No one achieved flag rank without being political. As a junior officer, I used to joke that rank times IQ equals a constant. In far too many cases, it seems to be true. Obama forced out hundreds of senior officers to make way for those like Vindman who are driven by politics and self-interest than the good of the military and the country. It’s the officers like Vindmann that cause me to discourage young people I know to avoid military service. The misplaced priorities of the senior officers are going to get a lot of people killed. I’m not willing to sacrifice my grandchildren on the altar of political correctness. My family has served in the military for generations. We’ve done our share.
Even Nimitz and Halsey owed some favor to politics: Nimitz was picked for CINCPAC over 28 more senior admirals because FDR knew and liked him; Halsey was kept as Third Fleet commander through his mistakes at Leyte Gulf and two typhoons because Nimitz and FDR had decided that it would be too great a blow to morale to remove Halsey.
Which is not to deny the gifts of both men as senior commanders. We lucked out getting Nimitz to run the Pacific War and getting Halsey to run the Guadalcanal campaign; and if the war had grown too big for Bill Halsey by 1944, the US had such preponderance of strength that it could afford to carry him through his failures.
Setting all this aside, it is probably telling how long it took in both the Civil War and World War II to improve the senior levels of command in both army and navy: that is, how long it took to sift through the Irvin McDowells and Lloyd Fredendalls to find the William Shermans and George Pattons.
FDR wanted Nimitz because FDR knew he was the best man for the job, not because he thought Nimitz was a democrat who would help promote democrat causes. The latter is a more common reason (the most common?) for promotion today, IMO.
Halsey has, IMO, gotten way too much grief for his performance at Leyte Gulf, most all of it based on 20/20 hindsight. Post war Adm Mitscher claimed he “knew” that Ozawa’s carriers were a decoy, that his flight decks were empty. How he could have known that is beyond me. Mitscher was known to play loose with the truth (Midway). He could have suspected this, but ignoring Ozawa’s carriers based on a suspicion would have been nuts. And Nimitz had declared the Japanese carriers a high priority target. There’s also the fact that USS Princeton had been sunk by IJN aircraft (flown from land) at the same time Center Force was being mauled on day one of the battle. Japanese aircraft were scarce at Leyte (thanks to Halsey’s raids on Okinawa and Formosa) but not completely absent. It would have been foolish to assume Ozawa’s carriers were devoid of aircraft and no threat. Therefore Halsey went after Ozawa. His failure was in how he did that (poor communication of orders/intent) and much of that falls to his staff (historically they were much less efficient in such matters than Spruances staff). As for the typhoons, in both cases Halsey was given HORRIFC advise from his chief aerologist, Capt Kosco, who never was relieved. Instead McCain took the fall after the second typhoon for some reason.
Every federal employee except the President takes the following oath: “I, [state your name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
At the conclusion of my orientation meeting on my first day at FAA, I stood, along with a room full of others, and took that oath. Looking around the room, I was pretty certain that I was the only person in the room who had ever read or would ever read the Constitution. I had to pass a test on it to graduate from high school, back in 1972. And I continued to study it ever since.
Nevertheless, it took me almost ten years to realize that working at FAA was in and of itself violation of that oath of office. Federal regulatory agencies have powers “delegated” by Congress to issue regulations having the force of law, adjudicate violations of those regulations, and impose penalties on violators. In other words, undo with prejudice the separation of powers the Constitution so wisely established.
The so-called “administrative state” needs to be disestablished in its entirety, because it exercises the powers of all three branches of US government. That isn’t allowed, even in theory, under the Constitution. This is not to say that all of functions of those agencies go away; being under the Executive branch of government, they would still be needed to enforce laws in their area of jurisdiction. But they cannot be allowed to make those laws, or adjudicate violations. The Congress, first and foremost, needs to do its damn job and legislate where laws are needed (and pass a budget, but hey, we don’t want to over tax them [heh heh]).
Michael, how would you separate the functions of drafting regulations vs law? Do all federal regulations have to go before Congress and the President for approval? How would that work in practicality? Or would a committee be assigned in Congress to review regulations and only move actions to the floor should there be a dispute over the legality of a regulation? Or would that review function simply reside in the courts? I believe that’s the way it’s done now.
