House passes $50.7 billion Sandy relief bill

FILE - In this Oct. 30, 2012, file photo, a man walks with his dog to a National Guard vehicle after leaving his flooded home at the Metropolitan Trailer Park in Moonachie, N.J., in the wake of Superstorm Sandy. The storm drove New York and New Jersey residents from their homes, destroyed belongings and forced them to find shelter for themselves - and for their pets, said owners, who recounted tales of a dog swimming through flooded streets and extra food left behind for a tarantula no one was willing to take in. (AP Photo/Craig Ruttle, File) / Craig Ruttle

The House of Representatives today passed a $50.7 billion bill to provide funds for Hurricane Sandy relief as well as other natural disasters. The vote was 241 to 180, with 179 Republicans and one Democrat voting no.

The bill will now move to the Senate, where it is expected to be passed by lawmakers after the new session begins on January 22, though it's possible it could be passed by voice vote this week. It is then expected to be quickly signed into law by President Obama.

The package was divided into two parts: A $17 billion bill for immediate recovery from Sandy, and another $33.7 billion amendment for long-term recovery and investment to limit the damage from similar events in the future. The October storm is believed to be responsible for 140 deaths and billions of dollars in damage centered in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. It damaged or destroyed hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses and knocked out transit systems and power grids.

The package provides more than $16 billion for the New York and New Jersey transit systems as well as more $16 billion for Housing and Urban Development funding for recovery from Sandy and other disasters. Other funding goes to the Federal Emergency Management Agency's disaster relief aid fund and to Army Corps of Engineers projects to limit future damage. Funding is also authorized for repairs by the Coast Guard, Federal Highway Administration and Veterans Affairs Department.

Lawmakers from the Northeast criticized southern Republican lawmakers who had sought to reduce the size of the package or require that funding be offset with an across the board cut to discretionary spending. An amendment from Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., that would have offset the funding with spending cuts failed 162 yeas to 258 nays earlier in the day, and the Republican-led House Rules Committee blocked efforts to reduce the size of the package.

"We are asking, we are pleading and we shouldn't have to beg for money for the Northeast, to be able to survive this tragedy that hit us," said Rep. Rosa Delauro, D-Conn., who added: "I might remind my colleague from Louisiana that between Rita, Wilma and Katrina, this institution appropriated $133.9 billion in disaster relief."

Critics of the bill derided it as "an excuse for a grab-bag of spending, having nothing to do with emergency relief," in the words of Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif.

The Senate passed a $60 billion Sandy relief bill before the end of the last Congress, but House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, declined to schedule a House vote on that measure in the wake of the contentious vote on "fiscal cliff" legislation. That decision prompted harsh criticism from northeastern lawmakers, including Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., and Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., forcing Boehner to hastily schedule today's vote in addition to $9.7 billion in flood relief that was passed Jan. 4.

Read More..

NRA Ad Calls Obama 'Elitist Hypocrite'

Jan 16, 2013 12:04am

Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP Photo

As the White House prepares to unveil a sweeping plan aimed at curbing gun violence, the National Rifle Association has launched a preemptive, personal attack on President Obama, calling him an “elitist hypocrite” who, the group claims, is putting American children at risk.

In 35-second video posted online Tuesday night, the NRA criticizes Obama for accepting armed Secret Service protection for his daughters, Sasha and Malia, at their private Washington, D.C., school while questioning the placement of similar security at other schools.

“Are the president’s kids more important than yours? Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools, when his kids are protected by armed guards at their school?” the narrator says.

“Mr. Obama demands the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes, but he’s just another elitist hypocrite when it comes to a fair share of security,” it continues. “Protection for their kids and gun-free zones for ours.”

The immediate family members of U.S. presidents – generally considered potential targets – have long received Secret Service protection.

The ad appeared on a new website for a NRA advocacy campaign – “NRA Stand and Fight” — that the gun-rights group appears poised to launch in response to Obama’s package of gun control proposals that will be announced today.

It’s unclear whether the video will air on TV or only on the web. The NRA did not respond to ABC News’ request for comment.  The domain for the website is registered to Ackerman McQueen, the NRA’s long-standing public relations firm.

