McCain and Obama

[kwr]

Hi Jerry,

Now that is some interesting commentary.

You may (from the inside, so to speak) be able to help me understand why the US is so interested in the military service record of its leaders. I am in no way trying to start a fight here but I find it bewildering how much effort and emphasis is put on Vietnam and whether you inhaled or not.

There seems to be a big difference between the US and the part of the world (Australia) that I inhabit. Here there is respect for servicemen (I deal with veterans as part of my job) but it does not add to their credibility as leaders. I find McCain's war service record interesting and that is about it. It does not give me any further confidence in his ability.

I suspect you are right about Obama not being a great aviator - I strongly suspect McCain would not have done as well at Harvard. Takes all types to make up the world and like many left of centre people there are parts of a conservative philosophy that I agree with eg stable family structures.

Sooo - if you have the inclination could you write a few words regarding the status of the military establishment in US leadership. I am seriously interested and as I said before in no way wish to start a fight.

Kevin

 

[DrJRapp]

Well, I guess if your dad and grandfather were decorated sailors that made Admiral, things were a little easier.

Exactly the opposite, the expectations on him were higher because of his lineage. Additionally, he had a much tougher time as a POW because of his Father's position.

The Navy isn't some "good old boys club" as you imply.

It is a shame to see you stoop so low to belittle something that WAS truely extraordinary and way beyond anything you may have even thought of accomplishing in your own right.

 

[DrJRapp]

Sooo - if you have the inclination could you write a few words regarding the status of the military establishment in US leadership. I am seriously interested and as I said before in no way wish to start a fight.

Kevin

Leadership isn't taught in college here but it is something that we make certain to identify, amplify and refine in our military personnel along with the characteristics of honesty and integrity. Since our very first President Gen George Washington our Presidents serve as "The Commander and Chief" of our military, therefore military experience, especially in a Command role is considered a valuable pre-qualification for the job. The position of Commander and Chief is not the place to get OJT.

Throught the years there have been many a poll taken of the American public of the trustworthyness of classes of career groups. Military Officers nearly always come out on top, and lawyers on the bottom. We even have many jokes about lawyers.

 

[DrJRapp]

if you or I wiped out 100 million-plus dollars (cost of 4 jets in the 60's) of Navy property when I was in, somebody would be loosing their commission and going to the brig. Pilot error or not, the "Nav" only has so much patience for such things.

~VDR

This is a severe distortion of the facts... Mc Cain "lost" two A1 prop Skyraiders($90K) and a couple of A4s which cost the Navy at the time of their acquisition about $600K each. He was shot down over NVN in the 4th while on his 24th ( I believe) bombing mission. I'm sure he was never "cut a break" because of his father or grandfather.

The Navy doesn't blame it's pilots for circumstances beyond our control.

During my flight training I crashed a T28 into Perdido Bay Florida following an engine failure. It was later salvaged and rebuilt probably at the cost of about $100K.

In my capacity as a SAR pilot in the MC Delta I lost two UH-1Ds due to ground fire...cost $250K each.

I'm my capacity as a test pilot for Naval Air Systems Command, I "lost" (crashed) an F4J ($4 mil) when my drogue shute failed to open on a short field landing in Keane NH and an EA6B ($55 mil) due to an electrical fire and a F14D ($35 mil) due to swing wing hydraulic failure. Since two were combat losses and the rest were mechanical failure I was never sent to the brig, demoted, discharged or made to pay for the planes...lol I was continued to be promoted and served in a high level capacity during DS that is still classified. Also, in spite of the perception that I cost the taxpayers many millions in broken airplanes.... shortly after release from active duty for DS in 1992 I was selected for the NASA mission specialist program but failed the flight physical due to injuries sustained in my previous ejections (crashes).

 

[twich54]

Jerry, your skills as a pilot or knowledge of the inner working of the Navy are not in question. But John McCain's is.

Van, Good morning !

