Ran across this article today about a speech he gave to the Cato Institute, and while I agreed with most of it, I noticed this little gem:
--Hagel also warned against measures proposed by the Democratic Party. "What we don't want to do, because that is the most dangerous scenario, is cut off funding from our troops. That would be devastating to our image in the world," he said.--
http://www.upi.com/Security_Terrorism/Analysis/2007/07/20/analysis_hagel_wants_un_to_solve_iraq/5364/I am not a proponent of defunding, myself (mostly because of the terrible political fallout that will be sure to follow, as evidenced by the above Republican's statement), but I could hardly care what the world thinks on this matter--our image is already lower than a snake's belly, and heck, the rest of the world is probably wondering why we haven't defunded already, so that's not really a good reason. But he nicely perpetuated the Right-Wing talking point about Democrats and defunding (We're willing to do something "dangerous" to the troops? Yeah, I don't think so, Chuck, that's YOUR party)--I guess he wanted to remind the folks at Cato which team he still played for.
I guarantee, however, that whoever the Republican nominee is, that guy will almost CERTAINLY make tons of hay out of Hillary and Obama's "defunding" votes in May. Especially considering the "Won't play chicken with the troops on funding" statement Obama made, and then he voted against the funding bill--a little flip-flop that I fear will come back to haunt him, as an Obama supporter. Maybe we should take this as a cautionary tale to NOT drive our top candidates into a position they are uncomfortable with?