In 1998, then-Senator Chuck Hagel stated that President Bill Clinton’s Ambassador-designate James Hormel was “openly, aggressively gay,” which was “an inhibiting factor” in his ability to perform “an effective job” as Ambassador to Luxembourg.
Now that Hagel is in the running to succeed Leon Panetta as Barack Obama’s Defense Department Secretary, he’s issued an apology. To Politico‘s Mike Allen. Via a statement. Issued through an aide:
“My comments 14 years ago in 1998 were insensitive. They do not reflect my views or the totality of my public record, and I apologize to Ambassador Hormel and any LGBT Americans who may question my commitment to their civil rights. I am fully supportive of ‘open service’ and committed to LGBT military families.”
Here’s the article about Hagel, opposing James Hormel’s nomination:
The Omaha World-Herald reported in 1998: “Ambassadorial posts are sensitive, Hagel explained. ‘They are representing America,’ he said [in an interview]. ‘They are representing our lifestyle, our values, our standards. And I think it is an inhibiting factor to be gay — openly aggressively gay like Mr. Hormel — to do an effective job.’”
Lifestyle.
Values.
Standards.
Now comes James Hormel, who has this to say about the “apology” provided by an aide of Chuck Hagel to Tiger Beat on the Potomac‘s premiere aggregator of yesterday’s news and gossip-mongerer and birthday-rememberer, Mike Allen. Reports WaPo’s Greg Sargent:
But in an interview this afternoon, the target of the 1998 slur, leading gay philanthropist James Hormel, told me he never received an apology from Hagel himself, questioned the sincerity of the apology, and said the incident should still raise questions about whether Hagel is the right man to oversee the repeal of don’t ask don’t tell.
“I have not received an apology,” Hormel, who is a major figure in Democratic politics, told me. “I thought this so-called apology, which I haven’t received, but which was made public, had the air of being a defensive move on his part.” Hormel added that the apology appeared to have been given “only in service of his attempt to get the nomination.”
Even worse in public life than the non-apology apology is the non-apology non-apology: the one when you announce you’ve apologized to someone and then that someone says, um, no — I haven’t got that apology. Former Senator Hagel can say all he wants that he’s apologized to James Hormel, but if James Hormel says he didn’t get that apology, I believe the Ambassador.
Who added:
But Hormel told me that Hagel’s comments — and the nature of his apology — raise questions as to whether he’s the right guy to ensure that “the repeal of don’t ask don’t tell is fully implemented as quickly as possible in ways that will have the least deleterious effect.”
Of Hagel’s comment, Hormel added: “If it were made today, it would be clearly disqualifying.”
Of course, any reporter in a position to ask Chuck Hagel’s aide, as he provided the second-hand statement claiming an apology, the obvious question “And what was the Ambassador’s response? Did he accept the Senator’s apology?” might have asked just that.
But that’s asking too much of Mike Allen, Politico’s premiere reporter.
Your move, Mr “Are-You-Really?” Defense Secretary.




43 Comments

all you can say about Hagel is that he didn’t say, “I’m sorry Mr. Hormel felt offended by what I said,” which is the usual way Republicans express their passive aggressive stuff.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see him try that next, in his direct call to Hormel. The Ambassador is, as we call old people in America who stand up for their rights and themselves, “feisty.” I fully expect him to give as well as he got in this back-and-forth.
I’d love to see this sink Hagel. The idea of him implementing the repeal of DADT is unacceptable, given these views. And using Mike Allen as the ‘intermediary’ is really even more insulting than the original apology, although The Village won’t see it that way.
Thanks Teddy,
I’m so tired of seeing Hagel’s nomination presented as some kind of liberal cause we all have to support. No thank you for many reasons including this!
x2
But, but, but — he might be Obama’s nominee! ! !
Doesn’t that mean we MUST support him?
(Actually I see no reason to fall in line behind the Brave Mentioner — I’ve never seen nominees treated so badly since Lani Guinier. Why not simply NOMINATE them, Mr President???)
x3
Thanks for this bit of information, Teddy. If James Hormel said that he didn’t get an apology, then I too accept that as fact. That Chuck Hagel is apologizing to Mr. Hormel in a statement, via Hagel’s aide, made to Mike Allen, that is unacceptable and cowardly. Not to mention extremely self-serving, now that Hagel is being considered for SecDef.
The only thing I’m missing here is that I don’t see in your post where it explains that Hagel is claiming that he apologized to Hormel in the past (unless it’s in the links). So if Hagel has never apologized, and is only now apologizing through Mike Allen, that is doubly cowardly!
No, we needn’t support Hagel. I’ve written two diaries about him here already, and Obama’s just starting to enjoy seeing the guy dangle out there taking punches, some of which he deserves – from the LBGT community – and some of which he does not.
Rachel Maddow had a short segment on her show Thursday about how LONG Obama is taking filling out a 2nd term cabinet, compared to recent 2nd term predecessors.