The White House had no comment on the NRA ad.

In the wake of last month’s mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, the Obama administration has met with a cross-section of advocacy groups on all sides of the gun debate to formulate new policy proposals.

The NRA, which met with Vice President Joe Biden last week, has opposed any new legislative gun restrictions, including expanded background checks and limits on the sale of assault-style weapons, instead calling for armed guards at all American schools.

Obama publicly questioned that approach in an interview with “Meet the Press” earlier this month, saying, “I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools. And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem.”

Still, the White House has been considering a call for increased funding for police officers at public schools and the proposal could be part of a broader Obama gun policy package.

Fifty-five percent of Americans in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll say they support adding armed guards at schools across the country.

“The issue is, are there some sensible steps that we can take to make sure that somebody like the individual in Newtown can’t walk into a school and gun down a bunch of children in a shockingly rapid fashion.  And surely, we can do something about that,” Obama said at a news conference on Monday.

“Responsible gun owners, people who have a gun for protection, for hunting, for sportsmanship, they don’t have anything to worry about,” he said.

ABC News’ Mary Bruce and Jay Shaylor contributed reporting. 

SHOWS: Good Morning America World News

Read More..

Today on New Scientist: 14 January 2013

Activist's death sparks open-access tribute on Twitter

Hundreds of researchers have been offering free access to their work in tribute to internet freedom activist Aaron Swartz, who committed suicide on Friday

Exploding microchip could make arms dumps safer

Shrapnel and bullets can set off huge explosions if they hit weapons stores. But microchip-based detonators could help keep them safe

The hologenome: A new view of evolution

Far from being passive hangers-on, symbiotic microbes may shape the evolution of the plants and animals that play host to them

White House uses Death Star request to plug science

The White House has politely declined to build a version of the planet-destroying space station from Star Wars but took the opportunity to promote science

Wolves bite back in the human world

Grey wolves are an evolutionary success story, giving rise to the domestic dog 10,000 years ago and now rebounding from centuries of persecution

Mariko Mori: From stone circles to stardust

The artist's new exhibition tethers human history to the life of the entire cosmos

Why we called off hunt for ancient Antarctic life

Geoscientist Martin Siegert says that drilling through 3 kilometres of ice to reveal the secrets of an entombed lake was never going to be easy

Give video games a sporting chance

Traditional fans will turn their noses up at e-sports, but they risk missing some compelling action

Benefits of emissions cuts kick in only next century

Even rapid action now to curb emissions will bring only modest results this century, but the earlier we act, the greater the eventual rewards

Video games take off as a spectator sport

Professional gaming has been huge in Asia for years, and improved technology means it is now going global

Read More..

New Holocaust museum opens at gruesome WW2 site

BRUSSELS: Belgium's newly-opened Holocaust and human rights museum stands symbolically on the site of barracks commandeered by the Nazis as a wartime transit centre for Jews and Gypsies being sent to the death camps.

The new "Kazerne Dossin" in the Flemish town of Mechelen, comprising a museum, memorial and documentation centre, is located at the site of an 18th century barracks that officials dub "a silent witness to the greatest war crime, in the form of genocide, in Belgium".

The new World War II remembrance complex some 30 kilometres from Brussels was inaugurated by Belgian King Albert II and opened to the public last month.

Like the Drancy camp outside Paris where Jews were rounded up and sent to death camps, the Dossin barracks -- directly linked to the Belgian rail network -- was turned into a last-stop transit centre for the notorious Auschwitz-Birkenau camp run by the Nazis during the war.

More than 25,500 Jews and 350 Gypsies from both Belgium and northern France were sent there after their arrest, often with the help of local police.

There were more than 70,000 Jews in Belgium before the Second World War broke out, notably 18,000 in the nearby port city of Antwerp.

After two or three months at Dossin, deportees were herded into trains for the Third Reich's death camps. Only five percent of the Jews and Gypsies who left Mechelen in 28 convoys ever returned.

