nope: elite by your definition, was anyone with a college degree from an ivy league school. That was deemed elitist by the right, He has nowhere near the experience to be qualified for this job. So stop with the excuses.
Wait. Trump is hiring a Fox News host as Secretary of Defense?
- Thread starter Tom Paris
- Start date
Oh, I think that was the guy that spent a week in the hospital without notifying anyone that he wasn't going to be at work.
I would quibble with your statement about our military leaders being political…it’s very rare for active duty officers to take public political positions, they tend to bend over backwards to not comment publicly on sensitive topics.
Honestly, I think getting banned from X and starting truth social was a blessing in disguise for Trump. People stopped getting the daily reminders of how nuts he is.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 97,690
- 203,510
- 113
Let's check in on what a real conservative, Defense hawk and right-leaning pundit has to say about this appointment:
=
=
The Trump Sh*t Show Arrives in D.C.Pete Hegseth, Elon Musk, and Trump himself. Buckle up.
For Pete’s Sakeby William KristolIn 2018, Donald Trump’s brain, Steve Bannon, told the writer Michael Lewis, “The Democrats don’t matter. The real opposition is the media. And the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit.” They’ve done it for a decade, and it’s largely worked. Now, one week after Trump’s election to a second term, they’re doing it again, only this time they’re flooding the zone with appointments that—let’s just say—stink up the joint. It’s disorienting, as it’s intended to be. You feel like you’re playing one of those whack-a-mole boardwalk games at Funland in Rehoboth. Ultimately you’ve accomplished little, except occasionally winning some cheap stuffed animal as a consolation prize. But sometimes in politics you have to start with small prizes and build up to bigger victories. And even though the bulk of Trump’s embarrassing and unqualified appointments will get confirmed, his intention to nominate Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense gives defenders of good government and the rule of law a chance for a win. It would not be for a small prize either. Secretary of defense is an important job. Could Hegseth’s nomination be defeated? Many Republican senators have dealt with Hegseth, and they know he’s beyond unqualified for the position. Has there actually been a single statement from a Republican senator actually praising the choice? I’m not aware of one. Now of course that’s different from actually opposing a nomination by the party’s Dear Leader, and we’ll see how many Republicans have the nerve to do that. But still, Democrats and good government organizations and veterans groups should make such opposition from some Republican senators easier. I’m confident there’s zero chance that incoming Armed Services Committee chair, Sen. Roger Wicker, would think Hegseth an appropriate, or even a defensible, selection. Nor would Armed Service Committee members Sens. Tom Cotton or Dan Sullivan. Will they say publicly what they know privately? We’ll see. But it will be easier for them to do so if there’s thorough research into Hegseth’s background and the public marshaling of evidence for Hegseth’s radical unfitness for the position. |
- Sep 13, 2002
- 97,690
- 203,510
- 113
Because he really is unfit.
I knew Pete Hegseth fifteen years ago when he was a young, pro-Iraq war veteran, moving in Weekly Standard/Project for a New American Century circles. He seemed to be an effective proponent of neoconservative foreign policy, and some of us wanted to think well of him and give him a hand on a promising career. I even weighed in (ineffectually) on his behalf when he ran for the Republican nomination for senator in Minnesota—against, as I recall, a Ron Paul–supporting America First type.
But as sometimes happens, my judgment and that of others was mistaken. Hegseth turned out to be personally untrustworthy, intellectually shallow, and politically opportunistic. He moved on and was encouraged to move on out of our world, and ended up in the orbit of Fox News and Trumpist sycophancy, where he fit in well.
The general reaction of others who knew him back when is summarized in a text I got last night. This is from someone who’s seen it all, who has a cynical view of politics, and who expects the corridors of power to be populated by opportunists and phonies. He’s not the type to get upset about second- or third-raters being appointed to high office. But still, he couldn’t quite believe this nomination. Under the subject line “Good Christ,” my friend wrote simply: “I wouldn’t let this creep dog-sit for me. Now he’s going to be the Secretary of Defense?”
But don’t believe me, or my dog-loving friend. Let’s just have a full exploration and public scrutiny of Hegseth’s background, and let people make up their own minds based on the evidence as to whether he should be in charge of the United States military.
Another friend emailed last night wondering if we should make a fuss about Hegseth. Wouldn’t it be better to have an incompetent showman rather than a more able Trumpist as secretary of defense? Wouldn’t the first perhaps be able to do less damage than the second?