First off I suspect this latest round of bickering is my fault for the rebuttal I gave Rich about comparing McCains service in the Navy vs. Obama's Harvard Law school newspaper duties. While I'm deadly serious in/with my respect to those who serve and have served, again, I was trying to poke an once or two of "levity" into the mix !

I do think from what Jerry has posted, he was trying to give us an honest "insiders look" and explanation.

THANKS Jerry !.

 

[TheBobGoat]

Thanks Jerry for all of the good comments.

Serving as an officer in the military can be a great test of leadership and character. Flying an aircraft just adds to that experience. Flying during combat adds even more.

When I look at all of the things Ive gotten to do in my life and how I have been tested through all of the above it is amazing. 99.9% of those I graduated high school and college with havent been tested in the same capacity or even had the opportunities to lead that I have.

Military experience can be very valuable and should be taken into account when voting for president (or hiring a job candidate in any other line of work).

 

[VanDaRo]

This thread seems to be loosing focus and I didn't want to harass Jerry anymore on this aspect of the candidate but this...

Exactly the opposite, the expectations on him were higher because of his lineage.

...is just not in keeping with the facts. How does one even qualify for combat aircraft duty when you barely squeak through your schooling ? If one wanted to fly F-18's today, you had better be one squared-away sailor and a top academic performer.

Secondly, I was in the Navy for 8 years (submarines, nuke, ELT) a long time ago and not unfamiliar with its ins and outs. I have plenty of my own harrowing tales from those days, but nothing like McCains'. He gets a tremendous amount of respect from me for his service, refusing repatriation before his fellow prisoners, and many of the things he has done in Congress since his taking office during the Reagan administration.

~VDR

 

[DrJRapp]

...is just not in keeping with the facts. How does one even qualify for combat aircraft duty when you barely squeak through your schooling ? If one wanted to fly F-18's today, you had better be one squared-away sailor and a top academic performer.

That's very easy to answer... it was Vietnam era. A time when academic performers were fleeing the country (ala Bill Clinton) to avoid risking their *** in military service. The fact that McCain had the will to to the job was reason enough.

Any Naval Academy graduate, from the top of their class to the very bottom get's their choice of duty in wartime. The "needs of the Navy" is aways the driving force, and the Navy's greatest need was for Aviators at that time. Flash to today...there isn't much demand for pilots nowadays, yet there is still strong supply of qualified young men who want the Navy to spend a million or so dollars to teach them to fly. The selection criteria have increased accordingly.

From your use of lingo such as ..."squared away sailor" you were obviously enlisted and not an officer, and pretty much in the dark about the workings of the selection processes for Commissioned Officers which is quite different than that of enlisteds. Enlisteds are promoted based on their performance on standardized exams along with what they have done or not done. Officers are promoted based on their potential to lead.

I've stated before that I'm not really much of a McCain supporter, but don't let politics intrude and belittle a man for your own perception of his performance in a capacity that few of you would be willing or able to undertake, let alone understand.

 

[Len44]

Unlike the Army or Air Force that have many Generals pushing paper, the Navy makes very few Admirals during peace time due to severe lack of opportunity for a major sea command (which is a prerequisite). Typically one out of every 8,000 officers commissioned makes Captain and one out of every 1000 Captains get selected by Congress to Flag rank (Admiral) . It is a political process and not a merit process.

Congratulations for your great success regarding your career in the Navy. As you note, very few achieve such a high rank as you did.

However, I am not sure where you received your in-depth information regarding what Army and Air Force General Officers actually do, i.e., "pushing paper." General Petraeus, for one, might beg to differ... I am just a little disappointed that an officer from one service would choose to denigrate the honorable service by officers in another branch of the military.

