When someone who regularly drinks to the point of having to be carried out of the room promises to stop drinking but only if you give him this nifty new job, should you believe him? “…he says he won’t drink if he’s confirmed.”
Bargaining is a classic addict's move. "I won't drink on the job" comes from the kind of hubris that marks someone who has never admitted they have a problem with alcohol. SecDef is one job in which one is "on-call" 24/7. A social drinker could have a drink or two with dinner and be able to function just fine. But an alcoholic is, by definition, unable to control their drinking and fool themselves that they're fine when in reality they are drunk. If there weren't several reports of blackout drinking one could think that the term "high-functioning alcoholic" applies to Pete. But the anecdotes have piled up too high to be able to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Except for the problem that the persons of the incoming administration are replete with histories of corruption and felonies. Birds of a feather stick together. IMO, the entire Republican party has corrupted itself with its intention to bully— all appearances of governing be damned.
You got it Hope. All previous history has no relevance now. Becuase never in our history have Americans been so stupid at the polls, and voted in, after witnessing his first 4-year debacle, the most corrupt unstable venal vindictive unqualifed president ever to see the oval office. It's a new world that we must somehow emerge from intact.
This right on the mark. Hegseth has the earmarks of an alchoholic. If so, that should be made evident to all in his hearings. And Trump, with all his own endless faults, is a non-drinker if I have my facts correct. Perhaps that being so, he might not fight as hard as he might otherwise to get this dangerous and unqualified person the SecDef post. Jesus - it's unthinkable.
Haven't heard that line from Little Feat for a long time. There will be plenty of both bogarting and sharing over the next 4 years if we're to keep our sanity.
Beatrice, you may recall Humphrey Bogart would leave a lit cigarette dangling from his lips interminably, tantalizingly, and suggestively... part of his cool... the power of a delayed consummation, if you will.
Also, the 60's movie hit Easy Rider sound track included a song "Don't Bogart Me" by The Fraternity of Man, with the lyrics,
"Don't bogart that joint, my friend,
Pass it over to meeeee...
..Roll another one, just like the other one,
And pass it over to me."
So yes, to some the appeal of the allusion is implicit sex, & drugs, with a bit of power or titrated control mixed in; but for others, it is just a reference to being a dog in the manger - monopolizing something desirable without making use of it yourself.
Anyone who has lived with or had a close friend who is alcoholic, knows that, and certainly anyone who has had several friends or acquaintances who remember times those people were drunk to the point of passing out knows that when they say they've "never had a drinking problem" are indeed addicted to alcohol.
Another line of questioning may be what-if questions unrelated to politics to gauge how Hegseth would manage a crisis. He will likely say, "That is a hypothetical question."
To which one could say, "Crises are not unique to political parties. We are asking about your character, Sir. And you are running from a non-political question. Simply said, Sir, your lack of experience and character makes it impossible for the American people to trust you to provide leadership through a crisis."
Indeed! At the very best he’d be a “dry drunk” hanging on by his fingernails while scared to death that the least little thing would send him back into the blackness that a heavy drinker knows all too well. Assuming, that is if there is any memory at all of the reverting to the preferred drug of choice, alcohol. A high stress job is no place for just such a personality. It would be a challenge for anyone in a recovery program but at least there would be a support system that one could use for reinforcement were the load get too heavy. And, if nothing else, that dry drunk could be or should be considered a severe security risk. That, as much as the drinking, should make such a person a definite no-go for confirmation.
I have found that out, too. In conflict zones where I have worked and where there is little direct oversight, I have found that someone who is a dry drunk is harder to work with than an active alcoholic. 🤭 With the latter, I usually can work with a few hours every day rather than having to cover my flanks, 24 / 7, from someone else's resentment. 😵 Trump is a classic example of a dry drunk. 😳
Will trump be able to use the US Armed Forces to establish a dictatorship? Will he follow in the footsteps of Hitler? I explore these questions based on the historical record.
Fine essay there, Kathleen. Like you, I am not so fearful of a take-over because the military leadership takes an oath -- one taken seriously by the large majority of brothers and sisters in uniform -- to the Constitution. What concerns me is a civil war. 🤢
While there might not be thirty times the manpower among the rebels versus uniformed military, as you observe in Germany, the revolt may pop up here and there like a whack-a-mole game that is impossible to suppress quickly enough to avoid a general contagion; call it a dispersion of subversion. 😱
I agree that some freelancers will kill their fellow Americans or those who dastardly immigrants in the name of Trump in the next four years, but I think it won't go past a couple of hundred dead.
I hope and pray you are right, Kathleen. 🙏 And I do think you are right.✌🏽If not, as a life-long bachelor, I am ready to fight. 🤬 Though trained in fire-arms, I can still barely hit the side of a barn. 🤭 Fortunately for me, most of these M.A.G.A. militants are as wide as a side of a barn. 😉
Unless the MAGA militants have hostages, I suggest we just let them remain where they are, and send in a beer truck and when the snoring gets really loud, we close in.
I read your wonderful essay from 2016. Thank God that Trump is not Hitler so we don't have to make such impossible choices. I didn't put this in my essay, but I was thinking the SA was a lot like Ku Klux Klan —they were widely distributed over Germany and were poised to keep the general population in line, not just to harass Hitler's enemies list.
My fear in 2017 is that Trump so wanted to x prove he was a tough guy that he would start using nu clear bombs on North Korea. We were three weeks into his administration I realized that wasn't going to happen, thank God.
That promise alone should disqualify a candidate. This is not a promise a social drinker would make, it's a squirming 'get me out of this' promise that will never be kept.
A teenager says that to his parents too….” If only you don’t take the car keys away from me, I won’t drink anymore when out with my friends”. Right! This is not the kind of person we want leading our military. That statement alone by him should be disqualifying.
Perhaps drinking to excess is not something that will exercise or concern GOP Senators too much ... after all they are Senators, all with a bar fridge. But does he drive an electric car, or do anything else wokey / commie?
You took the words right out of my mouth. I was married to an alcoholic and every member of his family were alcoholics. Also my daughter. Not a single one ever stopped drinking completely.
Detox and rehab do work, as I have seen with a friend. But the person has to be motivated to do better, and Pete Hegseth isn't. Actually, Hunter Biden is an example of the fact that detox and rehab do work.
My husband as well. He was given a second chance and grabbed for it like a drowning man for a life raft. Worked his program up until he no longer could-about 4 days before he died. He was 31.5 years with the program. AA worked for him and for us.
