Roger Simon is far too kind to him:

You would think with the “Arab Spring” turning into an unremitting display of psychotic religious fascism and fanaticism, chemical weapons ping-ponging between Syria and Hezbollah, Egypt imploding, Iran on the brink, etc., Schumer would take his role more seriously. Evidently not. His ambition has trumped all. He, with Obama’s other “good Jews” (Lew, Emanuel, Axelrod, etc.), plays along to get along, in almost any situation.

But are they, as some suggested in the comments to my January 22 column, the equivalent of the “kapos” and “sonderkommandos” of World War II, Jews who worked for the Nazis? Of course not. Not even close. But they are extremely weak men whose ambition makes them blind to what is in plain sight and not willing to risk anything to jeopardize their position, the very essence of corruption.

Chuck Schumer’s ringing endorsement of Chuck Hagel now seems like one mammoth embarrassment. If Schumer were a man of substance or even relative decency, he would now apologize or at least distance himself in some way. This is not even a matter of political ideology at this point. It is an matter of basic honesty. Hagel is quite simply not qualified for one of the most crucial positions in our country on any level. Will Schumer admit it? If not — liberal, conservative or Zen Buddhist — he is a contemptible hack.

When has he not been a contemptible hack?

[Update a few minutes later]

Poor Chuck Schumer:

Schumer’s travails are hardly over. Soon Republicans will be going populist, going after the big banks (some of his favorite donors) and decrying all those retirement benefits for rich people (“Hey, they’re my rich people!” Schumer would say.). By the end of this he’ll look like a phony Zionist, a faux immigration reformer and a pal of the rich and powerful.

Sure, Schumer is an infamous demagogue. There is no senator more partisan. And yes, the most dangerous place in D.C. is still between Schumer and a microphone. But have some heart, Republicans. The guy has a “kick me” sign on his back and the White House is kicking away.

They deserve each other.

And she’s still lying:

When asked about the claim that the attack was sparked by a protest over a video, she responded, “I did not say . . . that it was about the video for Libya.”

That’s simply untrue. When she stood by the caskets of the four Americans killed in Libya, she directly blamed an “awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with.” Afterward, she reportedly told the father of Tyrone Woods, the former Navy SEAL who was killed in the attack, “We will make sure the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.” Why tell the man that if the video had nothing to do with it?

Moreover, Clinton was part of an administration that crafted an entire PR strategy to blame these attacks on “an awful Internet video.” White House press secretary Jay Carney was unequivocal: This was a “response to a video, a film we have judged to be reprehensible and disgusting.” In his address to the United Nations, President Obama mentioned the video six times but al-Qaeda once. When he appeared on the Late Show with David Letterman, he blamed the video directly. U.N. ambassador Susan Rice went on five Sunday shows blaming the video. All of this happened when they already knew it was not true on the day of the attack, and even the president of Libya had publicly called the protest explanation ridiculous.

As I said, this is no surprise to anyone who’s been observing her throughout her career.

Three incredibly outrageous evasions.

Not surprising, to anyone who’s been observing her for the past couple decades. Rose Law Firm billing records? Cattle futures?

[Update a couple minutes later]

Kicking off the campaign.

[Friday morning update]

Thoughts on his disgraceful madness.

He really is one of the more contemptible members of Congress, and the thought of him being president should be frightening.

Was it Fast and Furious on steroids?

It’s a theory that seems to fit the available evidence.

Comparing and contrasting the “sensible” senator versus the “extremist crazy” Michele Bachmann.

[Update a while later]

Chuck Hagel’s historical delusions.

What an awful pick for SecDef. He’s unqualified on every level.