Tag Archives: Chuck Schumer

“Self-defense Shouldn’t Be Practiced By The Common Folk”

By Doug Book

gun control sign SC Self defense shouldn’t be practiced by the common folk

“Under no circumstances should people be able to confront others in a hostile manner, end up using deadly force, and escape punishment.”  Such is the far from unconventional viewpoint of UCLA Law Professor Adam Winkler. But it’s not the doings of actual thugs and lawbreakers that worry the professor. His concern is about people who “take advantage” of Stand Your Ground laws, laws which according to Winkler “unambiguously authorize people to pursue and confront others” and encourage vigilantism.

Of course, the professor is not alone in spreading his deliberately false description of the contents of Stand Your Ground legislation. Three days after the George Zimmerman verdict, AG Eric Holder told members of the Orlando NAACP that “’stand your ground’” statutes can ‘undermine public safety’ and ‘victimize too many who are innocent.’” They are laws that “senselessly expand the concept of self-defense and sow dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods.” That there is no evidence Stand Your Ground legislation now in force in over 30 states actually brings about the Wild West vigilantism so feared by the Attorney General doesn’t prevent his making the claim that self-defense-minded killers are everywhere poised and ready to strike.

But why is the left so adamantly opposed to legislation that does away with the requirement to retreat first when faced with a potential threat of great harm? (By the way, most Stand Your Ground laws simply do away with the requirement to retreat. They do not grant a new “privilege” to needlessly obliterate an attacker.)

The reason is that liberals recognize the danger inherent in news of an average citizen successfully exercising his right of self defense. Allow the spread of stories in which a victim turns the tables on his attackers, and suddenly, people become skeptical of placing responsibility for their safety and security in the hands of a far off policeman.

And for a left that believes that only the police and other approved, government officials should have the right to carry a gun, it is especially the defensive use of firearms that causes panic. For how can liberals square as many as 2.5 million yearly uses of firearms in self-defense with their agenda of disarming the American public?

The Regime’s current, focused attack against Stand Your Ground legislation should fool no one. For it’s the right of the American people to defend themselves–even with deadly force–that the left considers the real threat to their authority. In Britain, self-defense has become virtually illegal, a crime worthy of prison time. Imagine how envious the likes of Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and Chuck Schumer must be of the otherwise hated English politicos. With self-defense a punishable trespass, official members of law enforcement would become the public’s only legal means of protection. And who would be in charge of this, the only legally armed force with official authority to act in our best interest? Liberal mouths would be watering all over DC at the prospect of such power.

We’ve had to concede healthcare to Big …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Western Journalism

Erase The Boarders And Erase The Republican Party

By Derrick Hollenbeck

Voting Booth 300x168 Erase the Boarders and Erase the Republican Party

We’ve heard ad nauseam the advice from our good friend Chuck Schumer about how the Republicans can win the White House back if they would only grant amnesty to millions of   new Democrat voters and erase our southern border. This is of course a lie designed to destroy the Republican Party akin to deliberately directing a lost motorist to take a washed out bridge during a roaring Nor’easter.  Because what Democrats say and do is so often purposefully dishonest, here’s some advice from a rank and file conservative who actually wants the Republican Party to survive and grow.

The road to future political dominance is blindingly obvious to anyone who can count, but our Republican “leaders” are playing make believe with the clear truth. As damaged as our economy is we are still head and shoulders above the rest of the world’s cultures and economies.

The wagon of America’s economy is pulled by people who understand Judeo-Christian ethics and the value of hard work. Tending to the demands of White Americans, and those who share their values is simply a matter of siding with America’s “makers over our nation’s takers.”

With huge portions of Blacks and Hispanics falling outside of these parameters, it’s very easy to understand why both groups consistently vote Democrat. The Democrat lure of something for nothing is so overwhelming that it is not only foolhardy, but politically dangerous, to believe these “no worries minorities” will ever vote Republican in any meaningful numbers.

Minority groups make up about 32% of the American voting public. Whites are more than double that number at about 68%.  Analysis of last November’s presidential vote  showed that had Mitt Romney merely gotten the same amount of White votes John McCain got in 2008 he would have won despite his poorly run campaign. Further examination shows that had Romney gotten an impossible 70% of the Latino vote he still would have lost. Chasing minority votes is worse than a zero sum game.  The minority votes a Republican picks up by pandering to Hispanics or Black voters comes nowhere near offsetting the Whites who continue to flee the Republican Party in protest.