It doesn't matter if the question is asked or not. He will lie. As Kavanaugh lied. As Coney Barrett lied. The only reason to ask the question is give mealy-mouthed Susan Collins a chance to say later, "But, he said..." Why give any of them that cover?
I hear you KEM but, today 38 House Republican said NO! to the Musk-Trump bid for no spending limits until 2027 for Trump to transfer more tax relief to the American oligarch class. More specifically Chip Roy said on the Floor the Musk's foolish gambit was "asinine". Unexpected realities echoed through the House today.
As to Musk's threat to primary those not obedient, essentially the House today said "Bring it On". No honeymoon for President Musk [ Fri Update: Make that Speaker Musk.]
Regardless, nothing gets by Schumer the Senate gatekeeper. Gotta have all "4 Corners" the House R's & D's & Senate R's & D's. Didn't happen today -- not even close.
Yes, but let's leave Susan Collins out of any calculation. It's possible that as she nears retirement she may actually take a stand but all signs point to ... nope.
Unfortunately, my senior Senator, Susan Collins, has already announced her intention to run for re-election in 2026! This, after telling us when she first ran for the Senate in 1996 that, if elected, she would only serve 2 terms.
Having been re-elected in 2020, Collins is now in her 5th term!
She's not going anywhere - has said she's running again. I just hope she doesn't subject us to another speech like the one she gave justifying voting for Kavanaugh.
"... today 38 House Republican said NO! to the Musk-Trump bid for no spending limits for Trump's to transfer of more tax relief to the American oligarch class."
I thought the reason they voted against the Bill Lite was because of the elimination of the debt ceiling for two years. I don't think they mind the ruling class getting richer.
It's actually required to MAKE the tax cuts as they will increase the national debt. I expect Trump will get that passed but he should do it on HIS watch not Biden's. I would how Biden would veto any current bill that removed the debt ceiling. If it's gonna happen, it should be on the hands of Trump and the GOP.
Yeah ... but there is no political advantage for the Democrats to defend the Debt Ceiling - the GOP just beats them over the head with decade in, decade out. the Dems should kill it permanently.
And the alleged Debt Ceiling has never stopped ruling-class tax cuts.
As a Texan who doesn't like Chip Roy, I was really surprised by what he said. A republican sounding sane? Totally unexpected but I'm glad he reflected sanity.
I have to wonder whether there’s a sexual abuser pipeline from which MAGA chooses for its nominations? Hegseth, RFK Jr., Gaetz, Trump himself … and the hits keep coming.
Surely looks as though he has kompromat (or some other means of 'performative loyalty' compulsion) on every person he hires, appoints, or backs for office. This is why all MAGAt congressmen run with tail between legs. I expect that's why he's so attached to his hotels & Maralego - (cameras in every 'special guest' room). AND yes, I expect he learned this from Epstein (or VICE versa).
I'm waiting for the battle of the egos. Musk can buy and sell Trump - and if Musk has big sway over Congress then he becomes the acting President - embarrassing and humiliating Trump, which is something Trump cannot stand. I'll bring the popcorn.
Well, Pete Hegseth! When I was reading the Bob Woodward book "War" & learning about how our military & State Department & Security services were so deeply involved in the Ukraine War, the Middle East crises I shuddered when I thought about the gang of fools that trump has put forth.
And this evening's news about some Re-Mags considering voting to make Elon Musk the Speaker of the House, I have to wonder when this entire country is going to implode or explode or both. I mean does anyone think that Pete Hegseth has the ability to handle problems on the scale that our other SecDefs had. I mean even the bad ones, Donald Rumsfeld, weren't anything like this sorry excuse. If the man goes to work drunk, I hate to think about the decisions he'll make if someone wakes him at 3 in the morning & tell him that there has been a terrorist attack within the US.
~~~And speaking of Hegseth's drinking. I few days ago I had the misfortune of spending the day in the ER. Now if you have ever been in an ER you know that privacy is, well, there isn't any. And while I try not to listen in to other people's conversations I couldn't help but listen to what the nurse was saying to a gentleman that had fallen while he was drunk & hit his head & needed to be brought to the ER. It sounded like the gentleman drinks A LOT! So the nurse asked if he would be interested in help cutting back on his alcohol intake. The nurse asked if when the man had not had alcohol for a while if he had any problems. He admitted that he did. The nurse said that drugs could be offered to help eleviate withdrawal symptoms. So Ole Mr. Pete says that he will stop drinking IF he gets the job. How is he going to handle the stress of a job like that if he is going through withdrawal, what happens if his dependency is so great that he gets DTs? Is that who we want with nuclear access?
C'mon Re-Mags get your heads out or trump's ass & do what you were hired to do, protect & defend the Constitution not donal trump!
If he is drinking like observers say he is, he will DEFINITELY get the DTs…and badly. ALL alcoholics say that they can stop anytime. It takes considerable effort to really reach the point of understanding that the alcohol controls them. Additionally, it is a lifelong condition. Plus, as you say, what will happen to any of his resolves when faced with the stress of Secretary of Defense? I wouldn’t put any stock in an alcoholic (one is never a former alcoholic) saying that they will stop drinking if they are given a high stress appointment.
I'm just a person with a BA in history but I do pay attention to life itself so I'm glad that the paltry knowledge that I have gleaned about alcoholism gave me the right insight to post what I did & to have my observations acknowledged by an ICU RN made me feel like sometimes I really do come up with a cogent response. You gave my ego a bit of a boost! Thank you! But don't be concerned, my ego is nothing like Musk's or trump's I KNOW that I am NOT the smartest person the world has ever seen! 😉😉😉🤣
Happy Holidays to you & yours. And thank you for being a nurse! Your profession is the most underappreciated profession around.
Having been in the ER & a few times needing to be admitted to the hospital it is obvious that Nurses keep the hospitals going. Yes, doctors are quite important but it's nurses that provide the help, the concern, the knowledge, the expertise, the patients (I deliberately used that word!) that keep the world a healthier place. You have always been a hero in my eyes!
Thank you again for your dedication to the betterment of humanity.💗
Interestingly, I also did my graduate work in Medieval History, all but dissertation (ABD). 😉
Thank you for the kudos to nurses. Most people don’t realize that the docs actually get their specific information regarding particular patients from the nurses who are the ones who really have their fingers on the pulse of the day to day in hospitals.