Last September, Belgian Prime Minister Elio Di Rupo presented the country's apologies for crimes committed by people who had worked hand-in-hand with Nazis to deport Jews.

"This new museum takes a more profound look at the history of the persecution of the Jews in Flanders and Belgium, based on new historic sources of information and insights," said Kris Peeters, who heads the Dutch-speaking government of Flanders.

"It also provides a link between the concepts of holocaust and human rights."

In 1995, members of the Jewish community opened a small museum in a part of the barracks but much of the building had already been turned into flats and sold.

The new complex, built with the help of a 25-million-euro investment by the government of Flanders, adds a state-of-the-art cube-like museum designed by celebrated Flemish architect Bob Van Reeth.

The top fourth floor, destined to house temporary exhibitions, is open to the light of day but the other three storeys smack of a mausoleum.

Rectangular shapes in the white facade symbolise bricked-up windows while the heavy sliding steel door recalls those on the freight trains used to carry the victims to their death.

Van Reeth said the total volume was equivalent to that of the freight cars used in the 28 convoys to the death camp; the number of bricks used being the same as the number of people deported.

The three floors touch on three themes -- intolerance, fear and death.

The museum expects to see 100,000 visitors a year.

- AFP/al

Read More..

Clarence Thomas ends seven-year silence

By Bill Mears, CNN Supreme Court Producer

updated 8:17 PM EST, Mon January 14, 2013

Clarence Thomas

John G. Roberts

Antonin Scalia

Anthony M. Kennedy

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Stephen G. Breyer

Samuel A. Alito Jr.

Sonia Sotomayor

Elena Kagan

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Clarence Thomas known for remaining quiet during oral arguments


• On Monday, he joked about lawyers educated at Yale, his alma mater


• Current Supreme Court known as 'hot bench' for the rhetorical scrum during arguments

Washington (CNN) -- It was just a few words and a joke at that. But Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas broke his seven-year long silence on Monday when he spoke at oral arguments.

He made fun of lawyers from Yale, his law school alma mater.

Thomas has become known for rarely commenting on cases from the bench, another reflection of the complex and often misunderstood personality of the court's only African-American jurist.

On Monday, the justices were hearing an argument about the state of Louisiana's delay in paying for counsel for a death penalty defendant. Should that count against the state for the purposes of the right to a speedy trial?

A lawyer for the state was making the case for the inmate's appointed counsel, saying the woman was "more than qualified" and "very impressive."

"She was graduate of Yale Law School, wasn't she?" said Justice Antonin Scalia in apparent support, noting another member of the legal team went to Harvard.

The next words were hard to hear in the back-and-forth between the justices. But Thomas made a joke about the competence of Yale lawyers when compared to their Harvard colleagues, according to two witnesses.

Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012)

HIDE CAPTION

<<

<

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

>

>>

Six members of the current high court attended Harvard Law School. Thomas, Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor attend Yale.

Sotomayor describes life journey in new memoir

The official transcript released by the court does not capture the flavor of the colorful exchange. But the lawyer arguing before the court was apparently not pleased.

"I would refute that, Justice Thomas," said Carla Sigler, the assistant district attorney in Lake Charles, Louisiana.

The rest of the time, Thomas kept his own counsel as he is known to do.

"One thing I've demonstrated often in 16 years is you can do this job without asking a single question," he recalled in a speech five years ago.

Written opinions remain the main way the court expresses itself. But the current court is known as a "hot bench" for the busy back-and-forth rhetorical scrum during arguments.

Eight of the justices compete for time to make their questions and views known.

Thomas does occasionally speak from the bench when announcing opinions he has written, but before arguments commence.

Off the bench in friendly audiences, he can be gregarious, inquisitive and often self-reflective. He has a booming voice, and his hearty laugh is easily recognizable.

Some scholars have said Thomas' aversion to talking has reached epic heights.

A study of transcripts by Timothy Johnson of the University of Minnesota found in the past four decades, no justice besides Thomas had failed to speak at least once during an entire 12-month term.

The last time he spoke was February 22, 2006, during a capital appeal.

