Two weeks ago, the International Association of Fire Fighters held a forum for presidential candidates in Washington. Most of the major candidates of both parties accepted invitations to speak and did so without incident. Hillary Clinton gave a solid if unspectacular speech. John Edwards and Barack Obama acquitted themselves nicely. Some of the minor Democratic and Republican candidates also appeared, for whatever that’s worth.
The media made a fuss over Rudy Giuliani declining an invitation to this event, noting Rudy’s often tumultuous relationship with firefighters while he was mayor of New York. But I think the media missed the real story, which occurred when Senator John McCain spoke.
One must understand that the IAFF is a conservative bunch. True, they have never endorsed a Republican for president, but that’s largely the work of the union leadership. The rank and file members of the IAFF are bedrock Republicans. This would seem to be a perfect audience for Senator McCain. He was introduced to an enthusiastic round of applause, and as the audience settled in to listen to the senator, one could reasonably expect him to do well with this crowd.
That’s not what happened. McCain launched into an energetic defense of the Iraq war. Here’s an excerpt from Dana Milbank’s account in the Washington Post:
McCain told the crowd the war “is not hopeless.” No response in the audience except for somebody coughing.
Reading his speech and stealing quick glances at his listeners, he continued. "The hour is late, but we must try, we must!" Beefy firemen, arms folded on chests, stared back silently.
This is not, I am sure, what John McCain thought his second try for the White House would be like. The senator from Arizona is already slipping in the polls. Chuck Hagel’s entry into the race could be the nail in the coffin, because Hagel occupies the same ground that McCain does, but with a critical advantage: he opposes the war.
I’ve struggled somewhat to write about Chuck Hagel. He’s an unknown quantity in national politics. He doesn’t have the outsized personality of John McCain. He doesn’t evoke the dramatic echoes of 9/11 like Rudy Giuliani. His candidacy doesn’t have the potential to make history like Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.
That’s not as much of an obstacle as it used to be, however. In the era of negative campaigning, 30 second attack ads, 527 groups, etc. you don’t have to define yourself, you only have to define your opponent.
While that’s not exactly the sort of optimism one would like a presidential campaign to be about, as Robert DeNiro says, "it is what it is."
Or, in another GoodFella-ism:
"You may know who we are, but we know who you are."
So let’s see how Chuck Hagel compares to others of his Republican brethren:
Let’s start with how this prospective president compares with the incumbent. George W. Bush is the son of a former president, evaded combat in Vietnam, failed as a businessman, and as president has led the United States into an unnecessary and disastrous war.
Hagel is a study in contrast. He grew up in a small town in Nebraska, the son of a lumberman. Charles Hagel died in 1962, when his eldest son Chuck was only fifteen. Five years later, Chuck went to Vietnam and served as an infantry sergeant. After the war, Hagel worked for a Republican congressman on Capitol Hill and later in the Veterans Administration.
After leaving government service, Hagel made millions in mobile phones and investment banking. He then ran for the Senate in 1996 and has made a name for himself by being the sole outspoken Republican critic of the war in Iraq.
In 2000, ironically, Hagel was considered as Bush’s running mate, a job that obviously went to Dick Cheney. It might be fun to compare these two as well.
Take a look at this timeline, originally published by Slate magazine and enhanced at length by yours truly:1959: Dick Cheney turns eighteen and becomes eligible for the draft.
February, 1962: Cheney is classified 1-A, “available immediately for military service.”
June, 1962: Cheney returns to Wyoming after doing poorly at Yale University.
January, 1963: Cheney enrolls at Casper Community College.
March, 1963: Cheney applies for and is given a student deferment, the first of three undergraduate deferments he would apply for and receive.
May 19, 1965: Dick Cheney graduates from college after six years. The Selective Service classifies Dick Cheney 1-A again.
July 28, 1965: President Lyndon Johnson says draft calls will be doubled.
