Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Obama Partisan Non-Partisanship

Lost in the Sotomayor and Middle East news is this display of political skills in two nominations of Republicans for Administration posts, Director of the National Endowment for the Humanities and Secretary of the Army. Congressman Paul McHugh, ranking GOP member on Armed Services, may well have lost his NY seat to reapportionment anyway.
A surprise and more clever choice for the NEH is former liberal GOP congressman Jim Leach, given the pool of liberal academics at Obama’s disposal. But again it shows his political cunning, marginalizing the remainder of the Republican Party.

A look at Administration economic policies makes it difficult to swallow the moderate, pragmatic image he wishes to project, but he is certainly trying.

Discussions - 12 Comments

He has an entire team from Chicago advising him on this, yet you attribute the decisions to him alone. Where do you think Emmanuel was throughout all of this, or was he "a potted plant" or something, {to riff off of Brendan Sullivan}. Don't you think you might be setting the bar a wee bit low here? He appoints a brace of Republicans, hardly the first President to appoint members of the opposite party, yet for reasons more strained than sound, in Obama's case this evidences a high level of political acumen. Bit of a stretch, don't ya' think?

And one more thing, wherefore this "marginalization." Was the GOP planning to run elections on the doings and ongoings over at NEH? Who in the nation really pays any attention to anything going on over there?

Or who here believes the GOP will be unable to critique Obama's evisceration of the defense budget because he appointed a Republican to be Army Sec. I think you've overestimated these appointments in the grand scheme of things in Washington.

Uhm ... Obama is not the head of the Administration, but the Democrat party.

Anyway, I wouldn't exactly be exalting Chicago politics even if that has helped Obama to gain the US presidency.

I meant "not only"

I will believe Obama is going to cut defense spending when I see it. Out of control government growth, increased statism, inlfation causing deficits are moderate, bi partisan stuff in the modern era.

Brutus, have you taken a look at what Obama's done the F-22 Raptor, an air dominance platform that would have guaranteed America air dominance for the next 20 years. Missile defense, Air Force orbital platforms, etc.... Now maybe you think that Congressional Democrats will insert many of these programs back into the budget. I hope so. But I'm not holding my breath.

The agenda of the Left is to seriously reduce American power, which is why they're quite comfortable curtailing growth, running up huge budgetary deficits, damaging the dollar, and yes, reducing American military power.

Obama has repeatedly spoken in ways that indicate he's no friend of American Exceptionalism. He's trying to reduce our role, all in the interests of boosting that of the UN.

It's not going to work; the UN isn't likely to pick up any slack left by the United States. Into the vacum of power he's deliberately creating will step those that are troublesome to say the least. Obama and his little groupies are about to get an education.

F-22's are 300 million dollars a piece, not to mention their maintenance logistics. Conservatives are against out of control government spending, except when it comes to weapons.

They're not cheap, never said they were. But the finished product represents hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars, not to mention over two decades worth of effort and research. The F-15 was designed in the 60s, finalized in the 70s, and finally started reaching our squadrons and wings in the early part of the Reagan tenure. Our guys are fighting with weapon systems designed before the Carter era.

We need new weaponry. We're long overdue. It's got nothing to do with Obama, it's simply the passage of time. If there was one area of war that you would make sure you maintain complete dominance in, it would be air and space.

Obama signed off on a one trillion dollar stimulas plan that was nothing but a pay off to lefty groups, and wasn't stimulative.

Our military needs new equipment. That's all there is to it.

And be aware too of this, that the programs that Obama is gleefully blasting apart, were supported, sustained and financed throughout the Clinton tenure. Clinton's budget poured tens and tens of billions of dollars into the research and development of the F-22, as well as other weapon systems. We're talking genuine bipartisan support stretching back decades, which now Obama, in some frenzy of political passion, is ripping apart.

Worry not, Dan. The American military-industrial complex is alive and well.

We have raptors now, I lived for two years next door to the air force museum and the biggest r&d base in the country. if they are pulling funding it is because they moving on already so that more r&d money can get spent...probably on a unmanned style platform to replace the raptor. Obama says stay the course in Iraq, might have to go to war with Iran or North Korea (because they probably have WMD's....Americans love trite apparently) and step up the war in Afganistan/Pakistan. The budget is not going to go down, some money might just get moved around. As for the UN thing. Who do you think the UN is, it is the US military. The r&d won't even be interupted. It almost sounds like you were saying that Obama wants a new world order, but I know that can't be true. Another thing that I gleaned from the museum though, we who are not military historians don't realize the amount of different platforms that the air force has gone through during the period you described as a the f15 era.

We have less than 200 Raptors. That's not nearly enough. That's about 2 wings, and hardly enough to cover the wastage of combat, in a real war, and not the type of action our Air Force has encountered since 9/11.

I chose the Raptors as a notable example, but there are others.

They are not throw away planes like WW2. We are not opperating under the genius of the bomber will always get through. If the planes are as great as you say they are (and I think are too) we should not need a huge a stockpile. Have we not been told that the post 911 anti insurgent and anti terror is the type of war we can expect to have for the next hundred years. Besides, someone already mentioned the UN takeover so how are we going to get involved with a another legitimate power. Are you thinking about keeping the aliens under wraps, a grand war with China, or even the revival of the cold war?

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/14010