Part of complete coverage on

updated 1:58 PM EST, Mon January 14, 2013

"Argo" and "Les Miserables" were the big winners at this year's Golden Globes.

updated 5:06 AM EST, Mon January 14, 2013

VIDEO: CNN's Kristie Lu Stout and Hollywood.com's Matt Patches discuss the nominees for the 85th Academy Awards.

updated 10:31 AM EST, Mon January 14, 2013

Photos: Fashion at the Golden Globes on Sunday -- which outfit was your favorite?

CNN reports from Syria and Turkey on the human suffering of those who have survived the civil war, but now face further hardship.

updated 8:20 PM EST, Sun January 13, 2013

This is not worksafe. It's a hyperlink to Hiropon, the pornographic fiberglass creation of Japanese artist Takashi Murakami.

updated 7:44 AM EST, Mon January 14, 2013

The advance buildup has all been about Lance Armstrong as he prepares to enter the church of Oprah and seek absolution for his sins.

updated 7:47 PM EST, Fri January 11, 2013

Photographer Ronen Goldman recreates his dreams through photos.

updated 3:21 AM EST, Mon January 14, 2013

India doesn't do things small, religious festivals included. Over 55 days, an estimated 100 million Hindu devotees will go to the Kumbh Mela.

updated 6:45 AM EST, Mon January 14, 2013

VIDEO: Six thousand throwers participated. Organizers trucked in 162,000 pounds of snow in 34 truckloads for the throwdown.

updated 12:33 PM EST, Fri January 11, 2013

The fate of the Sri Lankan maid beheaded in Saudi Arabia, should spotlight the precarious existence of domestic workers, Jo Becker says.

updated 6:15 AM EST, Mon January 14, 2013

International leaders are responding to an uprising of Islamist militants in northern Mali.

updated 3:29 AM EST, Mon January 14, 2013

VIDEO: CNN's Nima Elbagir reports on wildlife rangers who risk their lives to guard Kenya's elephant population from poachers.

updated 6:22 AM EST, Mon January 14, 2013

VIDEO: CNN's Elizabeth Cohen has the latest on the flu epidemic and what health officials mean when they call it an "epidemic".

Read More..

Hillary Clinton to testify on Benghazi Jan. 23

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will testify Jan. 23 before the House Foreign Affairs Committee about the deadly Sept. 11 assault on the U.S. mission in Libya.

That's the word from Rep. Ed Royce, chairman of the panel. He said in a statement late Monday that Clinton will answer questions about the raid that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans in Benghazi.

Clinton had been scheduled to testify last month but she suffered a concussion when she fell during an illness. She was later hospitalized with a blood clot in her head.

She's also expected to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee around the same time as her House testimony. That date has not been announced by the committee.

She has planned to step down and President Barack Obama has nominated Sen. John Kerry to replace her.

Read More..

Armstrong Admits Doping in Tour, Sources Say

Lance Armstrong today admitted to Oprah Winfrey that he used performance enhancing drugs to win the Tour de France, sources told ABC News.

A goverment source tells ABC News that Armstrong is now talking with authorities about paying back some of the US Postal Service money from sponsoring his team. He is also talking to authorities about confessing and naming names, giving up others involved in illegal doping. This could result in a reduction of his lifetime ban, according to the source, if Armstrong provides substantial and meaningful information.

Armstrong made the admission in what sources describe as an emotional interview with Winfrey to air on "Oprah's Next Chapter" on Jan. 17.

The 90-minute interview at his home in Austin, Texas, was Armstrong's first since officials stripped him of his world cycling titles in response to doping allegations.

Word of Armstrong's admission comes after a Livestrong official said that Armstrong apologized today to the foundation's staff ahead of his interview.

The disgraced cyclist gathered with about 100 Livestrong Foundation staffers at their Austin headquarters for a meeting that included social workers who deal directly with patients as part of the group's mission to support cancer victims.

Armstrong's "sincere and heartfelt apology" generated lots of tears, spokeswoman Katherine McLane said, adding that he "took responsibility" for the trouble he has caused the foundation.