It is an undeniable fact that Whites and people of like mind and ethic have a bigger stake in the survival of America than those who will flood into our country should the Republicans grant them amnesty. When the lifeblood of America is drained out they will simply pack up and leave for Mexico as has happened since the start of Obama’s depression.

So what does all this say? It clearly says that if the Republicans want to live as free Americans and continue as a national Party they will have to concentrate on meeting the needs of Whites and like-minded people. Democrats focus on catering to Blacks and Hispanics as their natural constituency; why shouldn’t Republicans focus on their natural constituency? Going after a bloc of voters, that is more than twice as large as the Democrat pool of minorities, makes sense even to a fourth grader.

Either Republicans …read more

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Western Journalism

What Is Marco Rubio Up To?

By The Huffington Post News Editors

It was the mystery left in the wake of the Sunday shows: Just before Sen. Chuck Schumer was set to tell “Meet the Press” that the so-called Gang of Eight is on the verge of a deal on immigration reform, Sen. Marco Rubio sent out a statement headlined, “Rubio: No Final Agreement on Immigration Legislation Yet.” It read, in part, “Reports that the bipartisan group of eight senators have agreed on a legislative proposal are premature.”

Read More…
More on Republicans

…read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Huffington Post

Immigration Bill Deal: Business, Labor Groups Iron Out Differences

By The Huffington Post News Editors

By ERICA WERNER, The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Big business and major labor unions appeared ready Friday to end a fight over a new low-skilled worker program that had threatened to upend negotiations on a sweeping immigration bill in the Senate providing a pathway to citizenship for 11 million immigrants already in the U.S.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who’s been brokering talks between the AFL-CIO and the Chamber of Commerce, said in a statement that negotiators are “very close, closer than we have ever been, and we are very optimistic.” He said there were still a few issues remaining.

Read More…
More on Immigration

…read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Huffington Post

John McCain, Other Senators To Tour Mexico Border

By The Huffington Post News Editors

BY CRISTINA SILVA, ASSOCIATED PRESS

PHOENIX — A group of U.S. senators who will be influential in shaping and negotiating details of an immigration reform package is traveling to the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona to get a firsthand look at issues affecting the region.

Republican Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake of Arizona were expected to tour the border Wednesday with Democratic Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York and Michael Bennet of Colorado. They are all members of the so-called Gang of Eight – a bipartisan group that has spent recent weeks trying to craft proposed immigration legislation.

Read More…
More on Immigration

…read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Huffington Post

Conservatives Confident On Gun Measures

By Breaking News

guns SC Conservatives confident on gun measures

OXON HILL, Md. — Conservatives are all but declaring victory on their defense of gun rights, exuding confidence as calls for aggressive controls in the wake of the Newtown elementary school massacre have given way to scaled-back expectations to firearm restrictions in Congress.

“They can call me crazy and whatever else they want, but NRA’s nearly 5 million members and America’s 100 million gun owners will not back down — not now, not ever,” an emboldened Wayne LaPierre, the CEO and executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, told conservatives gathered at an annual conference. He pointedly ignored President Barack Obama’s most restrictive proposals in his speech, using it instead to assail the one that has the potential of getting approved — a near-universal background check for gun owners.

It’s a sign that LaPierre — and others at the Conservative Political Action Conference — thinks the nation’s largest pro-gun lobby has successfully beaten back the most limiting proposals.

Indeed, a bipartisan deal on near-universal background checks for firearms buyers remains a real possibility. And Congress still could pass a ban on high-capacity magazines. But Democrats haven’t been able to muster enough support, even within their own ranks, to push through an assault weapons ban.

That’s by far the most restrictive of the series of changes Obama and Vice President Joe Biden have sought following the Connecticut school shooting that killed 26 children and educators and a series of deadly shootings in Aurora, Colo., Oak Creek, Wis., and elsewhere.

Read more at Official Wire. By Ken Thomas.

