Sparks Fly on CNN After WaPo Columnist Denigrates Pete Hegseth's Military Service
The confirmation hearing for Pete Hegseth Tuesday was pretty intense, with the Secretary of Defense nominee refusing to be rattled despite the screeching of perpetually fauxfended Democrat senators, and one GOP senator shredding Democrats on the Armed Services Committee for being flaming hypocrites on issues like marital infidelity and showing up drunk for work.
But on CNN, things got quite spicy when one of their panelists boiled Hegseth's "main qualification" down to him being a TV show host on Fox News.
The sparks started flying when leftist Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell opined that Hegseth wasn't qualified to lead the Dept. of Defense in part because he had never "managed something as large as a Burger King," and saying "TV host" was his "main qualification."
This did not sit well at all with Republican strategist/GOP commentator Scott Jennings, who pointed out that his qualifications were extensive:
Rampell: I think it's not only about this unexplained flip flop on women serving in the military. It's not only about the fact that he hasn't managed something as large as a Burger King, probably, but that he could not answer basic questions. Not just gotcha questions, like questions like would you uphold the Geneva Conventions? Would you refuse an unlawful order if the president gave you one, which did happen under Trump before with Esper (ph)? Would you ever sick [sic] the U.S. military on American citizens?
You know, there are many examples of questions that, yes, he was very articulate and polished, and he's a T.V. host. That's his main qualification. I know in T.V. we sometimes get confused.
Jennings: Why do you denigrate this man's service? I don't understand, 20 years, decorated, Ivy Leaguer. He's a T.V. host. That's all he is.
(CROSSTALKS)
Rampell: Not every member who serves deserves to be in charge of the DOD.
Jennings: She said his main qualification is that he's a T.V. host, and I'm sorry, that's just baloney.
(CROSSTALKS)
Jennings: His main qualification is that he's a warfighter and he's going to be the closest warfighter we've ever had to the enlisted people running the Pentagon. He's decorated, he's an Ivy Leaguer, so he knows what he's doing.
Watch:
Later, in response to a jab from Obama-Biden/Biden-Harris alum Ashley Allison, who stated "Tonight on CNN, the Republicans don't care about family values," Jennings zinged back by telling her "The party of Bill Clinton and Doug Emhoff don't get to lecture me."
Back in November after President-elect Donald Trump first nominated Hegseth, Jennings had to respond to similar arguments from other CNN panelists - and absolutely hit it out of the park:
"I hear all the criticism of him is that he's not the expected Washington pick. And I'm just saying to you that the American people just voted against the expected Washington pick."
"He's got 20 years in service. Afghanistan, Iraq. Two bronze stars. Princeton, Harvard. Yeah, he's on TV, but so are the rest of us."
Watch:
To be fair, someone serving in the military and in a war zone does not automatically exempt them from criticism.
But I think that unless you can find something specifically related to a veteran's service that could legitimately be called into question (as the case was with Minnesota Gov./Dem VP nominee Tim Walz), starting off by denigrating someone's service in the armed forces is going to be a losing argument nearly every time.
Secondly, if you're going to argue that someone isn't qualified to serve in a presidential administration, whether it be in a cabinet position or something else, because they're not a Washington insider, you're going to lose that argument every time. Because, as Jennings correctly observed, Americans just demonstrated at the ballot box that they have rejected the status quo in favor of people who are willing to shake things up.
Post a Comment