This isn’t necessary to sink Hagel ,the neocons said he didn’t have the requisite degree of pathological love for their Judaeo -Christian Zionism to give Obama permission for this choice .Obama always wants to impress us as to how easily he works with the pubs and ,yes ,since he is one ,I’m a believer .
Fourteen years ago Chuck Hagel said something stupid that was condoned by society at the time and then publicly apologized when things changed. Wow!
Seems to me that Chuck has placed himself so far out of the mainstream of American thought on this subject that he should not be considered for any cabinet post. He is a fossil in shoes. Now if he had fulsomely and unequivocally apologized and stated that he has grown and changed over the last 16 years, it might be a different story. But he didn’t so it isn’t.
Oh dear. James Hormel hasn’t received a personal apology for something Chuck Hagel said fourteen years ago. Horrors!
In other words this is not even on the radar screen of today’s important issues of war and peace. This issue, alleged aggressive gayness, fourteen years ago, certainly has no connection with DADT. None.
So everyone get their dander back down again. There are more important things in life than this non-issue.
And as defogger implied, what with the Jewish objections Obama is sure to dump him, as is his wont.
We have enough of such vultures going after Mr. Hagel. It is time to leave Chuck Hagel alone.
Just note that the general sentiment has changed favorably for gays in the last 14 years. For most people homosexuality does not really matter as long as gays don’t alienate them by making it a bragging or crying issue at every opportunity. Fourteen, twenty years ago there was a lot of ignorance and intolerance and even some basketball players were refusing to play with Magic Johnson because he had AIDS virus (nothing to do with the gay issue). Now, you can put your own porn tapes online and not many people will be bothered by that.
What the hell being gay or non-gay or anti-Israel got to do with being defense secretary of the United States? Hagel is to be nominated and confirmed as Defense Secretary of this country (USA) and to serve people of this country (Americans) – not some pathetic parasite called Israel.
All those Israel firsters trying to chew Chuck Hagel should prove their loyalty to the US by stop talking about how good/bad it would be for Israel/Jews. If they so much care about Israel, they should relinquish their assets earned in the U.S., renounce their American Citizenship, and move to Israel. Only then they would have earned the right to criticize an american veteran like Chuck Hagel who views are worldly and first and foremost cares about serving America and the Americans.
President Obama should also be forcefully telling pro-Israel vultures to shut up because he (Obama), other Senators and Chuck Hagel are serving the U.S. and not Israel.
I’d chuck Hagel over the fiscal cliff.
And then find an actual ‘Democrat’ to fill the post.
I would much rather see Jack Reed nominated for SoS, than Chuck Hagel, given Obama’s predilection to Senators for Cabinet positions, but, Hagel is the best pick of the sorry litter being touted so far…! 8-(
My Bad… The DefSec not SoS…!
Steve Clemons has long supported Chuck Hagel and still does:
The Chuck Hagel I Know: A Staunch Defender of Gay Rights
lol. well as a gay man i am more struck by openly, aggressively gay .
now i have no knowledge of the ambassador. i wonder if there was anything pecular to him that hagel found particurly aggressive.
Who?
Now, that is the question.
I actually don’t think there is a so-called Democrat who would fit the bill, because the Powers-That-Be would refuse to take them seriously, if said person seriously outlined serious Defense/War cuts.
So we’re stuck in never-ending war spending.
That’s my take on it too.
Classy
When asked Monday night if any of the people who beat him in 1961 in Rock Hill – or attacked the Freedom Ride bus days later in Alabama – ever apologized before, U.S. Rep John Lewis, D-Ga. said, “Never. Until now.”
Lewis said he read Monday about the apology of Elwin Wilson for past acts of hate published Saturday… “I accept that apology, and would love to have the opportunity some day to talk to that man if he wants to,” Lewis said. “I have no ill feelings. No malice. This shows the distance we have come. It shows grace on his part. It shows courage.”
NOT CLASSY
“I have not received an apology,” Hormel, who is a major figure in Democratic politics, told me. “I thought this so-called apology, which I haven’t received, but which was made public, had the air of being a defensive move on his part.” Hormel added that the apology appeared to have been given “only in service of his attempt to get the nomination.”
What is wrong with Hormel, seriously? Hagel accepted what he said was wrong (something he said 14 years ago, the statute of limitations on armed robbery is 7 years),apologized to Hormel personally (as opposed to “in person”) and to every LGBT American, and made clear he was on the same page with the President on open service. I can’t imagine Hormel is still so eaten up by a stupid comment from more than a decade that he refuses to accept a man’s public apology. So what’s wrong with the guy, is he milking the episode as a front for other Hagel opponents; or is Hormel some kind of a jackass and this is just how he treats everyone?
if Hormel sincerely had doubts about Hagel’s commitment to LGBT rights (or just wanted to hear the apology in person) AND wanted to sounded more like a sincere human being, he’d have said something along the lines of… “I accept that apology, and would love to have the opportunity some day to talk to that man if he wants to.”
Why are you enabling this guy Teddy?