Photo credit: Gregory Wild-Smith (Creative Commons)

…read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Western Journalism

Regarding Immigration Proposals, Beware Of Your Opponents’ Motivation

By Breaking News

Chuck Schumer SC Regarding Immigration Proposals, Beware of Your Opponents’ Motivation

The subject of immigration (and evidently, illegal immigration) has proven to be a divisive issue for conservatives. There are divergent opinions as to which policies should be pursued vis-à-vis the 12 million illegal immigrants who reside in the country. However, as conservatives, there are certain fundamental goals and red lines that we should all unite behind as we commence debate on this issue. Any so-called comprehensive immigration reform proposal that is worth more than a bucket of spit must ensure the following:

we are not saddled with 12 million new consumers of the welfare state;
we don’t have 12 million new Democrat voters;
those receiving the amnesty will not have the ability to spawn chain migration;
before any amnesty is implemented, there is a complete establishment of visa tracking, border control, and mandatory E-verify to ensure that this won’t create another ‘Charlie Brown with the football’ scenario of more waves of illegal immigration;
our legal immigration system move towards a merit-based process that favors high-skill immigrants instead of the current “Kennedy” system that is random and tendentious towards low-skilled immigrants.
Undoubtedly, Republican negotiators of reform proposals, like Marco Rubio, are well-intentioned in their desire to solve a serious problem with thoughtful solutions. However, if they are really committed to advancing conservative solutions and addressing conservative concerns about the immigration system, they must understand the adversity we all face with our Democrat opponents on this issue. Their proposals must be crafted to work not just in a world full of Marco Rubios and Paul Ryans, but in a political system full of Luis Gutierrezs and a judicial sphere full of ACLU and MALDEF (Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund) types. Hence, when proposing immigration bills, to know thy enemy is key.

Democrats like Luis Gutierrezs and Chuck Schumer believe that all 7 billion people in the world are born with a God-given right to immigrate to the United States. When they speak of “our broken immigration system,” they are not bemoaning our policies that are biased towards low-skilled immigration; they are complaining that our generous acceptance of over 1 million new immigrants every year, predominantly from the third world, is not enough. As such, they believe that illegal immigration is a natural and justified result of our refusal to let in even more low-skilled immigrants than we have already admitted over the past two decades. They believe that our unwillingness to immediately grant them amnesty is a violation of their natural rights, and is a reflection of our sinister bigotry towards others.

Perforce, when they speak of “comprehensive immigration reform” they are referring to the following: complete amnesty of all illegals so they can immediately sign up for welfare programs and commence the path towards becoming a permanent Democrat voting bloc; an even larger increase in legal immigration from the third world and from countries that represent a security risk; more welfare recipients now – enforcement later (or never).

This is the brutally honest reality of the liberal immigration policy desideratum. Any Republican who plunges into this debate while disregarding this reality is willfully ignoring the statements and actions of Democrats over the past several decades.

Read More at Red State . By Daniel Horowitz.

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Western Journalism

Senate chair: Count up Hagel vote after hearing

Top Senate Republicans said Tuesday they would reserve judgment on Chuck Hagel‘s nomination until after his confirmation hearing next week, a positive sign for President Barack Obama‘s choice to head the Defense Department.

Hagel, who already has drawn strong opposition from six Senate Republicans, continued his outreach to lawmakers on Tuesday, meeting with 11 senators. Among them were Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Sen. John McCain, whose support for the nomination could smooth the way for the former GOP senator and provide political cover for other Republicans to back the nominee.

“Senator Hagel and I are old friends and we had a very frank and candid conversation, and I’ll be looking forward to the hearing and asking him questions,” the Arizona Republican told reporters at a news conference on his recent overseas trip. “He should be given the opportunity of a hearing before any of us make a judgment.”

Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, said he pressed Hagel on a number of issues, but kept returning to the basics.

Chuck Hagel would be the first enlisted man, the first volunteer to serve in Vietnam” to become defense secretary, Durbin said after a meeting with Hagel. “He served our nation in combat. He was wounded. I can understand why Obama has chosen him.”

Hagel, during a brief conversation with reporters in the Capitol, declined to answer specific questions, simply saying, “we have a hearing next week and I look forward to answering questions.”

The Hagel nomination gained momentum last week as Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., two of the strongest pro-Israel Democrats in the Senate, said the former Nebraska senator had addressed their concerns about his stand on Iran sanctions and support for Israel.

But Hagel still faces ambivalence among Republicans, if not outright opposition, and could emerge from the Senate committee vote with only party-line support. Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, the panel’s top Republican, has announced his opposition as have several other committee members.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said earlier in the day that it was too soon to count the votes and he would have a better assessment of the support for Hagel after his confirmation hearing on Jan. 31.

Asked if there were any Republican votes for Hagel, Levin said, “I haven’t seen any, but there may be that I haven’t seen. That doesn’t mean that there won’t be.”

