “magnitude” of drunken driving.  Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist said that a police checkpoint is a small price to pay for combatting the carnage caused by drunk drivers.  Essentially, the Court said the results of drunk driving was a more compelling interest than Fourth Amendment protections from unreasonable searches.  And, therein lies my argument.  

Statistically, in the U.S., more deaths result from guns than from drunk drivers.  In 2010, 10,136  people were drunk driving fatalities and in 2011 the number was 9,878  (NHTSA).  In 2010, 31,672 deaths resulted from firearms and in 2011 the number was 32,163 (Alpers, Philip and Marcus Wilson. 2013. Guns in the United States: Facts, Figures and Firearm Law).  

Understand, I am not condoning impaired driving.  I am making a case that, just the same as drunken driving deaths justify a compelling interest of the government to regulate it within the Fourth Amendment, so there is a compelling government interest in regulating guns within the Second Amendment, due to the number of gun deaths.  I feel the Supreme Court should apply the same standard of public safety to gun regulation that they apply to random roadblocks and checkpoints.  Just one day more...

Citizens for Tax Justice recently reported that Facebook received $429 million in tax refunds last year and paid no federal and state income taxes on its profits, which were more than $1 billion. In Facebook’s SEC filing this month, the company reported a $429 million net tax refund from the federal and state treasuries all the while earning nearly $1.1 billion in profits.  

Facebook’s income tax refunds stem from the company’s use of a single tax break, that is the tax deductibility of executive stock options. That tax break reduced Facebook’s federal and state income taxes by $1,033 million in 2012, including refunds of earlier years’ taxes of $451 million. (CTJ)  

This “stock option” is used by numerous corporations when they give executives options to purchase stock at a favorable price in the future.  When the options are exercised corporations can take a tax deduction on the difference between what was paid for the stock and what it is worth.

Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) has introduced legislation to end the stock option exclusion for corporations.  According to calculations made by Levin’s staff using IRS data, in the past five years U.S. companies have consistently deducted far more stock options for tax purposes than they recorded as book expense.  This excess deduction has ranged between $12 billion and $61 billion a year. (CTJ)  

When big corporations (legally) take advantage of the “stock option” in the U.S. tax code, thereby paying significantly reduced or no taxes, the difference has to made up somewhere.  And that falls on the back of the average taxpayer.

I suppose you could say the average taxpayer is a butthead for allowing this major loophole for corporations in the tax code.  But, when it comes to lobbying Congress, big corporations have the deepest pockets and have done a good job getting benefits in the tax code to avoid paying their fair share.  At a time when corporations are socking away more profits than ever before and sitting on piles of cash, it just doesn’t seem right the average taxpayers, who are struggling day to day, have to make up this difference.  And for that, Facebook and big corporations are this week’s buttheads.  Just one day more...

THE REAL MCCOY

“Yup, by gawd... it’s the real McCoy.”  Ever wonder where the phrase, “the real McCoy” came from?  Actually, there are two different ideas of how the phrase became popular.  The phrase is used to identify something as being original and not an inferior substitute.

It is thought to have originated from the Scottish phrase "The real MacKay", used in the phrase: "A drappie o' the real MacKay," (A drop of the real MacKay). The phrase was then used with a slight variation in a Canadian publication in 1881.  In James S. Bond's The Rise and Fall of the "Union Club", a character says, "By jingo! yes; so it will be. It's the 'real McCoy.”  

The alternative opinion on how the phrase became popular was the result of the invention of a superior automatic oiler (patent 1872) for steam locomotives by Elijah McCoy (1844 – 1929).  McCoy was a black Canadian-American inventor and engineer, who was notable for his 57 U.S. patents, most to do with lubrication of steam engines.  