I’d prefer a sunset provision be added as an amendment to the Constitution. All executive agencies dissolve automatically after 20 years without subsequent Congressional approval to extend them and the maximum extension is 20 years before another review. The President retains veto power to reject and throw it back to Congress to override.
Their regulations go poof when the agency does.
The President can introduce the legislation to Congress to extend with same or shorter term extension if he/she so chooses. In all cases Congress must approve, just as with any legislation.
If there is an agency reorganization its former self would be dissolved and their new incantation would require new regulations.
It would keep agencies from ossifying. But I’m not sure how effective redoing regulations every twenty years would work out. Seems to me worth a try at least.
When the Constitution was written, the word “regulate” did not have the meaning we give it today. Research dictionaries of the day. The word was defined as “to make regular” – almost, but not quite, a tautology.
The best example is the “commerce clause” of the Constitution. Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 3 grants Congress the power “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes;”
The purpose of this was to ensure first that the United States of America had a policy – whatever Congress established legislatively – that the country as a whole used in commerce with foreign nations, and the Indian tribes (considered foreign nations); second, that the States had a single policy, again what Congress established legislatively, for commerce among themselves. The latter was specifically aimed at preventing States from erecting trade barriers among themselves.
Here is where we can see the abdication of its power by Congress. One of the costliest aspects of medical care in the United States is that health insurance companies are prohibited by state law from offering coverage across state lines. That is the only thing with respect to health care that Congress is empowered to legislate (against) under the commerce clause, and the only thing that it has never touched. If Congress passed a federal law prohibiting any State from disallowing medical insurance companies from other states to operate within its borders, that would be an example of “regulating” commerce as the term was understood by the Founders – making it “regular.”
The only statutory requirements that can be levied on American citizens have to be in the form of laws passed by Congress. That august body had to do its damn job, and not “delegate” its powers (which it has no power to do under the Constitution) to the Executive branch, and set up laws that reasonably protect the public and preserve the Rights of the people.
Executive Branch agencies may establish rules representing good practice, but no rules with the force of law. And the Executive Branch agencies do not have the power to adjudicate any breach of law or rules by any citizen. They do it, but they have no Constitutional power to do it, so they do it unlawfully.
Congress should pass legislation regarding safety of flight for space launch that reflect whatever specifics currently covered by 14 CFR Part 400 are actually possible to require under any sane legislative regime, and leave it to Executive Branch agencies such as FAA to enforce the laws. The latter may also propose and establish rules of conduct for commercial entities, but none having the force of law. This would – properly – force Congress to understand what it was doing in its legislative function, and understand that its members membership would depend on not overstepping its powers. The horrifically onerous burden of federal control over commerce would vanish, and it would be astonishing how much better the civilization worked.
No one achieved flag rank without being political. As a junior officer, I used to joke that rank times IQ equals a constant. In far too many cases, it seems to be true. Obama forced out hundreds of senior officers to make way for those like Vindman who are driven by politics and self-interest than the good of the military and the country. It’s the officers like Vindmann that cause me to discourage young people I know to avoid military service. The misplaced priorities of the senior officers are going to get a lot of people killed. I’m not willing to sacrifice my grandchildren on the altar of political correctness. My family has served in the military for generations. We’ve done our share.
“No one achieved flag rank without being political.”
Nimitz, Halsey, Spruance…. at least not in the way and to the degree that happens today.
Even Nimitz and Halsey owed some favor to politics: Nimitz was picked for CINCPAC over 28 more senior admirals because FDR knew and liked him; Halsey was kept as Third Fleet commander through his mistakes at Leyte Gulf and two typhoons because Nimitz and FDR had decided that it would be too great a blow to morale to remove Halsey.
Which is not to deny the gifts of both men as senior commanders. We lucked out getting Nimitz to run the Pacific War and getting Halsey to run the Guadalcanal campaign; and if the war had grown too big for Bill Halsey by 1944, the US had such preponderance of strength that it could afford to carry him through his failures.
