Fair enough. There are cases where we can expect good executive conduct. Reagan being Governor CA clearly showed the way. But not all Governors are in fact good managers for the cut-throat political partisan RAT attack-dog environment. Nor would all businessmen necessarily be good government managers. McNamara wasn't. Bush wasn't. All divisive substantive policy issue disagreements aside...his managerial skills proved seriously exaggerated. A good manager can admit mistakes, and also revisit failed policy positions...and correct them.
I also have some serious yet-to-be-addressed issues with his record on spending, particularly some of the junk projects he championed against the Navy's wishes.
The 27 year career in the House will do that. But after you really dig into those "junk" projects you find that they were in fact supported by pretty damn good reasons.
And much to the dismay of the MSM which wants to try and smear him as a Randy Cunningham corrupticrat...it turns out that for rather principled reasons he OPPOSED the get-rich-scams of Brian Wilkes and his ilk like on the foreign software projects he had licensed. He wasn't for sale.
And the military services position against some such supposed "junk" was either not really the service's real position, or it was based on game-playing at some levels.
This ranges from the data conversion issue to the LC-X combat craft. A lot of times the need for a domestic manufacturer, or pushing to see if an experimental breakthrough can be achieved, is not prioritized...or sometimes considered at all by this and needless to say, the previous Administration.
A perfect example of where the military says they don't want something....but really rather badly do...but have to say otherwise...is the C-17. The finest military transport ever made. Those in logistics will tell you we need a hell of a lot more than 180 such planes...and would definitely want to keep the option of having fresh replacements in inventory for the ones that get beatup and used up. But the AirForce is dutifully playing ball with the Administration which wants to arbitrarily cut strategic defense procurements...and is cancelling further production. Just to restart the assembly lines and vendors...without producing a single plane...would cost $4.3 billion now. They could have easily kept those lines open and running for four or five years with the same amount of money just stretched into a minimal number of plane orders. But oh no. Got to kill it.
It is those kinds of inanities...which cost both the warfighter and the taxpayer ultimately... that Hunter has made his reputation opposing. He has seriously impressed Donald Rumsfeld as a "detail" guy on defense needs. Keeping a vast array of elements in his memory. He lives and breathes this stuff. To wit:
Rumsfeld effusiveIn late September, Hunter was the guest of honor at a black-tie dinner in a hall at Washington's Union Station, where the hawkish defense group the Center for Security Policy presented him with its annual "Keeper of the Flame" award.
Among those lauding him at the Center for Security Policy banquet that evening was Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who said the Pentagon relies on Hunter's "wisdom, his leadership, his experience and his 'get it done' attitude.'
"It is something when he comes into your office like a whirling dervish and starts discussing a subject first at the national level and then down at the microlevel, and then leaves you pieces of metal on your desk that you can hardly lift and has explained exactly where it goes, what it's for, why it should be there and then wants to know why it isn't. And God bless him for it."
Rumsfeld also said the U.S. is more secure because of Hunter.
"He's never let the troops down, and as a result of his leadership and his hard work, our nation is a safer place today," Rumsfeld told the dinner gathering that included Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
You obviously have some idea about his seriously sterling defense mindset. And no one amongst us conservatives can fault your thinking for your final sentiment...which we can all heartily agree with:
However, it might be worth it to have him as the nominee just to make the "chickenhawk"-squealing Michael Moore crowd squirm.
Indeed, it would.