Engine lubrication was a necessity for steam engines and the invention of the automatic oiler allowed them to make fewer stops for oiling and run at higher speeds, adding to the profits of railroad companies.  McCoy continued to refine his oilers and 50 of his subsequent patents were for lubrication systems.  Lacking the money to manufacture, he usually sold his patents to large companies and it wasn’t until 1920 that automatic oilers carried the name “McCoy Oiler.”  But, throughout the era of steam engines railroad engineers specifically asked if the locomotives they ran had “the real McCoy” oilers to avoid inferior oilers and breakdowns.  They wanted the genuine article.

The phrase, “the real McCoy” may have been a variation of a Scottish phrase, but as far as I’m concerned the railroad engineers made it part of the English language.  No doubt, Eijah McCoy would have been proud.  Just one day more...

MORE WINTER

This one is for all you snowbirds down south...  our forecast is for a winter storm with up to a foot of snow.  

Sometimes it is not so much the level of the snow, rather how the wind blows causing drifts.  Not one of my favorite events, but we’ll deal with it.

Here on the farm we have an older Ford tractor with a loader that makes moving snow less of a chore, but it is still a chore.  So, we’ll see tomorrow what this storm brings.  As for today, it sure feels like homemade soup is in order.  Just one day more...

AND THE TRUTH IS...

President Obama has called for universal preschool education and that got my attention.  As I have mentioned in past posts, my wife is an elementary teacher and my daughter teaches Kindergarten.  Early childhood education has a history in our family and it has become clear that the sooner children start a formal education the better they do as they progress through school.  

Programs like Head Start and Early Head Start have increased access to early childhood education among America’s children, but significant gaps in access remain for children in low and middle-income families, who would receive the same chance under President Obama's plan.

The facts are that:

• Well-designed preschool education programs produce long-term improvements in school success, including higher achievement test scores, lower rates of grade repetition and special education, and higher educational attainment. Some preschool programs are also associated with reduced delinquency and crime in childhood and adulthood.

• The strongest evidence suggests that economically disadvantaged children reap long-term benefits from preschool. However, children from all other socioeconomic backgrounds have been found to benefit as well.

• Increasing public investment in effective preschool education programs for all children can produce substantial educational, social, and economic benefits.

(Preschool Education and Its Lasing Effects:  Research and Policy Implications;  W. Steven Barnett, Ph.D.;  National Institute for Early Education Research Rutgers)

Enter the ideologues and partisans:

Fox News has repeatedly slammed President Obama's plan for universal preschool education by calling it a "government handout" that will trick a new generation of toddlers to vote for Democrats.  On Sunday, Fox Business host Gerri Willis called the preschool plan “immoral."  "I have to tell you, I think it’s immoral to make all of these promises, when you know you can’t afford it, we can’t afford it," said Willis. "Preschool for everyone, are you kidding me? We don’t have the money for that! … This is just crazy talk and I think it’s immoral to put this across as something that’s actually doable, when it’s not."  (Media Matters)

Appearing on CSPAN’s 'Washington Journal' on Friday, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) said that she opposes President Obama’s proposal for universal preschool education because it would mean "more paperwork."  Rep. Blackburn also claimed that preschool education funded by the federal government would somehow interfere with teaching and parenting: "Let 'em educate children, let 'em teach."  (CSPAN)

So long as partisans like Willis and Blackburn demagogue early childhood education for political reasons, preschool children will languish.  The overwhelming benefit of early childhood education is clear from empirical evidence and statistical data.  Until Willis and Blackburn can prove otherwise they should clam up.  Just one day more...

SERIOUSLY?!

The 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which abolished slavery, was ratified in 1865. Lawmakers in Mississippi, however, only got around to officially ratifying the amendment last month -- 148 years later -- thanks to the movie "Lincoln."

The state's historical oversight came to light after Mississippi resident Ranjan Batra saw the Steven Spielberg-directed film last November, the Clarion-Ledger reports.

After watching the film, which depicts the political fight to pass the 13th Amendment, Batra did some research. He learned that the amendment was ratified after three-fourths of the states backed it in December 1865. Four remaining states all eventually ratified the amendment -- except for Mississippi. Mississippi voted to ratify the amendment in 1995 but failed to make it official by notifying the U.S. Archivist.