My father went to all the best clinics that treated alcohol addiction. He was very high up in a well-known company. Each promise made was broken within hours of his getting home. He was a brilliant man, an artist, Harvard grad, athlete, but, nothing could keep him from the bottle .As a child of an alcoholic, who has spent years studying the power it. There is no way that anyone with this addiction can just stop, and, stay dry.
Anyone who's dealt with an alcoholic's conditional promise to not drink if they get their prize first would find Hegseth's nomination as laughable and frightening as I do. Such promise is a lie in service of the ego, and the #1 attempt to manipulate found in the alcoholics' manipulation playbook.
Isn't Hegseth the guy who, as a Fox News host, lobbied Trump to get pardons and rank reinstatements for servicemen convicted of war crimes? This alone should disqualify him for the Secretary of Defense position in my opinion.
I wanna know what he knows of Russian intervention in German, French, and our eclections? Where does he stand on NATO? On Tulsi Gabbard's positions re Syria, Ukraine.
What is his relationship with Tucker Carlson? Bannon?
He’s definitely not fit to serve, for dozens of reasons. And, just like the 3 Supreme Court justices testified that they would not overturn Roe, it seems that lying is not a problem for these types. And “we know these types.”
Fool me once, shame on you, fool every naïve citizen for over 8 years, shame on our country.
Turns out that 'Lying is not a problem' for well over half of us; read surveys on norms.
I don't think this loss of trust and trustworthiness changes any sooner than one societal collapse and 2-3 generations, and only then with serious changes to 'American values' as they stand now.
Best for our kids to find a much less affluent, less technical, nation - or perhaps commune.
Trump’s cabinet picks are worrysome. But, right now, I want to find a way to pick off Elon Musk. Do we, as citizens and voters, have standing to bring a class action suit against Musk for interfering with government operations, as he did by threatening primaries of anyone who voted against “his” bill? He seems to hold an inordinate amount of sway for an unelected bureaucrat-wannabe.
I was wondering at what point Elon crosses over into bribery territory, If he is offering quid pro quo to elected officials so they will help his business, thatʻs bribery. The interesting question is threatening to primary them if they donʻt play ball. What crime is that? Extortion? Terroristic threats? If it isnʻt a crime it should be. Also Speaker is third in line to the presidency but Musk wasnʻt born in the USA .
It turns out there is no constitutional prohibition restricting someone who isn't eligible to become President from being Speaker of the House (and they don't have to be elected either) but they still couldn't become President without a major violation of the Constitution.
WASHINGTON, Dec 17 (Reuters) - Elon Musk and SpaceX face at least three federal reviews over whether they have complied with federal reporting rules aimed at protecting national security, the New York Times reported on Tuesday.
This is not the first time the security practices of the SpaceX founder have been questioned by the Pentagon.
The Times said the new reviews were initiated by the Air Force, the Defense Department's Inspector General and the undersecretary of defense for intelligence and security. It cited eight people with knowledge of the rocket company and internal documents.
In September, DOJ asserted that Sergey Kiriyenko had created some 30 internet domains to spread Russian disinformation, including on Elon Musk’s X which was formerly known as Twitter. In October, the Wall Street Journal disclosed that Musk had been in contact with Kiriyenko and Vladimir Putin which Dmitry Peskov affirmed.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Kiriyenko
Russian businessman Yevgeny Prigozhin said he had interfered in U.S. elections and would continue doing so in future, We have interfered (in U.S. elections), we are interfering and we will continue to interfere. Carefully, accurately, surgically and in our own way, as we know how to do." https://www.reuters.com/world/us/russias-prigozhin-admits-interfering-us-elections-2022-11-07/ What does Musk know and if he does know, when did he know it?
Yes, it is bribery and extortion. But the GOP has given up on the rule of law - look at what Trump did, and the Justice Thomas/Alito bribes, the flimsy investigation of Kavanaugh, and how we are now unable to hold them to account because SCOTUS and the GOP decided crime, if its done by their own, is not a crime.
We’ve apparently all had our eyes on the wrong man whose desire is dictatorship. And it doesn’t really matter what the Constitution says. That lot doesn’t believe in it anyway.
Linda, I'm wondering if we might not be better off to preserve the power sharing status quo between two guys that don't understand power sharing at all... and who are statistically less likely to both agree to sell the US down the river to a given foreign power via crypto bribe or inside trade during a predictable / managed market swing.
(Sharing a bribe successfully is not something I see these two doing; they will mess up. No honor among kleptocrats, et cetera.)
I’m waiting for the big breakup of that bromance, which will happen since these guys are way too much alike. Who will come out on top is anybody’s guess. I’ll be crying in my popcorn.
Much of the country is ‘obeying in advance’, even in advance of the kleptocratic felon’s transition to the WH. Does not instill confidence in our press, congress, judiciary - or MIA president (hope he's up to SOMETHING...).
(Yeah, know that's not how court-martials work, but one can HOPE. Something needs to change in our institutions, for the nation to survive as constituted. Oddly, as a pacifist, for the next month it is the 'deep state' of the military I trust most with our constitution - of all the US institutions.)
“ At his confirmation hearing, Pete Hegseth needs to be asked, among many other things, if he agrees with the sentiment expressed by the men who held the job he aspires to. If the answer isn’t an unequivocal yes (and it’s unlikely it will be given the context), it’s just another reason he’s not fit to serve.”
What the hell difference does it make what he says? They all lie - Kavanagh, Barrett, Thomas - and then turn around and do the opposite of what they “promised.“
"At his confirmation hearing, Pete Hegseth needs to be asked, among many other things, if he agrees with the sentiment expressed by the men who held the job he aspires to. If the answer isn’t an unequivocal yes (and it’s unlikely it will be given the context), it’s just another reason he’s not fit to serve."
We've learned that people lie or massage the truth during their confirmation hearings, as did some of our current SCOTUS justices regarding settled case law, including Roe v. Wade.
I imagine that being a good liar is a basic requirement to be a Trump nominee. Especially to impress Trump and get confirmed. Who else would hire this pathetic incompetent?
Yes that's true but given the rebuke on yesterday's vote against removing the debt ceiling, I expect it is quite possible that 4 or 5 GOP senators may emerge to oppose Hegseth.
