January 15, 2025
for Pete’s sake
A mild oath of exasperation, annoyance, frustration, anger, or surprise.
If you’d watched the Senate confirmation hearing of Pete Hegseth and all you saw were the questioning Senators, while the nominee was sequestered behind a screen, you wouldn’t have been faulted for thinking that two nominees were behind that screen.
One; the town drunk who cheats on his wife, shows up to work half in the bag, has tanked a couple of businesses and is generally considered an embarrassing lout.
The other; a good upstanding family man with good Christian morals who rose above some possible failings to be a pillar of society.
It could’ve been a guy named John. And depending on who was doing the speaking and the questioning, it was either Gotti or the Baptist.
Your choice of which ‘John’ was behind the curtain could have been based on the questions asked and the tones with which they were presented. To use a baseball analogy, the Democrats threw some nasty fastballs aimed right at Hegseth’s dome, while the Republicans gently placed the ball on a tee, patted him lovingly on the back and said, ‘go get ‘em, big fella.’
I started to watch from the beginning but my own well being and the well being of those people and objects around me compelled me to be content (or discontented) with occasionally rejoining the spectacle and then clicking ‘off’ on the remote when it all became too sickening to bear. It was a disgusting theater of the bizarre put on by the Republicans.
I skipped dinner and went to bed early last night; depressed, sick at heart, sick in my gut and sick of seeing the feckless, fawning of the Republican Party which is content to watch the country circling the drain.
As the days tick down to inauguration day, the feelings of hopelessness and helplessness become more and more acute. I feel like I’m watching, voiceless and paralyzed, while the little kid chases a ball into the street in front of the speeding car. We the people have been ignored. Neutered by two (yes two) political parties that are more interested in power than people.
The senators on the Armed Services Committee (and all committees) are supposed to be committed to representing we the people, and working for the good of our nation, and presumably, the world. I have to believe that most Americans; whether they voted for cheap eggs, reproductive rights, cheaper gas, LGBTQ rights, or against either candidate (and yes, even the ones who helped to damn us all by sitting it out), couldn’t have been pleased watching yesterday’s farce (at least those who did watch all or part of it). It was one long, painfully drawn out, head buried in the hands moment.
Ever since Trump announced his bid for reelection, and as election day drew near and I came to the realization that Trump would win, I knew that a second Trump term would be bad. But this? I simply couldn’t have imagined a Fox “News” host, an idealogue with a documented history of alcoholism, business failure and abuse of women would be nominated to be the Secretary of Defense.
Hegseth’s CV includes, on the good side, degrees from Harvard and Princeton and his service as a Major in the Army. On the flip side Hegseth was forced from the executive positions of two advocacy groups, the Vets For Freedom (VFF) and Concerned Veterans for America (CVA) over allegations of financial mismanagement, sexual impropriety, drunkeness, and general personal misconduct that included compelling female staffers to go to strip clubs.
During Hegseth’s short stint running a political action committee called MN PAC, one third of its funds were spent on Christmas parties.
I started out with the good intentions of watching the whole thing but those intentions didn’t last beyond Committee Chairman Roger Wicker’s introduction, “The nominee is unconventional.” He added, “That may be what makes Mr. Hegseth an excellent choice …” A roll of my eyes and a ‘click’ of the remote.
I’m imagining Benedetto Vigna, the CEO of Ferrari looking for a chief mechanic. Candidate Antonio Soprano sits before an interview panel and is asked to name five parts of an internal combustion engine. Signore Soprano answers, “There’s the framistan, the doohickey, the whatchamajig, the muffler bearings, and …”
“Stop!” shouts Benedetto. “I’ve heard enough of this. Antonio is clearly a breath of fresh, unconventional air. When can you start signore?”
No. Companies, at least responsible successful ones, don’t hire the unconventional unless, unconventional is part of a package that includes experience, good judgement, and moral character. As we learned yesterday, and over the course of the preceding weeks, Mr. Hegseth does not possess that package.
