NYT Poll: Obama "Not Likely" to Be Effective Commander-in-Chief

FrontPage Mag ^ | 17 JULY 2008 | Floyd and Mary Beth Brown

[rdb3]

NYT Poll: Obama "Not Likely" to Be Effective Commander-in-Chief

By Floyd and Mary Beth Brown
FrontPageMagazine.com | 7/21/2008

On the night of January 20, 2009, a new commander-in-chief will leave the inaugural podium, parade, and festivities for the Oval Office. A national security staff ready with the latest “threat briefing” will join him there. On his desk, they will place a thick binder of reports, each focusing on real or emerging threats to our national security. In the quiet of the Oval Office -- in the presence of these stern-faced, deadly serious briefers and advisers -- Barack H. Obama, should he be the next president, will come face-to-face with reality.

Americans are afraid of this scenario, Barack H. Obama as commander-in-chief. The New York Times and CBS News released a poll this week; in it, Americans answered detailed questions about this possibility.

The poll’s answers shocked the strategists at the Obama campaign headquarters in Chicago. An intensive international travel schedule for Obama and a refocus of the campaign’s message on defense and foreign policy speaks to this fear.

The poll says Americans consider him lacking in the abilities necessary to run the armed services. Conversely, the polls show John McCain blows Obama out of the water as a good commander-in-chief. Forty-six percent of respondents thought McCain would very likely “be effective” as commander-in-chief, as opposed to only 24 percent saying the same of Obama. In fact, 36 percent think it is “not likely” Obama will be effective in the position.

Obama’s talents lie in his gift of oratory and his ability to move people with emotion, but this does not necessarily make for a good commander. The chief executive’s job requires forward thinking, realistic assessments of the world’s threats, and the maturity to make judgments in a crisis.

The USS Gerald R. Ford, an aircraft carrier, is now under construction in Hampton Roads, Va. It will be ready to join the fleet in 2015, replacing a carrier launched 47 years ago. Do we know that the USS Ford will be needed in 2015?

No, we do not. But can we afford to bet against it?

Obama thinks so. According to his own campaign literature, he is willing to let the USS Ford, and many more of tomorrow’s defense technologies, rust at the pier.

The decision to build the aircraft carrier is based on the concept of preparing America for the next war to come. Commanders must anticipate the evil designs of irrational lunatics. It’s always a tricky business, trying to anticipate future unknowns. Nevertheless, the president’s oath is to protect and defend the United States.

A president who hasn’t had any experience in military strategic planning is going to find himself in deep trouble if he finds his strategic armories empty in the face of an advancing enemy.

A review of Obama’s national defense plans offers insight into his preparedness to meet today’s and tomorrow’s defense realities. Obama makes a variety of claims which we think would dramatically weaken America if enacted. The Obama plans include cutting tens of billions of dollars of the Defense Department budget, and the development of no new weapons in space to protect satellites and strategic assets. He plans cuts in missile defense systems, slowing our development of future combat systems, developing no new nuclear weapons, and negotiating with Russia to take our ICBMs off what he calls “hair-trigger alert”. He advocates deep cuts in our nuclear program.

Not only does Obama have dangerous disarmament plans for America, he sorely lacks in experience. Besides being a junior senator, he has not been on any of the major defense committees. He has no previous hands-on experience with the military nor has he spent time with the men and women of our armed forces.

There are hundreds of weapon systems that could, under the quick-to-cut hand of Obama, be eliminated before they had the chance to prove themselves. If Obama had been in charge when the M1A1 Abrams Main Battle Tank was under development (a huge financial problem for the military) he would have cut it. But its developers persisted, and dollars that might have been considered “waste” by Obama were spent until the M1A1 became the most lethal, most respected, most effective tank on the battlefield.

Ask any Abrams crewmember who has survived direct hits by explosive shells and rocket-propelled grenades if he would have cancelled the Abrams, and the answer will be a resounding “No!”

Obama’s perfect future vision enables him to scrap defense programs, even as our nation’s enemies prepare very nasty projectiles to hurtle across continents and oceans.

Will he be able to effectively deal with crazed terrorists and power-hungry leaders with nuclear weapons in hand? Recent polls show Americans are nervous about Obama as commander-in-chief, and rightly so.

---

Floyd and Mary Beth Brown are bestselling authors and speakers. Mary Beth's latest book is featured at www.condibook.com. Together they maintain a blog at www.2minuteview.com.

[Condor51]

****Actually, it's based on the decision to keep re-fighting the war we know how to win (WWII) ... The aircraft carrier's day is nearly done due to improved anti-ship missile technology making its way into Third World arsenals, and this is going to become painfully evident by 2015.****

Have you ever watched the Military Channel? Today's Carriers and Carrier tactics are nothing like those of WWII.

Today's Carriers just don't float around the oceans alone. They are the central part of a Carrier Battle Group and are surrounded by Destroyers, Frigates, Submarines, etc. Those ships are there to protect the Carrier from those anti-ship missiles you mention. And if a missile did somehow get by those outer perimeter defenses, the Carrier itself has anti-missile defense systems.