Hagel was scheduled to meet on Wednesday with Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., a committee member who has said she was perplexed by the nomination.

Another panel member, Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said Tuesday, “I look forward to visiting with him and hearing his testimony and we’ll see where it goes.”

Durbin said Hagel was scheduled to meet with 20 other senators.

Concerns about Hagel replacing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta have centered on whether he is sufficiently pro-Israel, his description of pro-Israel groups as a “Jewish lobby,” and his stand on gay rights. Some GOP lawmakers also are concerned about potential cuts to defense spending and Hagel’s past support for reductions in nuclear weapons.

“That’s of great importance to me,” said Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Corker’s state is home to the Y-12 nuclear facility and significant cuts in the nuclear arsenal would affect his state.

“I want to delve beyond the one-liners and sentences that have been brought forth by groups. It’ll be a very earnest conversation. I always start with an open mind. But I do have concerns,” said Corker, who is scheduled to meet with Hagel on Friday.

Democrats hold a 55-45 advantage in the Senate and would have the votes to confirm Hagel on a simple majority, but they would need five Republican votes for the 60-vote threshold to break a GOP filibuster. A Republican effort to block Obama‘s choice of a former Republican senator would set off a firestorm as Senate leaders try to negotiate new rules on filibusters.

Separately, a GOP-leaning group launched an anti-Hagel ad campaign in the home states of five Senate Democrats up for re-election next year.

“Say no to Chuck Hagel before it’s too late,” said the commercials from Americans for a Stronger Defense. The spots target Sens. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Mark Begich of Alaska, Mark Udall of Colorado, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Kay Hagan of North Carolina.

___

Associated Press writer Richard Lardner contributed to this report.

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Fox US News

Remarks by the President and the Vice President at Inaugural Luncheon

By The White House

National Statuary Hall
United States Capitol

2:35 P.M. EST

SENATOR SCHUMER: Mr. President, Dr. Biden, and your whole wonderful family, I now rise to toast the Vice President of the United States and my former colleague and my friend, Joe Biden.

Mr. Vice President, you’ve been an extraordinary leader of this nation and a true partner to our President these past four years. You play many roles — advisor, advocate, implementer, persuader, strategist, and most important of all, friend. We're confident this unique partnership between you and our great President will only grow stronger and more productive over the next four years.

Mr. Vice President, on the surface, we don't share a common ancestry, but on a deeper level we do share a common story, an American story, of achieving our dreams thanks to the sacrifice of our immigrant forebears.

As you embark on your well-deserved second term, in the spirit of those who came before us, and on behalf of all Americans, we offer you all our support and warmest wishes, and we say to you — Sláinte. L’chaim. Salud. Cent’anni. And cheers. To our great Vice President.

(A toast is offered.)

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Mr. President, and to all the
Presidents assembled — I always enjoyed this lunch more than anything we did in the Capitol. For the 36 years I served in the Senate, I had the great honor of being included in this lunch of former Presidents and Vice Presidents — because it really is the place where we get together in a way unlike any other time when we gather. It’s always a new beginning every time we're in this room. And there’s a sense of possibilities and a sense of opportunity and a sense — sometimes it’s fleeting, but a sense that maybe we can really begin to work together.

And, Chuck, we may come from different ancestries, but as all our colleagues know over the years, we're cut from the same cloth — that we share that same common, absolute conviction that was expressed by Harry Truman when he said, “America was not built on fear. America was built on courage, on imagination, and an unbeatable determination to do the job at hand.”

That's what you’ve done throughout your career, and that's what almost everyone in this room has done. At the end of the day, it’s an absolute confidence — absolute confidence — there’s not a thing, a single thing this country can't do.

I spent too much time with all of you not to know you feel it with every fiber in your being that there’s nothing – nothing — this country is incapable of.

I must say the President kids me occasionally — I know Harry Reid always calls me a Senate man. I am proud to have been a Senate man. I am proud to be President of the Senate. But that pride is exceeded only by the fact I'm proud to be Vice President of the United States, serving as Barack Obama’s Vice President. It’s been one of the great privileges — (applause) — one of the great privileges of my life.

As a matter of fact, if the President will forgive me, as we were walking out and he was, as he said, savoring the moment, looking out at the crowd and all those Americans assembled, I found myself — surprised me, even — I turned to him saying, thank you. Thanks. Thanks for the chance. Thanks for the chance to continue to serve.