In 2024 Trump got 61% of the military veteran vote- Harris got 37%. In 2020 Trump got 60%- Biden 39%. In 2016 Trump got 61%- Clinton 35%. For me, as a life long liberal Democrat and 8 year military veteran, the crucial looming question is whether the military will carry out the direct orders of Trump, Hegseth and the 4 star General Trump picks as Chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, to use the military to not only round up immigrants as Trump has promised, but to deploy to cities under the insurrection act as Trump has promised he will enact as soon as he’s in power. Will Trump also order the military to round up those he has identified as enemies of the state? If almost 2/3 of the military veterans voted for Trump, how many military personnel on active duty now will refuse to carry out a direct order from Trump, their commander and chief, and the generals and commanding officers loyal to him?
Yes, that one was personal to me. One of the young ladies was friends with my family.
As a veteran, I don’t understand how so many military can support Trump. It was not like this when we served active duty. We were there to serve our country and the majority would never have supported Trump’s tactics. Sure, there were jerks that pushed their power against the enlisted and got away with it, why I left, but overall none of them would sound like these retired/separated jerks on Twitter who put deaths of others over our freedom. They’re a disgrace and that includes J.D. Vance.
Suspect there was a reasonable political gradient against tfg as one moved higher in the ranks. A LOT of generals have publicly censured tfg, a RARE act in US history.
I guess there would have to be some kind of geographic or other organizational unity to any opposition to such orders, and that very senior officers in those pockets of unity would have to express opposition. Otherwise, I fear everyone will just fall in line. Anyway, if opposition is expressed in the areas of greater D support, and those military members fold their arms as they should in response to the most excessive orders, what then occurs from a disciplinary standpoint? I know very little about military justice but I know a culture of impunity and entitlement exists among many supporters of the Republican Party. I doubt it augurs well for the future.
Raf, We’ve had an all volunteer military since 1973, so service members have made a big personal life investment to be there and advance up through the ranks, while they must obey direct orders everyday for years and often for decades. That reality, and Trump’s political support by military personnel that I outlined, I think adds to the likelihood that each individual will have strong incentives to not risk their career by gettiing punished with the immediate and serious consequences for refusing to obey a direct order, that comes down through the chain of command. When the insurrection act is invoked by Trump, the direct orders for military personnel to obey that would possibly be viewed as illegal during ordinary times, may be justified by the whole chain of command and obeyed.
PS just remembered that I co-taught a US War College course for senior military officers ~2006?, in Africa (just one week, one classroom, perhaps 20 officers, perhaps 10 of us teaching all essential things 'Africa'). Interesting for me in particular, since I was a pacifist and conscientious objector during Viet Nam. Now, I have a handful of advanced degrees including a couple from Harvard; saying this just to suggest I've met impressive people in my day (including a couple US Presidents), but I was VERY impressed with the intelligence, knowledge, maturity, philosophy, and self control of these highly trained and selected men. They could have enlisted me, and if so, I would have followed them in conflict. They were professionals who made a virtue of military service, and made that service honorable. In my confident middle age, caused me to re-examine my pacifism.
I am sure that NOT ONE of them would follow an order by the President that was illegal. And they know the law MUCH, much better than he.
Just to brighten your day a bit - a reassuring window into a rare club.
Suspect that 98-99% of that 61% was in the bottom 97% of the military hierarchy. (Since you seem numerate, and knowledgeable. Does this ring true? (ie, that, at the top, it was closer to 1 in 5 or 2 in 5?)
Mark I haven’t found figures on political affiliation or voting stats of military officers yet, but my guess is that especially in the Army and Marine field grade(0-4 through O-6 Major-Colonel )and General grade officers, that the majority of them probably vote republican.
The historical evidence is there for all of your readers. Hopefully there will be Senate confirmation hearings for nominees and not recess appointments. If Hegseth is asked the question you pose he will be on the record. It's his record of leadership of small Veterans charities that is most damning: misogyny, sexual harassment, drunkenness, fraudulent expense account. If those facts enter the record i can't see him being confirmed unless Elmo's financial threat of paying candidates expenses to primary any Senator that won't "obey in advance". Roll tide. We are in this together
When someone who regularly drinks to the point of having to be carried out of the room promises to stop drinking but only if you give him this nifty new job, should you believe him? “…he says he won’t drink if he’s confirmed.”
Hold my beer.
It’s something every alcoholic has said multiple times in his/her life, most times after a major incident threatening their relationship(s).
Bargaining is a classic addict's move. "I won't drink on the job" comes from the kind of hubris that marks someone who has never admitted they have a problem with alcohol. SecDef is one job in which one is "on-call" 24/7. A social drinker could have a drink or two with dinner and be able to function just fine. But an alcoholic is, by definition, unable to control their drinking and fool themselves that they're fine when in reality they are drunk. If there weren't several reports of blackout drinking one could think that the term "high-functioning alcoholic" applies to Pete. But the anecdotes have piled up too high to be able to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Behavior like this sank John Towers' nomination to SecDef. It should sink Hegseth's, too.
Except for the problem that the persons of the incoming administration are replete with histories of corruption and felonies. Birds of a feather stick together. IMO, the entire Republican party has corrupted itself with its intention to bully— all appearances of governing be damned.
You got it Hope. All previous history has no relevance now. Becuase never in our history have Americans been so stupid at the polls, and voted in, after witnessing his first 4-year debacle, the most corrupt unstable venal vindictive unqualifed president ever to see the oval office. It's a new world that we must somehow emerge from intact.
This right on the mark. Hegseth has the earmarks of an alchoholic. If so, that should be made evident to all in his hearings. And Trump, with all his own endless faults, is a non-drinker if I have my facts correct. Perhaps that being so, he might not fight as hard as he might otherwise to get this dangerous and unqualified person the SecDef post. Jesus - it's unthinkable.
Having had to put the plug in the proverbial jug forty-five years ago, I can attest to the truth of what you are saying.
“Don’t bogart that joint my friend, pass it over to me.”
That last theoretical question posed to the would be secretary is brilliant. Thank you, Joyce.
Haven't heard that line from Little Feat for a long time. There will be plenty of both bogarting and sharing over the next 4 years if we're to keep our sanity.
Please explain "bogart" to this obtuse reader.
Don't hold onto it too long. In other words, take a hit and pass it to the next person.
Beatrice, you may recall Humphrey Bogart would leave a lit cigarette dangling from his lips interminably, tantalizingly, and suggestively... part of his cool... the power of a delayed consummation, if you will.
Also, the 60's movie hit Easy Rider sound track included a song "Don't Bogart Me" by The Fraternity of Man, with the lyrics,
"Don't bogart that joint, my friend,
Pass it over to meeeee...
..Roll another one, just like the other one,
And pass it over to me."