Batra spoke to another Mississippi resident, Ken Sullivan, who contacted Mississippi Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann about the oversight. Finally, on Jan. 30, Hosemann sent the Office of the Federal Register a copy of the 1995 resolution, and on Feb. 7, the Federal Register made the ratification official.  (CBS News)

Seriously??!  An "oversight"?!  And it wasn't ratified until 1995?

Just one day more...

Former Vice President Dick Cheney said this week that President Barack Obama has jeopardized U.S. national security by nominating substandard candidates for key cabinet posts.  Cheney said it was vital to the nation's national security that "good folks" hold the positions of secretary of state, CIA director and secretary of defense.  "Frankly, what he has appointed are second-rate people," he said.  (AP)

This is the same guy who took us into war and cost us billions of dollars and thousands of lives.  In misleading us into war, Cheney said Saddam Hussein had "reconstituted nuclear weapons."  WRONG!  He said Hussein was working with al-Qaida. WRONG!  He said U.S. troops would be "greeted as liberators." WRONG!   Six months after the invasion of Iraq, he said there was nothing wrong with our strategy. WRONG!  In 2005, he said the Iraqi insurgency was "in its last throes."  WRONG! 

Cheney is like the old troll under the bridge, crawling out to spew garbage.  He needs to stay under the bridge.  Cheney cost this country so much in money and lives, yet continues to regurgitate the same misinformation and for that he is a butthead.  Just one day more...

WAITING ON THE EXCHANGE

As my wife and I plan for approaching retirement the lynch pin in the planning is health insurance.  Costs can range anywhere from approximately $500/month to $1200+/month, depending on plans and deductibles.  The cheapest plans are essentially insurance for only a catastrophic health problem.  Even the more expensive plans have copays and deductibles that vary.  Either way, health insurance costs are simply too much for the average retirees, at least until eligible for Medicare.

The only hope for us at this point is the Affordable Health Care Act (Obamacare) and right now that is an unknown.  The government has an informative WEBSITE about the new law, however the health insurance exchanges won’t kick in until 2014, but they are supposed to be in place in each state by October, 2013.  A number of states have already set up the exchange, however Nebraska officials are pouting and refusing to implement an exchange.  Thus, it will ultimately be run by the federal government.  What the Nebraska officials are doing by refusing to set up an exchange is wrong and counterproductive to serving the people of the state.  Living in a state dominated by narrow minded partisans can sometimes come down to a matter of life and death.  Just one day more...

Follow-up
A fellow blogger kindly left a comment about their monthly rates for health insurance and suggested I keep looking, so I spent the morning checking online and phone call to BCBS.  The short of the long is that until the Affordable Health Care Act kicks in health insurance providers do not cross state lines and we are limited by authorized providers in our state.  There are no providers I could find that quoted rates below $400-$500/month (with high deductibles and co-pays).  I appreciate comments and will keep shopping.

WE ARE BEING RIPPED OFF

Susan Crawford, former special assistant to President Obama for science, technology and innovation and communications law professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School, appeared on the Bill Moyer’s PBS show a couple nights ago.  Crawford provided evidence of an internet that's increasingly dominated by conglomerates like Comcast, Time Warner, Verizon, and AT&T. "They're charging us a lot for internet access and giving us second-class access.  A few companies control access in America and it's not in their interest to bring that fast, cheap access to us all”, she said.

Crawford outlines the growing disparity between the cost consumers are paying and the internet speeds they're seeing for that investment. "In Hong Kong, right now, you can get a 500Mbps symmetric connection that's unimaginably fast from our standpoint for about $25 per month. In Seoul, for $30 you get three choices of different providers of fiber for your apartment, and they come and install in a day because competition is so fierce." Simply by comparing those rates to a typical Time Warner subscription, she makes clear that US consumers are getting a raw deal.  Crawford says, all of us are at the mercy of the biggest business monopoly since Standard Oil in the first Gilded Age a hundred years ago.