The Carrier is here to stay and for quite some time. Well past the 2015 you mention.

If you don't have cable, google Military Channel. There should be info on those episodes about the modern US Carrier.

I may not be able to respond. The pc I'm on now is barely functioning. My Video card and monitor is all screwed up. I have to try to fix it in a few minutes.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

"The poll’s answers shocked the strategists at the Obama campaign headquarters in Chicago."

They need to send the strategists back to Princeton and Harvard for retraining. Did they really need to take a poll to figure this out???

They may be in for some more shocks before this is over.

[astounded]

“Hussein has a very high IQ.”

And you know this is a fact? Where did you find the number? I seem to remember the MSM telling Americans how “brilliant” was Bill Clinton and how “brilliant” was his so-called wife. “Cunning” is a more accurate term for the Clintons that may pertain to Obama. Further, we can observe that Obama is able to read from a Teleprompter adequately, but we also can observe that he is miserably poor on his feet without a written speech to quote. I believe he is a product of white liberal guilt (Affirmative Action)in his “education”.

[arthurus]

Affirmative Action. Just taking the worshippers at their word.
The observation holds whether Hussein is 180 or 80. JFK/LBJ’s “Whizz Kids” were the IQ stars of their day and they gave us micromanagement of a distant war right up to retreat and political defeat.

[AmericanVictory]

As we have pointed out in a published article, the NYT wants Obama to win so that the NYT can achieve its goal of losing another war to a totalitarian enemy, just as they have for so many years. Remember Duranty and Herbert Matthews, remember what Arthur Ochs Sulzburger told Tom Moorer during the Viet Nam War.

[hershey]

Every time we’ve elected a man with little experience, we got into terrible difficulty. Kennedy...the Bay of Pigs and Castro for forty odd years, Carter...the Iran hostage mess initiating Jihad and the worldwide Muslim terror war, Clinton, who refused to seize Osama bin Laden been captured by one of the nations near the Horn of Africa. Clinton said there was no ‘warrant’ out for his arrest. That was well before 9/11. And Clinton did nothing when the World Trade Center was bombed the first time. Nothing when we were attacked again and again, including the Khobi Towers attack and the Cole. Nothing. Even Europe is nervous about Obama’s lack of experience, which should give the average American pause when it comes to backing Barry. (Europe isn’t exactly known for common sense.)

[rfp1234]

President-select Osama will be Warren Buffet-line’s figurehead president, as Mr. Buffett will move up from controlling CA to the USA

[RWB Patriot]

I just hope the American people are smart enough to realize how bad Obama will be. I’ve talked to a guy at work about Obama’s lack of experience, and this guy actually thinks it would be great to have an inexperienced President. Not only that, he thinks Iran would warm up to us better if we followed Obama’s idea of “negotiating”.

Furthermore, he again showed his ignorance of history by declaring and I quote “He’ll (Obama) be like another JFK”.

It’s guys like him who make me wonder how safe our future is.

[Cementjungle]

Well, he could simply eliminate the military... then he wouldn’t need any Commander in Chief skills.

[rdb3]

Well, he could simply eliminate the military... then he wouldn’t need any Commander in Chief skills.

It appears that he wants to do just that.

[SunkenCiv]

see also the “NY taxes under Obama to be 50 per cent” topic.

Obama camp denies New Yorker writer plane seat
LA Times blog | July 21, 2008 | Andrew Malcolm
Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 11:15:46 AM by cdchik123
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2048801/posts

The Times Disses McCain Op-ed After Running Obama’s
Times Watch | July 21, 2008 | Clay Waters
Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 06:03:18 PM by yoe
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2049020/posts

NYT REJECTS MCCAIN’S EDITORIAL; SHOULD ‘MIRROR’ OBAMA
Drudge | Mon Jul 21 2008 | Drudge
Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 12:09:19 PM by edzo4
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2048826/posts

The Times and the McCain Op-Ed [the NYT responds]
NYT | July 21, 2008, | NYT
Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 09:15:11 PM by edzo4
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2049132/posts

The New York Times bad love for McCain
The Pittsburgh TRIBUNE-REVIEW | Salena Zito
Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 09:13:08 PM by Salena Zito
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2049131/posts

[SunkenCiv]

Obama Won’t ‘Rubber Stamp’ Military Decisions
(Tells ABC Nightline he still doesn’t support surge)
ABC News Nightline ^ | 21 July 2008 | Terry Moran
Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 09:09:07 PM by SE Mom
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2049129/posts

[ballplayer]

I can see it now USS BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA

[syriacus]

Maybe Obama can run the Iraqi army since al-Maliki likes him.

[Munz]

That is their M.O. - they plan attacks within the fiorst year. they are prepared for new offices and plan their attacks well in advance.
I would bet my last dime that we will have a high profile attack within a year of Bush leaving office. Or at least a grand attempt that can hopefully be thwarted.

[SunkenCiv]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2048697/posts?page=51#51