Actually, now I owe Teddy an apology. Its a good story and its not fair to shoot the messenger just because the other guy had me riled . :o)
Maybe they’ll do lunch soon – with Spam sandwiches…
On the D v. R question.
–First of all, there’s not a dime’s worth of difference party-wise.
–Secondly, the current D in the job, the first one in many years, is a friggin joke of the highest order. Actually he’s beyond funny, he’s dangerous and it’s essential that he be replaced soonest.
What’s your point here?
Hormel’s fortune was made on Spam, among other heavily processed meat products.
Not sorry to clarify.
No, actually.
Fourteen years ago Chuck Hagel said something incredibly offensive that sank an ambassadorial nomination. Now, he’s released a statement through an aide that claims he’s apologized. The supposed recipient says he’s received no apology.
See the difference now?
Maybe to you.
Clearly not to the alleged non-recipient of the non-apology.
And not to me either.
This isn’t about Israel. Not to me.
This is about having a SecDef who can constructively and fairly complete the implementation of DADT-repeal without animus or bias. Chuck Hagel hasn’t proven he’s that person, not to James Hormel.
Because Hagel claimed to have apologized to James Hormel, and has not.
It’s just that simple.
It couldn’t be clearer that the aide was forwarding a statement from Hagel himself (“My comments 14 years ago”) or that Hagel was apologizing to James Hormel (“and I apologize to Ambassador Hormel”) or that Hormel is being a jackass here (“I thought this so-called apology, which I haven’t received, but which was made public, had the air of being a defensive move on his part).
Its his choice whether to accept, reject or ignore a public apology, but when someone apologizes to you personally (as in specifically Hormel instead of the vague “anyone”), its just childish to call a public apology a “so-called apology” or to deny receiving it when he’d clearly already read it … it’d have been quite impossible to describe a statement as having the “air of a defensive move” if he hadn’t already received it (presumably through the press).
He DID apologize and Hormel DID receive it.
1, The statement, written in the first person and present tense by Chuck Hagel, was itself a public apology to James Hormel, (“I apologize to Ambassador Hormel”.
2. And the moment Hormel read the public apology (or listen to someone relay its content) he’s received it.
The John Lewis quote is a perfect example of a public apology received the press and accepted by Lewis before he’s spoken with the apologizer. The only factual difference between the two cases is that John Lewis is a great guy and James Hormel… not so much.
“Lewis said he read Monday about the apology of Elwin Wilson for past acts of hate published Saturday… “I accept that apology”.”
An apology is constructed of the first sentence, “I am sorry for…” directed at the object of the apology.
Not by an aide. Not in a statement. Not to Mike Allen. Not in Politico.
By a direct statement, in person/writing/telephone/email, that begins, “I am sorry for…”
I don’t really know what’s unclear about this.
I’m of two minds on this. The first being, why the fuck do Democrats appoint Republicans all the damn time? And even when they do, they still are branded as turncoats and commies? Second, being a dipshit and bigot in 1998 is qualitatively different from being one in 1978, and less forgivable.
Sad to say, Hagel would be a marked improvement over the current nitwit, and whoever might be in line behind would undoubtedly be worse, albeit in different ways.
Supreme Court? No. “Defense?” We could do worse, and have.
While I’m not “aggressively” gay or anything, I have a friend who is. Maybe you know her.
I think this is a good point, because pro-Israel types are known to use the gay issue to try and rally liberals to their defense, since Arabs — maybe just Muslims — are known to be gay unfriendly, or worse. What I heard of Hagel is that he was the only Senator to stand up to Israel, at all, while he was there.
About Hormel, what I have heard of him is that his record of treating workers is less than exemplary. Maybe he should apologize to the workers he’s mistreated over the years. Hormel might be a gay philanthropist, but Andrew Carnegie was a philanthropist, too. That doesn’t change how they acted at the companies they ran. So, if Hagel is to be on bended knee to gay people, maybe Hormel should be on bended to the working people he mistreated. What’s fair is fair.
It does seem to me one must look at James Hormel ‘s facebook page where he says
https://www.facebook.com/pages/James-C-Hormel/263356890367751
Seems to me that Teddy has an agenda here! This is about Israel, clearly!
There was a time when my liberal friends would call a self-serving douche a self-serving douche and a bigot a bigot. Now, they seem to bend over backwards to find redeeming qualities in such trash.
I’m a straight old (69) woman with many gay friends. What on earth is an “aggressively gay” person?
What is aggressively gay? I can only speak from experience. I was once on a Sierra Club backpack hike led by a gay woman who apparently had many gay friends along, which was fine, except in the tent that night the two females in an adjacent tent went into a long conversation about how they came out, complete with physical details. (Sometimes people forget about how un-sound-proof tents are, but they aren’t usually backpackers.) I had to ask them to shut up. And as a nudist, twice on nude beaches I have had a male come over and hit on me.
So, we can only guess, Hormel may have been (1) hitting on guys and/or (2) being overly explicit about his sex life. We don’t know. I doubt that Hagel would have used the term “aggressive” lightly because he seems like a sensible, moderate person.