My example of Chief Mechanic Antonio might seem far-fetched but we’ve been in a political climate in which the implausible has become the ordinary. And so, Senator and former Army Lt. Colonel and combat helicopter pilot Tammy Duckworth asked Pete Hegseth to name the importance of one of the nations in ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations). After a period of stammering like a school kid stalling for deliverance, Hegseth named South Korea, Japan, and Australia before the senator stopped Hegseth’s bleeding (or bleating), “Mr. Hegseth, none of those countries are in ASEAN …” It begged the question, how was it that Hegseth was even there?
When pressed by Senator Angus King about adhering to the Geneva Convention, Hegseth danced, deflected, and deviated for six minutes, leaving everyone wondering how Hegseth views the Geneva Convention.
For that, one only needs to flip through Hegseth’s book, ‘The War on Warriors,’ in which he writes, “What if we treated the enemy the way they treated us?” he asks. “Would that not be an incentive for the other side to reconsider their barbarism? Hey, Al Qaeda: if you surrender, we might spare your life. If you do not, we will rip your arms off and feed them to hogs.”
Later in the book, Hegseth asks, “Who cares what other countries think?”
I suppose that this is all fine and good with those who subscribe to the Bashar al-Assad, Vladimir Putin, and Pol Pot, theory of combat and no doubt there are plenty of those individuals to be found in the United States. As horrific as war is, do we have aspire to being the most horrific and to blow off “what other countries think?”
Hegseth stated before the whole committee, “I’m an open book,” yet in the days before the hearings, he refused to meet with the Democratic members. During the hearing, when Mark Kelly asked to confirm or deny specific allegations of misconduct and drunkenness, Hegseth responded “anonymous smears.” Well, there you have it (even though most of the allegations were not anonymous).
Hegseth’s wobbly defense of his alcohol abuse is not uncommon among drunks (take it from a guy who’s been a drunk). He’s been seen stumble down drunk, denied the accusations and meanwhile has pledged to give up drinking if he’s confirmed. It’s textbook behavior. I’m rooting for the guy to give up the sauce but I also know just how tempting a little bracer can be when the pressure gets to be overwhelming. Be very, very careful when a drunk qualifies his desire to go on the wagon with, ‘if I’m hired I promise to stop drinking.’
And then there was the flip side.
Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla asked Hegseth to, “Tell me something about your wife that you love.”
During his time, Mullin tried a weak version of the old throwing stones in glass houses gambit, “How many senators have shown up drunk to vote at night?” he asked, addressing his colleagues. “Don’t tell me you haven’t seen it, because I know you have. And then how many senators do you know have gotten divorced for cheating on their wives?” There’s a name for what Mullin did – deflection.
Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.), asked Hegseth how many genders there are. When Hegseth responded, “Two,” the Senator went into his lounge act, “I know that well. I’m a she-he.” Get it? Sheehy? She-he? He’s here all week, folks; tip your waiters..”
No doubt, Senator Sheehy rehearsed that one for days. All that was missing was the gold lame jacket, white belt and white shoes.
And there was your confirmation hearing, ladies and gentlemen.
‘Click.’
When Trump announced Hegseth, along with the rest of what is more like every kitchen’s random drawer full of junk and misplaced stuff, than it is a presidential cabinet, I thought, ‘no way.’
And then I learned at the end of the day yesterday that Senator Joni Ernst, a veteran and victim of rape and spousal abuse, and widely viewed as a Hegseth holdout, had announced that she would vote to confirm.
‘Way.’
This morning I thought that last night I’d maybe reached the depths of depression and despair. That was until I read that Mark Davis, a Republican operative and rabid MAGA disciple told Politico, “We gave the Senate an attitude adjustment.”
So much for the assembly that has been described through the decades as “the world’s greatest deliberative body.” Ha! Great deliberative bodies don’t get “attitude adjustments,” from a wayward president’s sycophants. Hell, they don’t get “attitude adjustments,” from any president’s sycophants.