So yes, to some the appeal of the allusion is implicit sex, & drugs, with a bit of power or titrated control mixed in; but for others, it is just a reference to being a dog in the manger - monopolizing something desirable without making use of it yourself.
Anyone who has lived with or had a close friend who is alcoholic, knows that, and certainly anyone who has had several friends or acquaintances who remember times those people were drunk to the point of passing out knows that when they say they've "never had a drinking problem" are indeed addicted to alcohol.
yup.
Precisely.
Another line of questioning may be what-if questions unrelated to politics to gauge how Hegseth would manage a crisis. He will likely say, "That is a hypothetical question."
To which one could say, "Crises are not unique to political parties. We are asking about your character, Sir. And you are running from a non-political question. Simply said, Sir, your lack of experience and character makes it impossible for the American people to trust you to provide leadership through a crisis."
Indeed! At the very best he’d be a “dry drunk” hanging on by his fingernails while scared to death that the least little thing would send him back into the blackness that a heavy drinker knows all too well. Assuming, that is if there is any memory at all of the reverting to the preferred drug of choice, alcohol. A high stress job is no place for just such a personality. It would be a challenge for anyone in a recovery program but at least there would be a support system that one could use for reinforcement were the load get too heavy. And, if nothing else, that dry drunk could be or should be considered a severe security risk. That, as much as the drinking, should make such a person a definite no-go for confirmation.
Absolutely, a dry drunk is almost worse that the drinking person.
I have found that out, too. In conflict zones where I have worked and where there is little direct oversight, I have found that someone who is a dry drunk is harder to work with than an active alcoholic. 🤭 With the latter, I usually can work with a few hours every day rather than having to cover my flanks, 24 / 7, from someone else's resentment. 😵 Trump is a classic example of a dry drunk. 😳
Promises, promises.
Will trump be able to use the US Armed Forces to establish a dictatorship? Will he follow in the footsteps of Hitler? I explore these questions based on the historical record.
https://kathleenweber.substack.com/p/will-trump-2025-hitler-1933
Fine essay there, Kathleen. Like you, I am not so fearful of a take-over because the military leadership takes an oath -- one taken seriously by the large majority of brothers and sisters in uniform -- to the Constitution. What concerns me is a civil war. 🤢
While there might not be thirty times the manpower among the rebels versus uniformed military, as you observe in Germany, the revolt may pop up here and there like a whack-a-mole game that is impossible to suppress quickly enough to avoid a general contagion; call it a dispersion of subversion. 😱
By the way, I wrote this essay eight and one-half years ago, when I was still a Republican, as a warning from me to me. https://nedmcdletters.blogspot.com/2016/05/letter-116-b-getting-historical.html ✍️
I agree that some freelancers will kill their fellow Americans or those who dastardly immigrants in the name of Trump in the next four years, but I think it won't go past a couple of hundred dead.
I hope and pray you are right, Kathleen. 🙏 And I do think you are right.✌🏽If not, as a life-long bachelor, I am ready to fight. 🤬 Though trained in fire-arms, I can still barely hit the side of a barn. 🤭 Fortunately for me, most of these M.A.G.A. militants are as wide as a side of a barn. 😉
Unless the MAGA militants have hostages, I suggest we just let them remain where they are, and send in a beer truck and when the snoring gets really loud, we close in.
I read your wonderful essay from 2016. Thank God that Trump is not Hitler so we don't have to make such impossible choices. I didn't put this in my essay, but I was thinking the SA was a lot like Ku Klux Klan —they were widely distributed over Germany and were poised to keep the general population in line, not just to harass Hitler's enemies list.
My fear in 2017 is that Trump so wanted to x prove he was a tough guy that he would start using nu clear bombs on North Korea. We were three weeks into his administration I realized that wasn't going to happen, thank God.
We need your even-tempered view, Ma'am. 🤝
If I got a dollar for every promise I broke as a drinker (until twenty-two), I would be edging out Elon in MUSKrat love. 😉
Secretary of Defense is not a 12 step recovery program.
Someone needs to release a compilation video of him in these drunken compromised positions. Like outtakes.
That promise alone should disqualify a candidate. This is not a promise a social drinker would make, it's a squirming 'get me out of this' promise that will never be kept.
A teenager says that to his parents too….” If only you don’t take the car keys away from me, I won’t drink anymore when out with my friends”. Right! This is not the kind of person we want leading our military. That statement alone by him should be disqualifying.
True that, C.D. This is not a negotiation.
I won't drink if you give me this "nifty" - [love it!!] new job - and btw, the check's in the mail. Hah! Bloody Unlikely.
Perhaps drinking to excess is not something that will exercise or concern GOP Senators too much ... after all they are Senators, all with a bar fridge. But does he drive an electric car, or do anything else wokey / commie?
You took the words right out of my mouth. I was married to an alcoholic and every member of his family were alcoholics. Also my daughter. Not a single one ever stopped drinking completely.
Suggest Al Anon for fam members of alcoholics. I found it helpful.
My father and brother were alcoholics. All I know is, once an alcoholic always an alcoholic, unless you go to detox if that works!
Detox and rehab do work, as I have seen with a friend. But the person has to be motivated to do better, and Pete Hegseth isn't. Actually, Hunter Biden is an example of the fact that detox and rehab do work.
My husband as well. He was given a second chance and grabbed for it like a drowning man for a life raft. Worked his program up until he no longer could-about 4 days before he died. He was 31.5 years with the program. AA worked for him and for us.
I salute your husband's sobriety and I salute your support for him. 💔✌🏽❤️
Your story gives me goose bumps. I'm sorry you lost your husband, but am glad that he was a strong person.
Like the joke: ¿How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light-bulb? 🤔
Just one. But, first, the light-bulb really has to want to change. 😉
That applies to just about every change we need or want to make in life.
True. There is that critical element of choice.
If only it were that easy!
As a now sober alcoholic, I can bet that he will not stop; at least not on his own.
It doesn't matter if the question is asked or not. He will lie. As Kavanaugh lied. As Coney Barrett lied. The only reason to ask the question is give mealy-mouthed Susan Collins a chance to say later, "But, he said..." Why give any of them that cover?
I hear you KEM but, today 38 House Republican said NO! to the Musk-Trump bid for no spending limits until 2027 for Trump to transfer more tax relief to the American oligarch class. More specifically Chip Roy said on the Floor the Musk's foolish gambit was "asinine". Unexpected realities echoed through the House today.