In addition, as shown below, FWIW, the overall percentage of Flag Officers does not vary much among the services.
(From http://usmilitary.about.com/od/promotions/l/blofficerprom.htm)

Active Duty General Officer (Flag Officers)Percent of Commissioned Officers:

Army: 0.46%; Air Force: 0.39%; Navy: 0.42%; Marine Corps: 0.49%

"General officers are nominated for promotion by the President of the United States, and confirmed by the Senate. You can't get more "political" than that. The services hold in-service promotion boards to recommend officers for general officer promotion to the President. When vacancies occur (a general officer gets promoted or retires), the President nominates officers to be promoted from these lists (with advice from the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the applicable service, and the Service Chief of Staff/Commandant)."

I really don't think Obama would have cut it a a Naval Aviator...... take it from many years personal experience evaluating junior Aviators, I know.

J Rappaport
Rear Admiral USN, Retired

While I am sure you were a keen judge evaluating junior aviators, you have never even met Barrack Obama, much less seen him fly an aircraft. So your statement is a bit surprising. Not that the ability to fly an airplane has a whole lot to do with being qualified to be President... (Unless, of course, you somehow thought that Bush flying around in some Guard airplanes merited your vote for him to be President.)

 

[TrumpetDoug]

John McCain Obama

I have been reading this thread for some time now and have not chimed-in for a while. But to cut to the chase I would hope we could keep the personal, hateful attacks on these two men down to a dull roar. I myself am a McCain supporter, I can think of not one single person on the planet that has given so much to a country, and yet still feels compelled to continue giving in one of the most thankless jobs you can find. I would think we could all at least admire the man for this.
On the other side you have Obama. A great man in his own right with passion and a different path for the country to follow. He has inspired a nation and rallied people that would otherwise sit on the sidelines. Once again could we all at least admire this.
And finally of course these two men have opposing views on what could/would work to keep this land moving forward. Here (IMHO) is where the discussion could/should be. The name calling and bashing of either of these men seems silly to me.
One last thing I forgot to mention was the press. Is there any doubt that it is severly left leaning and entirely unfair? Except for Fox of course. Fair and Balanced Fox News? I think not. However they are the ONLY media outlet that will give the "right" and John McCain a fair shake. You don't need sources for this just flip the channels and see for yourself if you are capable of looking with unbiased eyes (this is difficult for sure) Just look at the press in their attempt to destroy Palin. She has a 80% approval rating in her state, and the press is hell bent on finding that 20% and ramming it down our throat every minute. I long for the day when at least the big three could just report the news, no spin added. We could all look for the bias side elsewhere if we wanted.
Just my 2 cents guys
Doug - out

 

[twich54]

Good post Doug !! It's true, has been for years, the medias spin on things does tend to 'excite the emotions' !!

 

[Rich]

Jerry,

Thanks for your informative reply regarding your experiences in the Navy. Regardless of your view that there is no "old boys club" in the Navy, I find it ludicrous to believe that someone of McCain's class standing and especially with his poor grades in subjects like mathematics, would be granted entrance to flight school were it not for some political machinations regarding his father and grandfather. This is just my opinion, of course, but I think you assuming there was no such intervention on his behalf is just being naive.

As for the rest of what you said, I really don't see that you have shown his Navy experience to be any great pre-requisite to the duties of president. Again, how does flying a jet qualify you to be president? As a captain of a squadron, perhaps he showed some leadership potential. But how long did that last? He became commanding officer of a training squadron in 1976, and then became the Navy's liaison to the Senate in 1977. So he was commander of a squadron for a whole year! Not much leadership experience to speak of there.

So he has experience as a wartime jet pilot and a career politician. I am not saying these aren't admirable achievements. I am just saying they are not so remarkable that they should distinguish him as the obvious choice for president. Ultimately, it comes down to his honesty, integrity, and his stance on issues. I think it is clear from his abandonment of his "maverick" status in a desperate attempt to move to the right for this election, that he has abandoned honesty, integrity, and a middle-of-the-road stance on issues.

It is even clearer from his choice of Palin and his refusal to allow media access to either of them, that his decision-making ability is questionable and his credibility to the american people is rapidly dwindling. What is he trying to hide? Perhaps his and her lack of knowledge and ability to reasonably respond to tough questions?