The job of the Senate, as described in the Constitution is “advice and consent,” meaning that the Senate is to be consulted on appointments made by the President. “Advice and consent,” isn’t a rubber stamp. Otherwise there would be no need for the consultation. The Senate can refuse to consent which essentially means, ‘we’re advising you to make a better choice.’
My despondency isn’t rooted in the Hegseth hearing. Hegseth is just one symptom of a virus that’s running rampant within a party that controls the government.
Mark Davis brazenly admitted that MAGA has gamed the system, and the fix is in. The majority of the “greatest deliberative body” has felt Donald Trump’s fat thumb on the scale and has had visions of Elon Musk menacingly tapping his checkbook and mouthing the words, “I can have you primaried.”
When it comes to the confirmation of the Secretary of the Defense, and the leadership of the most well equipped, best trained, best funded and, here’s the really scary part, the most lethal military force the world has seen, the Republican Senate isn’t working on behalf of America’s sake, or the world’s sake or for the sake of you and I. Our senators aren’t doing it for the people’s sake. They’re working for their own sake, for Donald Trump’s sake and, in this case, for Pete’s sake.
In 1986, William L. Shirer’s, “The Nightmare Years 1930 – 1940,” was published. Shirer, an American correspondent, best known for his book “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” wrote a memoir of his time in pre-World War II Europe. It was a dangerous, unsettled time not just in Europe but around the world.
With the reelection of Donald Trump to the presidency, I feel that the coming four years (or more) may be the most volatile and dangerous in American and world history.
After reading Shirer’s memoir, I’m considering a new blog, a sort of personal journal of my own, a chronicle of the days that loom before us. It would be a site separate from this one (which may put the future of this site in doubt). Not a simple rehash of the news, but my own personal thoughts and feelings.
At this point a new site to be named “47 – America’s Nightmare” is only in the consideration stage. To be quite honest I don’t know if I could stomach a daily (or semi-daily) dive into the MAGA swamp. For now “47 – America’s Nightmare” will be a series on this particular site.
Stay tuned.
The Life in My Years 
I must admit when I read your comment regarding cheating on his spouse, is it relevant? If, you condemned every person in politics for their infidelity or their lack of morals who would be in power?. I personally dislike anyone who cheats/lies or isn’t honest. I understand your concern for the bigger picture and I really do hope that it becomes less of an issue for America and indeed for world peace.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hello Suzanne, I think it’s relevant if his admitted multiple incidents of infidelity (five affairs while married to his first wife and a child born to his then future third wife while married to the second) have been part of an overall pattern of bad behavior. One or two? Okay, fine I guess, who’s perfect? Six (that we know of), along with a propensity to hit the bottle to beyond excess shows a lack of impulse control, and I think I would like my Secretary of Defense to have a steadier hold on his impulses. That and the fact according to the U.S, Uniform Code of Military Justice, infidelity is forbidden in the very department that he seeks to lead.
“If, you condemned every person in politics for their infidelity or their lack of morals who would be in power?” Fair question. Indeed nobody is perfect. My question, should there be a line between what I’ll call bearable lapses in behavior and a pattern of conduct that belies trust? Where is that line and did Pete Hegseth cross it?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Hi Paul, I agree he shouldn’t be in politics and why on earth would someone with debatable morals even contemplate politics?. I know silly question. You are very knowledgeable in what is going on with American politics I shall sit back, read and learn with no commenting from now on 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, please do comment. It’s an important part of the discussion that helps us to learn and appreciate differing points of view.
Why would someone with debatable morals contemplate politics? Debatable morals often used to be disqualifying. Now they’re overlooked. The irony is that the Republican Party champions Christian values and morality while backing the most amoral president in American history.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I will comment when I feel more informed. In the meantime, I’ll absorb more information. I do agree that people with an honest background need only apply to politics, though that’s not going to happen. Perfection isn’t required, just basic decent human morals which we learnt as kids. Don’t lie and cheat.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There’s a really serious issue if unfaithfulness leads to him being vulnerable to blackmail, especially by a non-US agency. I also question whether the oath of a person found breaking a past oath is as good as that of a person who takes her/his promises seriously. In my mind the two are not equal.