It’s not a ridiculous position.
But Hegseth would be an ultra-loyalist, and would go along with everything Trump and his apparatchiks in the White House want. He would enable all of Trump’s plans to politicize and degrade our military, about which we’ve already seen a glimpse. It’s impossible to imagine him raising any objection regarding the host of things Trump plans to do, from using the military to round up immigrants to intervening to promote politically aligned general officers.
History suggests that shallow opportunists who have become mindless loyalists can be as dangerous as more impressive ideologues in helping effectuate the authoritarian project.
So it’s worth having this fight. It could prevent a really bad secretary of defense from taking office. But it also could establish the principle, early on in this second and far more dangerous Trump term that lies ahead, that the opposition will fight. And that it can win.
I knew Pete Hegseth fifteen years ago when he was a young, pro-Iraq war veteran, moving in Weekly Standard/Project for a New American Century circles. He seemed to be an effective proponent of neoconservative foreign policy, and some of us wanted to think well of him and give him a hand on a promising career. I even weighed in (ineffectually) on his behalf when he ran for the Republican nomination for senator in Minnesota—against, as I recall, a Ron Paul–supporting America First type.
But as sometimes happens, my judgment and that of others was mistaken. Hegseth turned out to be personally untrustworthy, intellectually shallow, and politically opportunistic. He moved on and was encouraged to move on out of our world, and ended up in the orbit of Fox News and Trumpist sycophancy, where he fit in well.
The general reaction of others who knew him back when is summarized in a text I got last night. This is from someone who’s seen it all, who has a cynical view of politics, and who expects the corridors of power to be populated by opportunists and phonies. He’s not the type to get upset about second- or third-raters being appointed to high office. But still, he couldn’t quite believe this nomination. Under the subject line “Good Christ,” my friend wrote simply: “I wouldn’t let this creep dog-sit for me. Now he’s going to be the Secretary of Defense?”
But don’t believe me, or my dog-loving friend. Let’s just have a full exploration and public scrutiny of Hegseth’s background, and let people make up their own minds based on the evidence as to whether he should be in charge of the United States military.
Another friend emailed last night wondering if we should make a fuss about Hegseth. Wouldn’t it be better to have an incompetent showman rather than a more able Trumpist as secretary of defense? Wouldn’t the first perhaps be able to do less damage than the second?
It’s not a ridiculous position.
But Hegseth would be an ultra-loyalist, and would go along with everything Trump and his apparatchiks in the White House want. He would enable all of Trump’s plans to politicize and degrade our military, about which we’ve already seen a glimpse. It’s impossible to imagine him raising any objection regarding the host of things Trump plans to do, from using the military to round up immigrants to intervening to promote politically aligned general officers.
History suggests that shallow opportunists who have become mindless loyalists can be as dangerous as more impressive ideologues in helping effectuate the authoritarian project.
So it’s worth having this fight. It could prevent a really bad secretary of defense from taking office. But it also could establish the principle, early on in this second and far more dangerous Trump term that lies ahead, that the opposition will fight. And that it can win.
No I think it's your triggered anger because your candidate lost and your hate that the majority of Americans erased her.
To be fair, Ivy -> bulge bracket bank analyst -> Army officer GWOT -> Top five B school -> Banker was a common and elite career track in the 2000’s.
I have a couple of friends who did that.
He was also on the basketball team at Princeton with a couple of fund guys I know.
Wait and see. The left will argue every single appointment is unfit. This is the game. They loved Elon musk until he said he was a republican, but hypocrisy doesn't matter when you've convinced yourself (the media has convinced you rather) that the other side is evil.
Good people can often succeed given the opportunity. Trump is also known for firing quickly, so while I remain skeptical of this particular appointment, I'm willing to wait and see.
Just like I was skeptical of the Biden presidency, I'm willing to give him the full 4 years before passing judgement (although let's be honest, he's already checked out).
Do I seem angry? Weird, I’m absolutely not. Believe it or not this kind of absurdity is precisely what I expected.
Are you under the impression that I had some big emotional attachment to Harris?
- Sep 13, 2002
- 97,690
- 203,510
- 113
Bill Kristol is not "The Left."
This is why no one takes you Trumpies seriously.
This is a cogent argument against the guy from someone on the political right who WORKED WITH HIM.
You missed my point...my fault. Military leadees dont make political comments as in politicians and policy. They are political animals to get to the top.
