Separating the Man From The Job

Just a few days ago, we heard the news that President Obama will nominate Chuck Hagel, a Republican former Senator from Nebraska, to become the next defense secretary. It’s a terrifically odd choice, and my first thoughts on the subject were not pleased. It seemed like another instance of Obama making far too much peace with the establishment and caving before any demands are made, a terrible negotiation strategy.

Which it is. But it’s a lot more than that. Chuck Hagel is not the average Republican in terms of foreign policy. As a veteran of the brutal and unnecessary Vietnam War, Hagel seems to understand the grueling nature of militarism. He was a vocal opponent of the Iraq War. He has supported for cutting the military budget, a cut even most democrats would be scared to endorse. When asked about winning the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, he said, “Iraq and Afghanistan are not America’s to win or lose.”  

I disagree greatly with Hagel on most points. He played a good part in the Bush wrecking ball that hit the nation in the 2000s. He voted for indebting tax cuts for the rich as well as destructions of civil liberties. He’s had a consistent record of voting against LGBT rights. He joined with those who responded to the immigration crisis by building bigger fences.

All of these things would be vital- if Hagel were a senator. But we’re not talking about electing him to the senate. We're talking about giving him command of wars. In this instance, we have to take on a hard job as citizens: separating the man from the job.

Take a look at another potentially raucous cabinet nomination: Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts as Secretary of State. Liberals should be, in general, happy with his voting record, which puts him just to the left of the middle of the Democratic Party, including running for president as an opponent of the Iraq War. However, his track record is still questionable on foreign policy. He's shown too much support for unilateralism and interventionism, and let's not forget his vote in favor of the Iraq War Resolution. 

In this instance, as well as the first, we have to remember that there is a difference between a person, overall, and how they will fit a certain job. Nowhere is this truer than in the character-defamation-centered world of politics. With both of these nominees, we should proceed with an incredibly cautious optimism, keeping an eye on them for problematic intentions or a lack of conviction. But the whole time, we have to keep in mind that an unpleasant person can be right for a job, and the vital opposite.