LikeLike
Hello Robin, Very good points. Unfortunately, as I write this, Pete Hegseth is our new Secretary of Defense. I guess we’ll have to wait for him to come to the Situation Room at 2 in the morning, after a bender, to address a global crisis.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This whole process of selection is very different to what we have here in the UK. No one gets to question the Prime Minister’s appointments but (s)he can normally only appoint from those MPs in their party already elected to parliament, so they have already gone through both party and voter scrutiny. Do they always get it right? No (a minister resigned just yesterday because of allegations, which may not even be true, of possible misconduct). But we don’t see the extremes of unsuitability that I’m observing among Trump’s appointments, even in the worst of cases!
LikeLike
Hello Sarah, Our Senate confirmation process didn’t used to be such a partisan clown show. Once upon a time, senators took their job seriously and weren’t such boot licking cowards. Now they’re afraid, not only of Trump, but of Elon Musk.
There was also a time when the hearings weren’t televised. Once the cameras and microphones were allowed in it was kabuki time.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi Paul,
So I didn’t manage to read this until this morning, a heavy read before my coffee, made my blood boil.
I’d watched clips of the confirmation – Hegseth’s smug expression as he struggled to respond to Sen. Kaine. I couldn’t even stand the sight of him for more than two minutes, so … CLICK.
So much disturbs me about this confirmation. Elected officials are willingly turning a blind eye to allow this inexperienced man/child to hold a position with tremendous power. And even if he doesn’t know much , my guess is he’ll do the bidding of whoever “pays him” what he wants … whether that be in more power, more money, more recognition, more women, more booze. The list can go on. His history shows he has no moral character, so I don’t expect it will take much.
It’s like we’re witnessing the foot solders being lined up, but when all is said and done, a future generation will have to deal with them, will have to hear them say: “I was only taking orders.”
UGH!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hello Eden, Well next time add a little splash of Bushmills to the coffee before reading. After inauguration day, when the stuff really starts we’ll be adding a splash of coffee to the mug of Bushmills.
DOD is the biggest department in the U.S. government, in terms of both size and budget. Not to mention the decision making that has to take place. The secretary has to be prepared to jump into action and make decisions any moment of the day or night. It isn’t a place for someone who has a history of being in his cups.
The person that Hegseth is going to answer to is Donald Trump and that’s the really scary part. Trump was the guy who wanted to use the 82nd Airborne Division on American citizens who were protesting. Hegseth was asked about that and he danced the GOP two step.
I hope that it won’t come down to the “only following orders” scenario. We will have to rely on good officers who will refuse to follow illegal orders.
Hegseth is a shoe-in. Our allies are aghast and Putin is popping Champagne.
Thanks for reading and commenting.
Paul
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yeah, reading above comments, knee-jerk reaction WOULD be “Who cares about infidelity? Everyone does it.” And yes, the moral road for politicians is a hazy, gray, winding one. But learning more about the great orange one is wise, because I don’t think a lot of people know the depth of his treacheries and/or his perceptions of women in general. Just the fact that he was caught on tape–years ago, yes, but so what? He hasn’t changed an iota–saying “Grab em by the pussy,” and referring to how women let themselves be treated and should be treated… Those ideas about women are just the tip of the iceberg re: every other subject under the sun, too, an indicator of a black hole where a soul should be. THIS is someone you want to run the country? But they do. People don’t care. They probably admire it, even. So it’s not really even about him as much as them, the folks that voted him in. ‘Cause he would have been a joke, a laughingstock, without his endless support and enablement. Sorry to be redundant. I know we’ve covered this all before! lol 🙂
LikeLike
Hi Stacey, “I know we’ve covered this all before!” And yet, here we are. Each time that I thought we’d hit rock bottom, we would suddenly find a new low. I don’t believe that there is rock bottom anymore. It’s just an endless chasm.
Paul
LikeLike