And so, folks, I raise my glass to a man who never, never, never operates out of fear, only operates out of confidence — and I'm toasting you, Chuck. (Laughter.) And a guy who I plan on working with — you can't get rid of me, man. Remember, I'm still part of the Senate. (Laughter.)

God bless you, Chuck. You’ve done a great job. And, Lamar, you have as well. To Chuck Schumer. Good to see you, pal.

(A toast is offered.)

SENATOR SCHUMER: The best parts of these events are unscripted. (Laughter.)

I'd now like to introduce our Senate Majority Leader, my good friend and, really, foxhole buddy — a great man, Harry Reid — to offer the official toast to the President. (Applause.)

SENATOR REID: Americans todays are wishing the President Godspeed for the next four years. People all over the world are looking at us, and our exemplary democracy, and wishing the President the best in the years to come.

I’ve had the good fortune for the last many years to work on a very close, personal basis with President Obama. I’ve watched him in the most difficult challenges that a person could face. I’ve watched him do this with brilliance, with patience, with courage, wisdom, and kindness, for which I have learned a great deal.

So, Mr. President, I toast and pray for you, your wonderful family, and our great country four more successful years.

Barack Obama.

(A toast is offered.)

THE PRESIDENT: Michelle and the Speaker of the House came to a meeting of the minds that I may be delaying the proceedings too much. And so I’m just going to be extraordinarily brief and say thank you — to my Vice President, who has not only been an extraordinary partner but an extraordinary friend; and to Dr. Jill Biden, who has partnered with my wife with extraordinary generosity on behalf of our men and women in uniform.

To the entire Cabinet that is here, I am grateful to you. Some of you are staying and some of you are leaving, but I know the extraordinary sacrifices that you and my team have made to try to advance the cause of progress in this country, and I’m always going to be grateful to you for that.

To the Speaker of the House and Nancy Pelosi, to Democratic Leader Harry Reid, as well as Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, and to all the congressional leaders and all the members of Congress who are here — I recognize that democracy is not always easy, and I recognize there are profound differences in this room, but I just want to say thank you for your service and I want to thank your families for their service, because regardless of our political persuasions and perspectives, I know that all of us serve because we believe that we can make America for future generations.

And I'm confident that we can act at this moment in a way that makes a difference for our children and our children's children. I know that former President Carter, President Clinton, they understand the irony of the presidential office, which is, the longer you're there the more humble you become and the more mindful you are that it is beyond your poor powers individually to move this great country. You can only do it because you have extraordinary partners and a spirit of good will, and most of all, because of the strength and resilience and fundamental goodness of the American people.

And so I would like to join all of you not only in toasting the extraordinary work that Chuck Schumer and Lamar Alexander and others have done to create this special day for us, but I also want to thank each and every one of you for not only your service in the past, but hopefully your service in the future as well.

And I would like to offer one last toast, and that is to my extraordinary wife, Michelle. There is controversy about the quality of the President — no controversy about the quality of our current First Lady. (Laughter and applause.)

Thank you, everybody. God bless you, and God bless America.

END
2:44 P.M. EST

Source: FULL ARTICLE at The White House Press Office

Maine Sen. King: No strong reason to oppose Hagel

Maine Sen. Angus King said Thursday that he sees no strong reason to oppose President Barack Obama‘s pick for secretary of defense.

The newly elected senator, an independent, said in an interview with The Associated Press that he won’t make a final decision on former Sen. Chuck Hagel‘s nomination until confirmation hearings are finished. King serves as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which is scheduled to hold a confirmation hearing on Jan. 31.

“I start with a presumption that the president should be able to appoint his own people to his Cabinet. So unless there’s some strong disqualifying element or quality to the nominee, I start with that positive presumption,” King said.

Asked whether he saw a strong disqualifying element or quality with Hagel, King said, “No.”

“But I want to see what the testimony is at the hearing and have a chance to talk to him directly,” he added.

King said he was scheduled to meet privately with Hagel on Friday, but a King spokesman says the meeting has been moved to next week.

Hagel did meet Thursday with Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Leahy had previously expressed his support for the nominee. In a statement, he called Hagel “superb and highly qualified.”

“I know his sense of integrity and his great knowledge of our defense and foreign policies,” Leahy said. “He knows about national defense from the ground up and from his own deeply personal experience — he still carries the wounds of war. The fact that he would be the first enlisted service member to head the Pentagon is significant, and it is timely.”

