A Times editorial urging the Senate to confirm Chuck Hagel as secretary of defense says, "Mr. Hagel is one of a fading breed of moderate Republicans whose independence and past willingness to challenge Republican orthodoxy on Iraq, sanctions on Iran and other issues is admirable."
Mr. Hagel's opposition to sanctions on Iran wasn't a challenge to "Republican orthodoxy"; the sanctions he opposed were passed by votes such as 98 to 2, with the two dissenters being Mr. Hagel and another Republican, Richard Lugar. They were signed into law by a Democratic president, Bill Clinton. Sanctions against Iran aren't "Republican orthodoxy," they are supported at this point by Democrats, the United Nations, European nations, and even the New York Times editorial page as a preferred peaceful alternative to military attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities. A Times editorial in June of 2012, for example, referred to "the current international consensus for sanctions." It's yet another example of the Hagel double standard in action. When President Obama is for sanctions on Iran, they are an "international consensus." When Senator Hagel opposes them, they are "Republican orthodoxy."
Note also the reference to Mr. Hagel's "past willingness." In order to win support for his confirmation. Mr. Hagel has abandoned his willingness to challenge the bipartisan orthodoxy on Iran sanctions, suggesting that the "independence" the Times is so enamored of is subordinate to his desire for the Pentagon job.