 

[Rich]

Is there any doubt that it is severly left leaning and entirely unfair?

A popular misconception that has been debunked in this particular instance by a non-partisan study:

Study Finds Obama Faring Worse On TV News Than McCain

Since the primaries ended, on-air evaluations of Barack Obama have been 72% negative (vs. 28% positive). That’s worse than John McCain’s coverage, which has been 57% negative (vs. 43% positive) during the same time period.

About CMPA:

The Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA) is a nonpartisan research and educational organization which conducts scientific studies of the news and entertainment media.

 

[TrumpetDoug]

Like I said.....................

A popular misconception that has been debunked in this particular instance by a non-partisan study:

Study Finds Obama Faring Worse On TV News Than McCain

just flip the channels for a while, and look at the print media.............if you dare.
Here would be a example of neg. press for Obama? The Republican, gun totting, ultra right-wing, conservative movement leveled charges that Obama will raise your taxes. IOW only the nut-jobs believe this and here is who they are. Yea I guess you could say that was a "negative" for Obama. If you were non-partisan. OK I made that statement up to make a point but this is exactly the kind of language you see used on the majority of our "news " programming.
Just Fair and Balanced.
Doug - out

 

[VanDaRo]

From your use of lingo such as ..."squared away sailor" you were obviously enlisted and not an officer...

True. But somebody had to pay for the university education !! LOL !!



And as far as the media leaning to the left, I would not argue that. But it is not an intentional act, but more of a representation of what most people feel is the most reasonable approach to governing. Personal bias plays a role in all aspects of our lives and, whether we choose to or not, we make judgments every day that stem from these.


~VDR

 

[kwr]

Leadership isn't taught in college here but it is something that we make certain to identify, amplify and refine in our military personnel along with the characteristics of honesty and integrity. Since our very first President Gen George Washington our Presidents serve as "The Commander and Chief" of our military, therefore military experience, especially in a Command role is considered a valuable pre-qualification for the job. The position of Commander in Chief is not the place to get OJT.

Thanks Jerry - a nuance I had not appreciated. I had assumed the Commander and Chief title was ceremonial rather than strategic.
Kevin

 

[kwr]

One last thing I forgot to mention was the press. Is there any doubt that it is severly left leaning and entirely unfair? Except for Fox of course. Fair and Balanced Fox News? I think not. However they are the ONLY media outlet that will give the "right" and John McCain a fair shake. You don't need sources for this just flip the channels and see for yourself if you are capable of looking with unbiased eyes (this is difficult for sure) Just look at the press in their attempt to destroy Palin. She has a 80% approval rating in her state, and the press is hell bent on finding that 20% and ramming it down our throat every minute. I long for the day when at least the big three could just report the news, no spin added. We could all look for the bias side elsewhere if we wanted.
Just my 2 cents guys
Doug - out

I guess that depends where you stand Doug. I find the American press via the internet very right leaning.

Kevin

 

[DrJRapp]

Just my 2 cents guys
Doug - out

In a world where 2 cents doesn't buy much you've given us a lot of value.

Thanks

 

[DrJRapp]

Thanks Jerry - a nuance I had not appreciated. I had assumed the Commander and Chief title was ceremonial rather than strategic.
Kevin

While the "title" of Commander in Chief is largely ceremonial the President as set forth in the Constitution really is the CnC..he ultimatly makes the calls and cannot delegate that authority. Number 2 in the Chain of Command of our military is not supposed to be the Secretary of Defense but that position is often abused. Number 2 is supposed to be the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Each branch of the service has a Chief of Staff or Commander who is the head of the operational forces of that service. Each survice has a parallel organization for administrative matters headed by the "Secretary" of that service ( a civilian) reporting to the Secretary of Defense who is supposed to be the Administrative head of the military.

 

[kwr]

Thanks Jerry - I had gained the impression that the Secretary of Defense outranked the Joint Chief of Staff particularly with the sidelining of Colin Powell early in the current administration's tenure.

Kevin