I think I can give a 4 star general the benefit of the doubt on a mistake. You seem to want to give Trump the benefit of the doubt on EVERY mistake. Or lie. Or rape. Or con. Or felony. Or theft of top secret documents. Or cabinet choices.
He is liar, a hater of everything that made America great, and trump loyalist, so I guess that's a positive for you morons.Ya, but he worked at FOX News.
Sweet, I see he has done work for a Koch Brother foundation focused on privatizing the VA and removing people from benefits.
No one can be happier than the Heritage foundation types.
No one can be happier than the Heritage foundation types.
Isn’t that true of pretty much all organizations? Historically, that’s often been the case for peacetime militaries…at least until they get into a full-scale war and ability matters far more.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 97,690
- 203,510
- 113
Another "liberal" weighs in:
Former Fox News host Gretchen Carlson said she was “stunned” Tuesday by Donald Trump’s intention to nominate Fox & Friends host Pete Hegseth as his Secretary of Defense.
“From silly diner interviews on Weekend Fox and Friends to Secretary of Defense?“ Carlson wrote on X. ”I never thought I’d say I’m stunned about any pick after the election but nominating Pete Hegseth for this incredibly important role? Yes he’s a veteran … and?"
www.thedailybeast.com
Former Fox News host Gretchen Carlson said she was “stunned” Tuesday by Donald Trump’s intention to nominate Fox & Friends host Pete Hegseth as his Secretary of Defense.
“From silly diner interviews on Weekend Fox and Friends to Secretary of Defense?“ Carlson wrote on X. ”I never thought I’d say I’m stunned about any pick after the election but nominating Pete Hegseth for this incredibly important role? Yes he’s a veteran … and?"
Ex-Fox Host Flames Former Colleague After Trump Pentagon Nod
GOP senators also seemed puzzled. ‘Really?’ one said. ‘Who?’ another asked.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 97,690
- 203,510
- 113
Good grief.
I am so tired of his ridiculous random capitalization.
Nice that writing a best seller is a qualification. Trump is so easily impressed.
So we are proposing firing all women in the military . . . why?
The last guy disappeared for a week or so and it was fine. Yeah he's not a conventional pick, possibly a completely bonkers pick, but he isn't going to be able to single handedly get us into a nuclear war.
Pardon the pun, but given the war stories we hear about large corporations, I’m not sure the jockeying is all that different.
This is actually pretty close to my reaction when I read it. I still say give it a chance.Another "liberal" weighs in:
Former Fox News host Gretchen Carlson said she was “stunned” Tuesday by Donald Trump’s intention to nominate Fox & Friends host Pete Hegseth as his Secretary of Defense.
“From silly diner interviews on Weekend Fox and Friends to Secretary of Defense?“ Carlson wrote on X. ”I never thought I’d say I’m stunned about any pick after the election but nominating Pete Hegseth for this incredibly important role? Yes he’s a veteran … and?"
Ex-Fox Host Flames Former Colleague After Trump Pentagon Nod
GOP senators also seemed puzzled. ‘Really?’ one said. ‘Who?’ another asked.
I mean, not like we have a choice…
Based on the instability, scandals and incompetence of his first administrations cabinet, idk that there’s much to be optimistic about - wasn’t it something like 40/44 cabinet picks didn’t make it through his term? He had historically high turnover.
Jesus H Christ. I just went and looked at the partial bio's of former Secretaries of Defense. This guy is beyond inadequate.
JFC.
Look at his 1st term and his appointments. Half of them or more were indicted or resigned to avoid indictment. His children served in his administration, grifting as much as he did himself.
His son-in-law getting a 2 BILLION dollar deal from the Saudis post presidency. You MAGAs shit your pants over Hunter and shrug shoulders over this. Who knows what this 2 billion bought - we're talking Orange Turd here.
Good people. Holy shit.
So the bright side is he'll be fired promptly if it isn't working.
On the Joe Rogan podcast he talked about how choosing people would be different this time, that he learned a lot from the first time around in terms of how he chose people, and said he really didn't know what he was doing. This, as well as the Noem pick are really the only two head scratchers I've seen so far. They're pretty important positions too.
So we agree? I didn't say anything about his first term appointments, but I cover that in another post.
During this phase, the other side argues every pick is terrible. That's how it works. Both parties do it, and it's difficult for any human to stand up to that level of scrutiny. So be it.
Opinions will be what they are.
Yeah, what he meant by that is he learned to only pick yes men, not people that actually know what they're doing and have a backbone.
