The political reality is … that the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here. – Chuck Hagel

Chuck Hagel's 2006 statement regarding a "Jewish lobby", in Washington has reverberated throughout the Capitol for seven years now, generating enough GOP ire to come back and effectively sting the former Nebraska senator at the most pivotal moment in his career. The statement has served as one of the key elements in objections to Hagel's appointment, and sparked outrage surrounding his continued skepticism of Israeli political leadership. Below are a few talking points about Hagel's appointment as secretary of defense.

The "Jewish lobby" misstep

In a commentary piece written for CNN.com by former Bush administration press secretary Ari Fleischer, Hagel is lambasted for misunderstanding the relationship between the United States and Israel. Fleischer's attacks draw largely on polls gathered by the Pew Research Center and Gallup, whose data suggests that Americans view Israel more "favorably" than their Palestinian and Iranian neighbors. While the data Fleischer used might resonate with some, his gripes with Hagel are largely rhetorical:

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.

Fleischer continued, saying:

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.

The rhetorical assault on Hagel continues in a December piece published in the neoconservative opinion magazine the Weekly Standard by founder/editor William Kristol. Kristol vilifies Hagel's voting record as a member of Congress and his refusal to cater to Israeli interests.

Anti-Israel propagandists are thrilled. Stephen Walt, junior partner of the better-known Israel-hater John Mearsheimer, writes that if President Obama nominates Hagel, it will be "a smart move". Why? Because, "unlike almost all of his former colleagues on Capitol Hill, he hasn't been a complete doormat for the Israel lobby.

GOP motives for blasting Hagel – it isn't just Israel

While the focal point of neocon derision centers around Hagel's stance on Israel, more recent analysis indicates that anti-Hagel sentiment might pertain more to his plans for the defense budget.

A long piece by Salon's David Sirota shows that several Republican leaders have revealed their anxieties about possible sequestration measures at the Pentagon.

Senator John Cornyn (who has raked in a whopping $355,026 from the defense industry) let slip that one of his big concerns is that Hagel purportedly "believes the Defense Department can sustain the sort of draconian cuts contained in sequestration." Likewise, in a Wall Street Journal column, Republican Rep Tom Cotton concluded a tirade against Hagel by slamming him for "seem(ing) willing to accept devastating cuts to defense spending.

This American Prospect article by Matthew Duss expands on the real motivations behind the GOP's slandering of Chuck Hagel. Duss argues that Hagel's views on the Middle East represent a changing tide in American foreign policy that neocons have a hard time digesting.

attacks on Hagel represent an attempt by the neoconservative wing of the Republican Party to avoid a conversation over America's changing role in the world. Over the past years, and especially during the recent presidential election, this faction has seen their expansive (and expensive) view of American hegemony increasingly marginalized as US leaders grapple with constrained budgets, an electorate that has soured on costly foreign adventurism, and an international environment that has proven to be far less malleable to American whims and preferences than neocons have theorized.

The Hagel nomination's significance

To some however, the prospect of Hagel heading the Pentagon represents a national security concern. According to a Washington Post piece by Robert Satloff, Hagel's appointment comes at a "critical moment" between the US and Iran.

tThis nomination by President Obama almost certainly raises doubts among allies and adversaries alike that Obama may not be nearly so committed to using all means necessary to prevent Iran from achieving a nuclear weapon as he pledged during his reelection campaign. Some experts believe that Iran may soon amass enough enriched uranium to give it "breakout capacity" – allowing it to quickly produce a nuclear weapon at a time of its choosing.

The fight will continue, even after his appointment

Going back to the American Prospect piece by Matthew Duss, Chuck Hagel once responded to his critics by saying:

The biggest threat to the American political system, Hagel said, were those who "debase and degrade the political process by straight-out lies and misleading spots on television. It's a cancer to our system.

What's unfortunate is that Hagel still needs to be on the defensive, especially in lieu of a new ad campaign by 2012 presidential candidate Rick Santorum designed to oppose his nomination.

But even after he begins his tenure as secretary of defense, the dialogue surrounding Chuck Hagel is likely to continue, as politicians of both parties have never been reluctant to hold back their criticisms and praises. Politico has compiled a slideshow of what Washington's important players are saying about Hagel.