As to Musk's threat to primary those not obedient, essentially the House today said "Bring it On". No honeymoon for President Musk [ Fri Update: Make that Speaker Musk.]
Regardless, nothing gets by Schumer the Senate gatekeeper. Gotta have all "4 Corners" the House R's & D's & Senate R's & D's. Didn't happen today -- not even close.
Yes, but let's leave Susan Collins out of any calculation. It's possible that as she nears retirement she may actually take a stand but all signs point to ... nope.
Unfortunately, my senior Senator, Susan Collins, has already announced her intention to run for re-election in 2026! This, after telling us when she first ran for the Senate in 1996 that, if elected, she would only serve 2 terms.
Having been re-elected in 2020, Collins is now in her 5th term!
UGH! She has to be primaried!
She's not going anywhere - has said she's running again. I just hope she doesn't subject us to another speech like the one she gave justifying voting for Kavanaugh.
Susie from Maine retire? Never. She has all those Good Little Boys she has to move into life-time appointments.
That would be nice. She usually walks back a commitment.
"... today 38 House Republican said NO! to the Musk-Trump bid for no spending limits for Trump's to transfer of more tax relief to the American oligarch class."
I thought the reason they voted against the Bill Lite was because of the elimination of the debt ceiling for two years. I don't think they mind the ruling class getting richer.
I believe that eliminating the debt ceiling is intended to make the tax cuts more palatable, as in "We don't need the money anyway"
It's actually required to MAKE the tax cuts as they will increase the national debt. I expect Trump will get that passed but he should do it on HIS watch not Biden's. I would how Biden would veto any current bill that removed the debt ceiling. If it's gonna happen, it should be on the hands of Trump and the GOP.
Yes, the point of lifting it now is to be able to place the blame in the Biden administration timeline and not in Dumpty's.
Yeah ... but there is no political advantage for the Democrats to defend the Debt Ceiling - the GOP just beats them over the head with decade in, decade out. the Dems should kill it permanently.
And the alleged Debt Ceiling has never stopped ruling-class tax cuts.
Got that right Jon. 🎯
Agree.
Yes, the attempted debt ceiling was aimed at 2027 & you are correct again -- they do mind the richest-getting-richer.
I think some of them are starting to get a clue.
As a Texan who doesn't like Chip Roy, I was really surprised by what he said. A republican sounding sane? Totally unexpected but I'm glad he reflected sanity.
Surprised everyone in all states.
Clearly everyone has his number! Glad to know that.
So true. Why do we make them swear an oath to be truthful but exact no consequences for their perjury?
I have to wonder whether there’s a sexual abuser pipeline from which MAGA chooses for its nominations? Hegseth, RFK Jr., Gaetz, Trump himself … and the hits keep coming.
You mean since Jeffrey Epstein??
Ed it's a tale as old as time.
As some wise person said, men are just infirm brains being led around by firm dicks ... pretty difficult to argue with!
Me man, you woman, woman need man to lead way … toots.
So offensive
Trump only choses people he owns.
Surely looks as though he has kompromat (or some other means of 'performative loyalty' compulsion) on every person he hires, appoints, or backs for office. This is why all MAGAt congressmen run with tail between legs. I expect that's why he's so attached to his hotels & Maralego - (cameras in every 'special guest' room). AND yes, I expect he learned this from Epstein (or VICE versa).
But one has to find the kompromat.
Trump loves Musk’s billions; Musk loves Trump’s power.
Elon and fElon, kissing cousins
Now THAT is a GREAT one!
I'm waiting for the battle of the egos. Musk can buy and sell Trump - and if Musk has big sway over Congress then he becomes the acting President - embarrassing and humiliating Trump, which is something Trump cannot stand. I'll bring the popcorn.
And I’ll get the Ben & Jerry’s!
A match made by the devil...
But neither likes an upstart …
David, I think it speaks to the ilk of people who have no problem doing things that are beneficial to themselves without consequences to others.
Because in those worlds of one, others exist not.
only to serve
Exactly—serve quietly, quickly, then leave bowing backwards three times.
Well, Pete Hegseth! When I was reading the Bob Woodward book "War" & learning about how our military & State Department & Security services were so deeply involved in the Ukraine War, the Middle East crises I shuddered when I thought about the gang of fools that trump has put forth.
And this evening's news about some Re-Mags considering voting to make Elon Musk the Speaker of the House, I have to wonder when this entire country is going to implode or explode or both. I mean does anyone think that Pete Hegseth has the ability to handle problems on the scale that our other SecDefs had. I mean even the bad ones, Donald Rumsfeld, weren't anything like this sorry excuse. If the man goes to work drunk, I hate to think about the decisions he'll make if someone wakes him at 3 in the morning & tell him that there has been a terrorist attack within the US.
~~~And speaking of Hegseth's drinking. I few days ago I had the misfortune of spending the day in the ER. Now if you have ever been in an ER you know that privacy is, well, there isn't any. And while I try not to listen in to other people's conversations I couldn't help but listen to what the nurse was saying to a gentleman that had fallen while he was drunk & hit his head & needed to be brought to the ER. It sounded like the gentleman drinks A LOT! So the nurse asked if he would be interested in help cutting back on his alcohol intake. The nurse asked if when the man had not had alcohol for a while if he had any problems. He admitted that he did. The nurse said that drugs could be offered to help eleviate withdrawal symptoms. So Ole Mr. Pete says that he will stop drinking IF he gets the job. How is he going to handle the stress of a job like that if he is going through withdrawal, what happens if his dependency is so great that he gets DTs? Is that who we want with nuclear access?
C'mon Re-Mags get your heads out or trump's ass & do what you were hired to do, protect & defend the Constitution not donal trump!
If he is drinking like observers say he is, he will DEFINITELY get the DTs…and badly. ALL alcoholics say that they can stop anytime. It takes considerable effort to really reach the point of understanding that the alcohol controls them. Additionally, it is a lifelong condition. Plus, as you say, what will happen to any of his resolves when faced with the stress of Secretary of Defense? I wouldn’t put any stock in an alcoholic (one is never a former alcoholic) saying that they will stop drinking if they are given a high stress appointment.
Signed, Retired ICU RN
I'm just a person with a BA in history but I do pay attention to life itself so I'm glad that the paltry knowledge that I have gleaned about alcoholism gave me the right insight to post what I did & to have my observations acknowledged by an ICU RN made me feel like sometimes I really do come up with a cogent response. You gave my ego a bit of a boost! Thank you! But don't be concerned, my ego is nothing like Musk's or trump's I KNOW that I am NOT the smartest person the world has ever seen! 😉😉😉🤣
Happy Holidays to you & yours. And thank you for being a nurse! Your profession is the most underappreciated profession around.