A handful of Republicans have expressed their opposition to Hagel, a Republican who served two terms as a senator from Nebraska. His nomination gained some Democratic momentum this week with the backing of Sens. Chuck Schumer and Barbara Boxer, but the opposition of the top Republican on the Armed Services Committee, Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, was a blow.

If confirmed, Hagel would be the first Vietnam veteran to serve as the secretary of defense.

“The idea that he’s been an enlisted man, a decorated Vietnam veteran, he knows the reality of the life of the ordinary soldier is a big plus,” King said. “I’ve heard people dismiss that, say, ‘Oh, that’s no big deal.’ I think it is. I think it’s a significant piece of what he brings to this position.”

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Fox US News

Schumer to back Hagel for Pentagon's top job

Sen. Chuck Schumer, an influential Democrat and member of the party’s leadership, said Tuesday he would back President Barack Obama‘s choice of Chuck Hagel to head the Pentagon despite earlier misgivings about the Republican’s stand on Israel, Iran and gay rights.

In a lengthy statement, Schumer said he met for 90 minutes with Hagel on Monday and received assurances on a range of issues from the former Republican senator.

“I am currently prepared to vote for his confirmation. I encourage my Senate colleagues who have shared my previous concerns to also support him,” Schumer said.

The face-to-face meeting took place in the West Wing of the White House. While there, Schumer also met with Obama in the Oval Office, according to a Senate aide. Schumer told Obama that Hagel’s responses on Israel were critical to his decision on the nomination.

Schumer telephoned Hagel Tuesday morning and informed him of his decision, according to the aide.

Hagel has faced opposition from his former Republican colleagues and lukewarm support from some Democrats before and after Obama tapped him to replace Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.

But Schumer’s support coupled with backing from Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., a senior member of the Foreign Relations Committee, will be critical to the prospects for his nomination. The two are the more prominent Jewish members of the Senate, and Schumer is the third-ranking Senate Democrat.

In a conference call with reporters, Boxer said she was unaware that Schumer had announced his support for Hagel, but the fact that the two lawmakers reached their decision independently would be a boost to his nomination.

Boxer said she was confident that Hagel would carry out Obama‘s policies.

She added: “I feel people are being very unfair to Chuck Hagel.”

Schumer said Hagel told him that he backs all steps necessary, including the use of military force, to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Schumer also said Hagel told him that he has always supported Israel‘s right to retaliate militarily against attacks by Hezbollah or Hamas.

Hagel drew widespread criticism for referring to the “Jewish lobby” in describing certain pro-Israel groups. Schumer said Hagel understands the sensitivity of the “such a loaded term and regrets saying it.”

“I know some will question whether Senator Hagel‘s assurances are merely attempts to quiet critics as he seeks confirmation to this critical post. But I don’t think so,” Schumer said. Senator Hagel realizes the situation in the Middle East has changed, with Israel in a dramatically more endangered position than it was even five years ago. His views are genuine, and reflect this new reality.”

Schumer said Hagel also provided assurances on gay rights and abortion rights for members of the military.

Hagel has reached out to all 100 senators and his meeting with Schumer was the first of a dozen one-on-one sessions planned over the next few weeks.

Hagel’s confirmation hearing before the Armed Services Committee will probably occur within weeks.

Boxer said late Monday that she would support Hagel’s nomination. She said he provided answers to a range of questions and promised to support Obama‘s policies “without reservation.”

The former Nebraska GOP senator has been dogged by questions of whether he’s soft on Iran, weak in his backing for Israel and opposed to gay rights.

“A lot of charges rise up and fall when the facts are presented,” Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., a friend of Hagel’s, said in an interview Monday. “That’s the same thing that’s going to happen here. These claims — suddenly claims are debunked — and we get on to substance.”

Backers of Hagel’s nomination counter criticism by pointing to his votes for some $40 billion in military and security aid for Israel during his 12 years in the Senate and his support for all options, including military action, to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. They argue that his position on gay rights has evolved.

Despite the support, Hagel — a Republican tapped by a Democratic president — has few advocates in either party in the Senate and a limited number of opportunities to make inroads with the GOP.

Democrats hold a 55-45 advantage in the Senate, and the party has the numbers to confirm Hagel if the vote is a simple majority. A possible Republican filibuster and a threshold of 60 votes would add even more rancor to the current fight between Democrats and Republicans over Senate rules just as the leaders are trying to negotiate a compromise.

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Fox US News