Oct. 26, 1965: The Selective Service declares that married men without children, who were previously exempted from the draft, will now be called up. Married men with children remain exempt.
November 1, 1965 Cheney receives his fourth student deferment as he begins graduate school at the University of Wyoming.
Jan. 19, 1966: The Selective Service reclassifies Dick Cheney 3-A, "deferred from military service because service would cause hardship upon his family," because his wife is pregnant with their first child.
Jan. 30, 1967: Dick Cheney turns 26 and therefore becomes ineligible for the draft.
Summer, 1967: Chuck Hagel and his brother Tom are inducted into the U.S. Army. They are assigned to the same unit and become infantry squad leaders in the U.S. Army’s Ninth Infantry Division.
1968: The Hagel brothers are deployed to Vietnam. Chuck attains the rank of sergeant and wins two Purple Hearts for injuries sustained in combat.
1989: When questioned why he did not serve in the military, Secretary of Defense Cheney tells a Washington Post reporter: “I had other priorities in the '60s than military service."
That about says it all, doesn’t it?
So on a personal level, Hagel differs considerably from Bush and Cheney. He and McCain didn't have "other priorities." They wanted to serve their country, and did so with honor. That reflects well upon them, but the Republican nominee has to answer questions about Iraq, not Vietnam. So how does Hagel fare in that comparison?
President Bush thought this war would be quick and easy. Hagel knew better:
“We should not be seduced by the expectations of "dancing in the streets" after Saddam's regime has fallen, the kites, the candy, and cheering crowds we expect to greet our troops, but instead, focus on the great challenges ahead…We have heard precious little from the President, his team, as well as from this Congress, with a few notable exceptions, about these most difficult and critical questions. We need only look to Afghanistan where the Afghan people joyously welcomed our liberation force but, months later, a fragile transition government grapples with rebuilding a fractured political culture, economy, and country.” - Chuck Hagel, from the Congressional Record, October 9, 2002
Vice President Cheney thought that we were “winning” in Iraq and that the insurgency was “in its last throes.” Hagel knew better:
"Maybe the vice president can explain the increase in casualties we're taking," the Nebraskan told CNN.
"If that's winning, then he's got a different definition of winning than I do." - Chuck Hagel, August 18, 2005.
Now, two years later, McCain argues that we must continue the fight, that the surge is necessary and tactically sound. Hagel’s response?
Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska described the move as “the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam, if it’s carried out.” – on the Senate floor, January 11, 2007.
For these remarks and others, Chuck Hagel has earned the enmity of many Republicans in Washington. What Hagel perceives as his duty as a senator and as an American, others consider to be party disloyalty. Certainly Ole Dick isn't a fan:
“Let’s say I believe firmly in Ronald Reagan’s 11th Commandment: thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican. But it’s very hard sometimes to adhere to that where Chuck Hagel is involved.” - Vice President Dick Cheney, January 29, 2007.
The differences between Chuck Hagel and the party leaders are clear. They are just as stark as the differences between Hagel, who is not yet a candidate for president, and his potential rivals. There is a vacuum on the Republican right that McCain cannot fill, that Giuliani certainly cannot fill. Mitt Romney is trying to do so, but he’s troubled by the uncomfortable fact that he was a moderate Republican until he decided to run for president. While these three candidates compete for the centrist vote, the conservative base of the party, the folks who actually choose the nominee, are looking for a candidate.
Now, Hagel has challenges to overcome. He has to raise money. He needs to become better known. Perhaps most of all, he needs to develop a positive political persona. So far he’s only been the critic, telling us what we can’t do. He has to do more, he has to tell us what we can do, what’s possible, what to reach for. Despite what I said before about only having to define your opponent, there is still an advantage to be gained for a presidential candidate who can inspire people.
So the last hurdle to be overcome is history, the long standing tendency of Republicans to nominate the front runner. Yes, they go with a guy when it’s his “turn.” But if ever there were an election when a Republican could cut in line, this is it.