Having been in the ER & a few times needing to be admitted to the hospital it is obvious that Nurses keep the hospitals going. Yes, doctors are quite important but it's nurses that provide the help, the concern, the knowledge, the expertise, the patients (I deliberately used that word!) that keep the world a healthier place. You have always been a hero in my eyes!
Thank you again for your dedication to the betterment of humanity.💗
Interestingly, I also did my graduate work in Medieval History, all but dissertation (ABD). 😉
Thank you for the kudos to nurses. Most people don’t realize that the docs actually get their specific information regarding particular patients from the nurses who are the ones who really have their fingers on the pulse of the day to day in hospitals.
Happy holidays to you as well.
Dear Retired ICU RN, I am in fact a former alcoholic who’s been sober for two decades. Sincerely, Another Retired ICU RN
Congratulations, keep up the good work!
My father went to all the best clinics that treated alcohol addiction. He was very high up in a well-known company. Each promise made was broken within hours of his getting home. He was a brilliant man, an artist, Harvard grad, athlete, but, nothing could keep him from the bottle .As a child of an alcoholic, who has spent years studying the power it. There is no way that anyone with this addiction can just stop, and, stay dry.
I’ll drink to that.
Anyone who's dealt with an alcoholic's conditional promise to not drink if they get their prize first would find Hegseth's nomination as laughable and frightening as I do. Such promise is a lie in service of the ego, and the #1 attempt to manipulate found in the alcoholics' manipulation playbook.
Isn't Hegseth the guy who, as a Fox News host, lobbied Trump to get pardons and rank reinstatements for servicemen convicted of war crimes? This alone should disqualify him for the Secretary of Defense position in my opinion.
I wanna know what he knows of Russian intervention in German, French, and our eclections? Where does he stand on NATO? On Tulsi Gabbard's positions re Syria, Ukraine.
What is his relationship with Tucker Carlson? Bannon?
He’s definitely not fit to serve, for dozens of reasons. And, just like the 3 Supreme Court justices testified that they would not overturn Roe, it seems that lying is not a problem for these types. And “we know these types.”
Fool me once, shame on you, fool every naïve citizen for over 8 years, shame on our country.
Turns out that 'Lying is not a problem' for well over half of us; read surveys on norms.
I don't think this loss of trust and trustworthiness changes any sooner than one societal collapse and 2-3 generations, and only then with serious changes to 'American values' as they stand now.
Best for our kids to find a much less affluent, less technical, nation - or perhaps commune.
Trump’s cabinet picks are worrysome. But, right now, I want to find a way to pick off Elon Musk. Do we, as citizens and voters, have standing to bring a class action suit against Musk for interfering with government operations, as he did by threatening primaries of anyone who voted against “his” bill? He seems to hold an inordinate amount of sway for an unelected bureaucrat-wannabe.
I was wondering at what point Elon crosses over into bribery territory, If he is offering quid pro quo to elected officials so they will help his business, thatʻs bribery. The interesting question is threatening to primary them if they donʻt play ball. What crime is that? Extortion? Terroristic threats? If it isnʻt a crime it should be. Also Speaker is third in line to the presidency but Musk wasnʻt born in the USA .
It turns out there is no constitutional prohibition restricting someone who isn't eligible to become President from being Speaker of the House (and they don't have to be elected either) but they still couldn't become President without a major violation of the Constitution.
What if he has conflicts?
WASHINGTON, Dec 17 (Reuters) - Elon Musk and SpaceX face at least three federal reviews over whether they have complied with federal reporting rules aimed at protecting national security, the New York Times reported on Tuesday.
This is not the first time the security practices of the SpaceX founder have been questioned by the Pentagon.
The Times said the new reviews were initiated by the Air Force, the Defense Department's Inspector General and the undersecretary of defense for intelligence and security. It cited eight people with knowledge of the rocket company and internal documents.
Neither the Times or Reuters reported that Federal government contractors are prohibited from making contributions or expenditures, or promising to make any such contribution or expenditure, to any political party, committee, or can didate for federal office, or to any person for any political purpose or use. https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/federal-government-contractors/#:~:text=Federal%20government%20contractors%20are%20prohibited,any%20political%20purpose%20or%20use.
Others are asking about the nature of Musk's relationship with China.at if he has a conflict because he's a government contractor?
Is Musk jailbait?
In September, DOJ asserted that Sergey Kiriyenko had created some 30 internet domains to spread Russian disinformation, including on Elon Musk’s X which was formerly known as Twitter. In October, the Wall Street Journal disclosed that Musk had been in contact with Kiriyenko and Vladimir Putin which Dmitry Peskov affirmed.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Kiriyenko
Russian businessman Yevgeny Prigozhin said he had interfered in U.S. elections and would continue doing so in future, We have interfered (in U.S. elections), we are interfering and we will continue to interfere. Carefully, accurately, surgically and in our own way, as we know how to do." https://www.reuters.com/world/us/russias-prigozhin-admits-interfering-us-elections-2022-11-07/ What does Musk know and if he does know, when did he know it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2024_United_States_elections
Did Musk violate both state and federal election law? In Pa, the penalty can be 7 years in a workhouse.
Yes, it is bribery and extortion. But the GOP has given up on the rule of law - look at what Trump did, and the Justice Thomas/Alito bribes, the flimsy investigation of Kavanaugh, and how we are now unable to hold them to account because SCOTUS and the GOP decided crime, if its done by their own, is not a crime.
We’ve apparently all had our eyes on the wrong man whose desire is dictatorship. And it doesn’t really matter what the Constitution says. That lot doesn’t believe in it anyway.
No, we didn’t see this sudden friendship with Musk as an attempted coup it now appears to be.
Great question, Linda. What would the ACLU say?
It's all about the immense amount of money Muck has available to just throw around. In this culture, money=power.
Linda, I'm wondering if we might not be better off to preserve the power sharing status quo between two guys that don't understand power sharing at all... and who are statistically less likely to both agree to sell the US down the river to a given foreign power via crypto bribe or inside trade during a predictable / managed market swing.
(Sharing a bribe successfully is not something I see these two doing; they will mess up. No honor among kleptocrats, et cetera.)