To view the entire broadcast or read the transcript go HERE

Before we moved to the farm we lived in a small town of 2500 where I served two terms on the city council.  At one meeting the librarian was explaining the wireless internet being provided for patrons of the library.  Just like some fast food restaurants, when open wireless is available patrons get internet access free.  It seemed logical to me that citizens of a community are entitled to internet access provided by the city, not unlike any other municipal utility.  So, I went about researching what it would take to set up the “hubs” throughout the town to provide wireless internet to all residents.  Later in the process everything came to a halt when I learned that internet provider companies in the state had gone to the state legislation and had a law enacted prohibiting anyone else from providing internet access, specifically city governments.  

Susan Crawford has made the case that we are being ripped off by the internet companies.  The same is the case for satellite television and cell phone companies.  The mega-companies mergers have gotten under the radar of the FCC and they are charging whatever the market will bear.  Just like any other societal utility, communications are essential today.  It is time for the FCC to do their job and get on the side of the consumers.  Just one day more...

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Wednesday laid out a grim list of spending cuts the Pentagon will have to make in the coming weeks that he said will seriously damage the country's economy.  He said that if Congress doesn't pass a budget the Pentagon will have to absorb $46 billion in spending reductions in this fiscal year and will face a $35 billion shortfall in operating expenses.  "These steps would seriously damage the fragile American economy, and they would degrade our ability to respond to crisis precisely at a time of rising instability across the globe," Panetta said.  (The Associated Press)

At what point are these politicians going to stop trying to scare the bejesus out of us in order to continually add more and more money to their budgets?!  The U. S. annual military budget exceeds all other industrial nations combined at $711 billion.  And the waste continues.  NBC news reported last night that the military scrapped a new computer project after spending $1 billion on it.  The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost the taxpayers between $3.7 trillion and 4.4 trillion.

Panetta speculates that budget cuts to the military would damage the economy, when in fact the massive military spending and recent wars contributed to the recession this country is still trying to dig out of.   Other politicians used hyperbole to scare us into war, like the “smoking gun” and “mushroom cloud” and Penatta now does the same to scare us into continuing the bloated military spending and for that he is a butthead.  Just one day more...  

NO SATURDAY MAIL

In an effort to save money the U.S. Post Office has announced that they will stop Saturday mail delivery effective in August.  The Post Office has been losing money for years, especially since UPS and FedEx and most recently the advent of email.  Here on the farm we get rural delivery, which was known as RFD (rural free delivery).  Most of our mail is either bills or junk mail, so I doubt we will miss Saturday delivery.  But, it is certainly a notable event after so many years of Saturday delivery by the Post Office.

It brought to mind the history of mail delivery in our family.  My grandfather was a rural mail carrier in North Dakota.  That was a time went the mail went through - period.  Even in the winter, whether by horse and buggy or modified snow vehicles, the mail was delivered.  Especially in the 20’s and 30’s my grandfather had to be resourceful to get the mail delivered and one method was putting tracks and ski blades on a Model T.  It was tough in the North Dakota winters, however my father said it helped their family get through the Great Depression.

I grew up in North Dakota and vividly remember the winters.  Back then we didn’t think anything about it.  We just dealt with it.  Now that I am in my 60’s I don’t deal with it well anymore.  I can’t imagine how my grandfather dealt with the North Dakota winters delivering rural mail.  He probably didn’t think anything about it.  Just one day more...

P.S.  I’m throwing in a winter pic of a Model T truck I restored just for the heck of it.

ANOTHER NOTABLE BATTLESHIP

USS William T. Powell (DE213), a Buckley-class destroyer escort of the United States Navy, was named in honor of Gunner's Mate William T. Powell (1918-1942), who was killed in action, aboard the heavy cruiser USS San Francisco off Guadalcanal on 12 November 1942.  The USS Powell served in W.W.II during 1944-1945.

