Posted on 12/15/2016 6:03:28 AM PST by Kaslin
President-elect Donald Trump is being faulted for supposedly appointing too many retired generals to Cabinet-level jobs and "militarizing" the government.
Former Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn is slated to be national security adviser. Retired Marine Gen. James Mattis has been nominated as defense secretary. Retired Marine Gen. John Kelly is Trump's nominee for secretary of homeland security. High-ranking officers such as Gen. David Petraeus and Adm. Michael Rogers have been rumored for other positions in the Trump administration.
All are retired as well as seasoned veterans. They have been previously entrusted with the lives of thousands of soldiers, and they have traveled around the world and met many of the key leaders in Asia, Europe and the Middle East.
Most of the criticism of the Flynn, Mattis and Kelly nominations is politically created hysteria, like past contrived bouts of partisan frenzy over subjects such as the "war on women" or the "climate of hate."
Why, after reaching a high military rank before retirement, should a nominee earn more scrutiny than an ex-banker, ex-politician or ex-lawyer?
Did anyone complain when Barack Obama appointed five retired generals and one retired admiral to either Cabinet posts or high-ranking positions in his administration? In fact, Flynn and Petraeus were first appointed to high office by Obama.
Under Obama, Petraeus became CIA director. Flynn served as Obama's director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Retired Gen. Eric Shinseki was head of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Retired Gen. James Jones was national security adviser. Retired Adm. Dennis Blair and retired Gen. James Clapper served as successive directors of national intelligence.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
I will take a General or a successful corporate magnate in leadership rolls versus career (hack) politicians, academics, theorists, or community organizer/activists all day long and twice on Sunday. It’s nice to see adults in charge once again.
I think the Ivy League is mad that that their usual 95% quota of senior Administration officials is not being met this time. :)
I figure these are all the guys that we would of had on our side if we had to have a Coup and had to end up putting a bullet into Barry, so, either way, its all good.
Considering the question I’d say he’s hired just the right amount.
The clue “leader” answers the ignorant question.
Obama had General Shinseki at VA, General Jones as National Security Advisor, and Admiral O’Connell as Director of National Intelligence and nobody talked about him having too many generals in his administration.
At least they are not a bunch of weed smoking liberals.
They real reason they are so upset is because they see Trump ignoring them and relegating them to the back bench. The louder they squawk the further away he will push them.
They have become irrelevant to both his presidency and the American people. Their fake news isn't going to cut it anymore.
I will take a General or a successful corporate magnate in leadership rolls versus career (hack) politicians, academics, theorists, or community organizer/activists all day long and twice on Sunday. It’s nice to see adults in charge once again.....
Perfectly stated. Experience successfully running large organizations is mandatory.
Can they do they job and be successful implementing Trump’s vision? If yes, it doesn’t matter if they are a General or what have you. The left is concerned not only because of the Generals but because Trump’s team is mainly made up of old white men and not enough diversity. Their idea of diversity is no old white men but all gay black latinas. Then and only then will they be satisfied but because they would be mostly conservative this won’t sit well with the left. As that too has to align with their non-tolerant viewpoint.
Let’s just say no matter who Trump picks they won’t be happy.
I think we all feel that way.
Ivy league graduates are overrated. And if you pay attention to what’s happening at most college campuses these days perhaps those aren’t the best choices for experienced leadership positions. I prefer and have been around high-ranking officers for many years and find them to be some of the hardest working most intelligent “CEOs” out there. They are experienced in leadership, they are experienced with fiscal responsibility, and they are experienced in ensuring the details are not overlooked.
“Too many generals”
“Too many millionaires”
“Too many outsiders”
“Too many lobbyists”
No matter whom President Trump nominates, the delicate snowflakes on the left will whine and cry about how terrible Trump’s picks are. Liberals disgust me, and I am tired of paying for those parasites to sit around and whimper.
Side Note: My son’s college had a “Young Democrats” meeting with hundreds of 8.5” by 11” fliers advertising “there will be food”. My son printed up smaller fliers and posted one on each Young Democrats flier. I don’t have the exact words, but it was something like: “Conservatives, go for the food - it’s the only time you’ll see democrats pay to feed productive Americans instead of the reverse.”
Soneone should say Trump has a ‘diverse’ group. :)
Just to drive the left even more bonkers...if that is possble.
Depends on the person.
No one should be automatically discounted because they were in the military, but it would also be foolish to think that every admiral or general is perfect.
It is a mistake to assume that success in one profession will automatically lead to success in another profession.
Look to the heart.
You can train people to do a job, but it’s awful hard to train people to care.
And by “heart”, I don’t mean someone who is just nice.
Some of the hardest people I met had the most heart.
I think you are right. I remember talking to a manager about leadership and found out that he was ex-military. This is the view that he held. The leadership training and experience was in his opinion far superior to what is normally found in corporations.
Might be a good idea to review what has taken place in the last 50 or so years. America is in great shape? About to go bankrupt, more people unemployed than ever before, government spending out of control, culture at an all time low and our politicians are pathetic.
So why would anyone want follow that pattern of failure? It just might be that new approaches will be better than following programs that fail, time after time.
Go, President-Elect Trump. Listen to your people.
So once you leave the armed services you are still a military leader?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.