Riccardo S. Savi/Getty Images|Ray Tamarra/Getty Images

Lance Armstrong Stripped of Tour de France Titles Watch Video

Lance Armstrong Doping Charges: Secret Tapes Watch Video

McLane declined to say whether Armstrong's comments included an admission of doping, just that the cyclist wanted the staff to hear from him in person rather than rely on second-hand accounts.

Armstrong then took questions from the staff.

Armstrong's story has never changed. In front of cameras, microphones, fans, sponsors, cancer survivors -- even under oath -- Lance Armstrong hasn't just denied ever using performance enhancing drugs, he has done so in an indignant, even threatening way.

Armstrong, 41, was stripped of his seven Tour de France titles and banned from the sport for life by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency in October 2012, after allegations that he benefited from years of systematic doping, using banned substances and receiving illicit blood transfusions.

"Lance Armstrong has no place in cycling and he deserves to be forgotten in cycling," Pat McQuaid, the president of the International Cycling Union, said at a news conference in Switzerland announcing the decision. "This is a landmark day for cycling."

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency issued a 200-page report Oct. 10 after a wide-scale investigation into Armstrong's alleged use of performance-enhancing substances.

Armstrong won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005.

According to a source, speaking to ABC News, a representative of Armstrong's once offered to make a donation estimated around $250,000 to the agency, as "60 Minutes Sports" on Showtime first reported.

Lance Armstrong's attorney Tim Herman denied it. "No truth to that story," Herman said. "First Lance heard of it was today. He never made any such contribution or suggestion."

Armstrong, who himself recovered from testicular cancer, created the Lance Armstrong Foundation (now known as the LIVESTRONG Foundation) to help people with cancer cope, as well as foster a community for cancer awareness. Armstrong resigned late last year as chairman of the LIVESTRONG Foundation, which raised millions of dollars in the fight against cancer.

Read More..

Benefits of emissions cuts kick in only next century

Are we the altruistic generation? Do we care what happens to our grandchildren, and to their children? Or are we with Groucho Marx when he said: "Why should I care about future generations? What have they ever done for me?"

A new study of climate change lays out in detail why this matters. According to its author, Nigel Arnell of the University of Reading, UK, the unpalatable truth is that even rapid action now to curb greenhouse gas emissions would have only a "negligible effect by 2030, and the benefits in 2050 would remain small". The big dividend – cooler temperatures, fewer floods and droughts and better crop yields, compared to carrying on as we are – would only become clear by about 2100.

Arnell and colleagues used climate models to look at how different policies to curb greenhouse gases would affect temperature, sea levels, crop yields and the incidence of droughts and floods. Two findings emerged. The first is that lags in the climate system mean the real benefits of cutting emissions will only show up late this century. This, says Arnell, underlines that there is a lot of global warming "in the pipeline" that cannot now be prevented.

But the study also shows that tackling climate change early brings big rewards. Arnell compared a policy of letting emissions peak in 2016 and then cutting them by 2 per cent a year with one that delays the peak till 2030 and then cuts by 5 per cent a year. He found that both restricted warming in 2100 to about 2 °C, but the climate disruption over the next century would be much less with the early start. Coastal flooding from sea-level rise in particular would be much reduced. This, he told New Scientist, contradicts a common view that drastic action to curb warming should wait for renewable energy to become cheaper.

"Arnell has shown just how crucial the emissions pathway we take today will be for our children and grandchildren," said Dave Reay, geoscientist at the University of Edinburgh, UK. Bill McGuire of University College London agrees: "It shows taking effective action now is far better than putting it off until later."

It's a shame, then, that even if all goes well with UN negotiations, no global deal to bring down emissions will come into force until at least 2020. Our great-great-grandchildren will be cursing our delay.

Journal reference: Nature Climate Change, DOI: 10.1038/NCLIMATE1793

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

Read More..

Halimah Yacob is first female Speaker

SINGAPORE: Madam Halimah Yacob is Singapore's first woman Speaker of Parliament.

She took the Speaker's seat at the start of the sitting of the House on Monday afternoon.