My father (photo above) served on the USS Powell.  He never talked about his time in the U.S. Navy and he never “wore it on his sleeve”, or hat for that matter.  Those who knew my father knew of his service.  He didn’t need to tell them or wear symbols.  The only symbol he had from his service was a panther tattoo on his upper arm.  All he said about that was that he had it done with some of his shipmates.   Imprudence of an 18-year-old I suppose.   But, like his time in the Navy, he never talked about that either.  Somehow that just seemed right.  Just one day more...

FEBRUARY NOTABLE LAUNCH

The German battleship Bismarck was the first of two Bismarck-class battleships built for the German Kriegsmarine.  Named after Chancellor Otto von Bismarck it was launched in February, 1939.  The Bismarck and her sister ship Tirpitz were the largest battleships ever built by Germany, and two of the largest built by any European power.

Under commanding officer, Capt. Ernst Lindemann, the Bismarck conducted only one offensive operation, in May 1941, code named Rheinübung. 

The ship, along with the heavy cruiser Prinz Eugen, was to break into the Atlantic Ocean and raid Allied shipping from North America to Great Britain. The two ships were detected several times off Scandinavia, however, and British naval units were deployed to block their route. At the Battle of Denmark Strait, Bismarck engaged and destroyed the battle cruiser HMS Hood, the pride of the Royal Navy, and forced the battleship HMS Prince of Wales to retreat; Bismarck herself was hit three times and only suffered an oil leak from a ruptured tank.

The destruction of HMS Hood spurred a relentless pursuit by the Royal Navy involving dozens of warships. Two days later, while heading for the relative safety of occupied France, Bismarck was attacked by Swordfish torpedo bombers from the aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal.  One torpedo found the Achille’s heel of the Bismarck and a hit was scored that rendered the battleship's steering gear inoperable. Amazingly, the torpedo hit the Bismarck’s rudder.  In her final battle the following morning, Bismarck was pummeled by a sustained bombardment from the British fleet and sank with heavy loss of life. 

"Aquellos que no pueden recordar el pasado están destinados a repetirla" (Those who cannot remember the past are destined to repeat it),  George Santayana.  

Just one day more...

Chuck Hagel has been nominated by President Obama as Secretary of Defense and the  Senate confirmation hearing was on Thursday.  Consistent with recent Senate hearings, it was a circus.  The main clowns were John McCain and Lindsey Graham.  Hagel is from Nebraska and I am familiar with him as a former U.S. Senator. He is highly qualified to be the Secretary of Defense and the treatment he received from McCain and Graham was outrageous.

  

Hagel is a Vietnam War veteran and served in the United States Army infantry from 1967 to 1968 as a squad leader. Hagel received the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry, two Purple Hearts, Army Commendation Medal, and the Combat Infantryman Badge. Although he is a Republican, Hagel rightly criticized the Iraq War, saying, "There will be no victory or defeat for the United States in Iraq," and called for a "phased troop withdrawal.  In January 2007, Hagel openly criticized President Bush's plan to send an additional 20,000 troops to Iraq. He called it "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam."  Hagel supported a timeline to get out of Iraq.

Instead of focusing on relevant military issues - Iran, Afghanistan, drones, sexual assault in the military, the bloated military budget, etc. - McCain and Graham went on a witch hunt about Hagel’s opposition to the Iraq War and Hagel’s comment about the “Jewish lobby” (taken out of context).  McCain is single-minded about war.  For whatever reason, his response to any international dealing is to attack first and mediate last.  Graham is  flatly a partisan ideologue, who has no balance whatsoever and will oppose anyone who does not fit his narrow absolutes.  In contrast, Hagel is a soft-spoken, deliberative man, who independently and thoughtfully analyzes issues of war and peace.  Hagel knows firsthand the evils of war. 

McCain and Graham not only badgered Hagel in the hearings, they also ignored all the issues relevant to the military and duties of the Secretary of Defense and for that they are buttheads. Just one day more...