I’m waiting for the big breakup of that bromance, which will happen since these guys are way too much alike. Who will come out on top is anybody’s guess. I’ll be crying in my popcorn.
Much of the country is ‘obeying in advance’, even in advance of the kleptocratic felon’s transition to the WH. Does not instill confidence in our press, congress, judiciary - or MIA president (hope he's up to SOMETHING...).
Or, our billionaires.
Hope the military court martials him day 1.
(Yeah, know that's not how court-martials work, but one can HOPE. Something needs to change in our institutions, for the nation to survive as constituted. Oddly, as a pacifist, for the next month it is the 'deep state' of the military I trust most with our constitution - of all the US institutions.)
“ At his confirmation hearing, Pete Hegseth needs to be asked, among many other things, if he agrees with the sentiment expressed by the men who held the job he aspires to. If the answer isn’t an unequivocal yes (and it’s unlikely it will be given the context), it’s just another reason he’s not fit to serve.”
What the hell difference does it make what he says? They all lie - Kavanagh, Barrett, Thomas - and then turn around and do the opposite of what they “promised.“
I hope the military stands firmly with the Constitution, even as Trump tries to have Generals who don’t swear loyalty to him removed.
"At his confirmation hearing, Pete Hegseth needs to be asked, among many other things, if he agrees with the sentiment expressed by the men who held the job he aspires to. If the answer isn’t an unequivocal yes (and it’s unlikely it will be given the context), it’s just another reason he’s not fit to serve."
We've learned that people lie or massage the truth during their confirmation hearings, as did some of our current SCOTUS justices regarding settled case law, including Roe v. Wade.
I imagine that being a good liar is a basic requirement to be a Trump nominee. Especially to impress Trump and get confirmed. Who else would hire this pathetic incompetent?
It doesn't matter ... the GOP has a Senate Majority after 3 Jan.
Yes that's true but given the rebuke on yesterday's vote against removing the debt ceiling, I expect it is quite possible that 4 or 5 GOP senators may emerge to oppose Hegseth.
In 2024 Trump got 61% of the military veteran vote- Harris got 37%. In 2020 Trump got 60%- Biden 39%. In 2016 Trump got 61%- Clinton 35%. For me, as a life long liberal Democrat and 8 year military veteran, the crucial looming question is whether the military will carry out the direct orders of Trump, Hegseth and the 4 star General Trump picks as Chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, to use the military to not only round up immigrants as Trump has promised, but to deploy to cities under the insurrection act as Trump has promised he will enact as soon as he’s in power. Will Trump also order the military to round up those he has identified as enemies of the state? If almost 2/3 of the military veterans voted for Trump, how many military personnel on active duty now will refuse to carry out a direct order from Trump, their commander and chief, and the generals and commanding officers loyal to him?
May 4, 1970. Kent State.
Yes, that one was personal to me. One of the young ladies was friends with my family.
As a veteran, I don’t understand how so many military can support Trump. It was not like this when we served active duty. We were there to serve our country and the majority would never have supported Trump’s tactics. Sure, there were jerks that pushed their power against the enlisted and got away with it, why I left, but overall none of them would sound like these retired/separated jerks on Twitter who put deaths of others over our freedom. They’re a disgrace and that includes J.D. Vance.
As a veteran myself, Sharon, I share your important concerns.
Suspect there was a reasonable political gradient against tfg as one moved higher in the ranks. A LOT of generals have publicly censured tfg, a RARE act in US history.
I guess there would have to be some kind of geographic or other organizational unity to any opposition to such orders, and that very senior officers in those pockets of unity would have to express opposition. Otherwise, I fear everyone will just fall in line. Anyway, if opposition is expressed in the areas of greater D support, and those military members fold their arms as they should in response to the most excessive orders, what then occurs from a disciplinary standpoint? I know very little about military justice but I know a culture of impunity and entitlement exists among many supporters of the Republican Party. I doubt it augurs well for the future.
Raf, We’ve had an all volunteer military since 1973, so service members have made a big personal life investment to be there and advance up through the ranks, while they must obey direct orders everyday for years and often for decades. That reality, and Trump’s political support by military personnel that I outlined, I think adds to the likelihood that each individual will have strong incentives to not risk their career by gettiing punished with the immediate and serious consequences for refusing to obey a direct order, that comes down through the chain of command. When the insurrection act is invoked by Trump, the direct orders for military personnel to obey that would possibly be viewed as illegal during ordinary times, may be justified by the whole chain of command and obeyed.
PS just remembered that I co-taught a US War College course for senior military officers ~2006?, in Africa (just one week, one classroom, perhaps 20 officers, perhaps 10 of us teaching all essential things 'Africa'). Interesting for me in particular, since I was a pacifist and conscientious objector during Viet Nam. Now, I have a handful of advanced degrees including a couple from Harvard; saying this just to suggest I've met impressive people in my day (including a couple US Presidents), but I was VERY impressed with the intelligence, knowledge, maturity, philosophy, and self control of these highly trained and selected men. They could have enlisted me, and if so, I would have followed them in conflict. They were professionals who made a virtue of military service, and made that service honorable. In my confident middle age, caused me to re-examine my pacifism.
I am sure that NOT ONE of them would follow an order by the President that was illegal. And they know the law MUCH, much better than he.
Just to brighten your day a bit - a reassuring window into a rare club.
Again, look at the number of highest ranking military who have PUBLICLY spoken against tfg. This has been historical in scope.
Suspect that 98-99% of that 61% was in the bottom 97% of the military hierarchy. (Since you seem numerate, and knowledgeable. Does this ring true? (ie, that, at the top, it was closer to 1 in 5 or 2 in 5?)
Mark I haven’t found figures on political affiliation or voting stats of military officers yet, but my guess is that especially in the Army and Marine field grade(0-4 through O-6 Major-Colonel )and General grade officers, that the majority of them probably vote republican.
Not even Hegseth’s mom
Can wholeheartedly recommend him,
Here is a guy who can’t be trusted in a bar,
And they want him a secretary of war.
Joyce,
The historical evidence is there for all of your readers. Hopefully there will be Senate confirmation hearings for nominees and not recess appointments. If Hegseth is asked the question you pose he will be on the record. It's his record of leadership of small Veterans charities that is most damning: misogyny, sexual harassment, drunkenness, fraudulent expense account. If those facts enter the record i can't see him being confirmed unless Elmo's financial threat of paying candidates expenses to primary any Senator that won't "obey in advance". Roll tide. We are in this together