Madam Halimah, who resigned on Sunday as Minister for State, fills the position vacated by former People's Action Party Member of Parliament, Mr Michael Palmer, who stepped down on 12 December 2012 due to an extramarital affair.

She was nominated by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to be elected as Speaker.

- CNA/ck

Read More..

Fleischer: Hagel is wrong about Israel

Former Sen. Chuck Hagel was nominated by President Obama for defense secretary.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• In 2006, Hagel said 'the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here'


• Ari Fleischer: The support for Israel isn't because of 'intimidation,' but merit


• Polls show most Americans view Israel favorably, but don't support Iran or Palestinians


• Fleischer: Israel is a steady friend of the U.S. and a tolerant democracy

Editor's note: Ari Fleischer, a CNN contributor, was White House press secretary in the George W. Bush administration from 2001 to 2003 and is the president of Ari Fleischer Sports Communications Inc. He is a paid consultant and board member for the Republican Jewish Coalition, which opposes the Hagel nomination. Follow him on Twitter: @AriFleischer

(CNN) -- "The political reality is ... that the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here." -- Senator Chuck Hagel, 2006

As a result of those words and his voting record, former Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel's nomination has turned a decades-long, bipartisan confirmation process for secretary of defense into an acrimonious one.

While some leading figures such as the Anti-Defamation League's Abe Foxman and the Simon Wiesenthal Center's Rabbi Abraham Cooper say Hagel's words are borderline anti-Semitism, I'm less worried about anti-Semitism and more worried about the judgment of a potential defense secretary who thinks Israel has won support because of "intimidation," not merit.

Ari Fleischer

Israel is widely supported by the American people because Israel deserves to be supported. Israel is a lonely democratic ally and a steady friend of the United States in a dangerous and tumultuous region. Their people are like the American people -- free, independent, capitalistic and tolerant.

A Gallup poll taken last year showed 71% of the American people view Israel favorably while only 19% view the Palestinian Authority favorably and just 10% view Iran favorably.

In a Pew Research Center study last month, 50% of adults said they sympathize more with Israel in its dispute than with the Palestinians. Just 10% sympathize more with the Palestinians, while about as many (13%) volunteered that they sympathize with neither side.

Contrary to Hagel's logic, Israel doesn't enjoy widespread American support because anyone -- from any faith -- intimidated someone else; Israel earned the support of the American people because of its people's values.

Opinion: Hagel is a friend to Israel

The danger in what Hagel said is if he thinks Israel is supported on Capitol Hill because of intimidation, then it's not hard to see why Hagel is so soft in his support for our ally. He sees himself as an independent voice willing to stand up to intimidation, and he wears his anti-Israel votes as badges of honor.

But Hagel isn't independent. He's alone.

His position on Middle Eastern matters is so outside the mainstream of both parties that almost no one agrees with him.

In 2000, Hagel was one of only four senators who refused to sign a Senate letter in support of Israel.

Peter Beinart: What's behind Hagel nomination fight

The following year Hagel was one of only 11 senators who refused to sign a letter urging President George W. Bush to continue his policy of not meeting with Yasser Arafat until the Palestinian leader took steps to end the violence against Israel.

John Cornyn: Why I can't support Hagel

Contrary to America's longstanding bipartisan position, Hagel has called for direct talks with terrorist organizations Hamas and Hezbollah. In 2007, Hagel voted against labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, the group responsible for the death of many American servicemen in Iraq, a terrorist organization.

And in 2008, he was one of two senators on the banking committee to oppose a bill putting sanctions on Iran. One of the measure's biggest backers was an Illinois senator named Barack Obama.

I'm a New Yorker and neither of my senators -- Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand -- supports Israel because someone muscled them into that position through intimidation. They both support Israel because the lobby that wants them to support Israel is an American lobby, made up of people from both parties and all religions and from people with no religion or political party at all.

But if Chuck Hagel believes that it's intimidation and not sound judgment that has caused his colleagues to support Israel, then Chuck Hagel should not be confirmed as our next secretary of defense.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Ari Fleischer.

Read More..