Setting all this aside, it is probably telling how long it took in both the Civil War and World War II to improve the senior levels of command in both army and navy: that is, how long it took to sift through the Irvin McDowells and Lloyd Fredendalls to find the William Shermans and George Pattons.
FDR wanted Nimitz because FDR knew he was the best man for the job, not because he thought Nimitz was a democrat who would help promote democrat causes. The latter is a more common reason (the most common?) for promotion today, IMO.
Halsey has, IMO, gotten way too much grief for his performance at Leyte Gulf, most all of it based on 20/20 hindsight. Post war Adm Mitscher claimed he “knew” that Ozawa’s carriers were a decoy, that his flight decks were empty. How he could have known that is beyond me. Mitscher was known to play loose with the truth (Midway). He could have suspected this, but ignoring Ozawa’s carriers based on a suspicion would have been nuts. And Nimitz had declared the Japanese carriers a high priority target. There’s also the fact that USS Princeton had been sunk by IJN aircraft (flown from land) at the same time Center Force was being mauled on day one of the battle. Japanese aircraft were scarce at Leyte (thanks to Halsey’s raids on Okinawa and Formosa) but not completely absent. It would have been foolish to assume Ozawa’s carriers were devoid of aircraft and no threat. Therefore Halsey went after Ozawa. His failure was in how he did that (poor communication of orders/intent) and much of that falls to his staff (historically they were much less efficient in such matters than Spruances staff). As for the typhoons, in both cases Halsey was given HORRIFC advise from his chief aerologist, Capt Kosco, who never was relieved. Instead McCain took the fall after the second typhoon for some reason.
And now Vindman is running for office:
https://vindmanforcongress.com/
If you go there, noptice that he is asking for money even before he tells you why he should be elected.
In a serious military, he would have been flogged, his saber broken, his buttons cut off and his ass kicked off the post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGX-jak1Sio
Disregard the lyrics starting at “He was innocent. Not a charge was true.”
Cut and paste issue? I was thinking the same thing in response to Flight-ER Doc.
I think you meant this.
Although in those days, given the scenario, it’d be far more likely if convicted, you’d be hung.
“…represents everything that is wrong with our officer class”
A fat ass who hates the constitution because it was written to constrain people like him.
Why are so many or our military so freaking fat?
Every federal employee except the President takes the following oath: “I, [state your name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
At the conclusion of my orientation meeting on my first day at FAA, I stood, along with a room full of others, and took that oath. Looking around the room, I was pretty certain that I was the only person in the room who had ever read or would ever read the Constitution. I had to pass a test on it to graduate from high school, back in 1972. And I continued to study it ever since.
Nevertheless, it took me almost ten years to realize that working at FAA was in and of itself violation of that oath of office. Federal regulatory agencies have powers “delegated” by Congress to issue regulations having the force of law, adjudicate violations of those regulations, and impose penalties on violators. In other words, undo with prejudice the separation of powers the Constitution so wisely established.
The so-called “administrative state” needs to be disestablished in its entirety, because it exercises the powers of all three branches of US government. That isn’t allowed, even in theory, under the Constitution. This is not to say that all of functions of those agencies go away; being under the Executive branch of government, they would still be needed to enforce laws in their area of jurisdiction. But they cannot be allowed to make those laws, or adjudicate violations. The Congress, first and foremost, needs to do its damn job and legislate where laws are needed (and pass a budget, but hey, we don’t want to over tax them [heh heh]).
Michael, how would you separate the functions of drafting regulations vs law? Do all federal regulations have to go before Congress and the President for approval? How would that work in practicality? Or would a committee be assigned in Congress to review regulations and only move actions to the floor should there be a dispute over the legality of a regulation? Or would that review function simply reside in the courts? I believe that’s the way it’s done now.
I’d prefer a sunset provision be added as an amendment to the Constitution. All executive agencies dissolve automatically after 20 years without subsequent Congressional approval to extend them and the maximum extension is 20 years before another review. The President retains veto power to reject and throw it back to Congress to override.
Their regulations go poof when the agency does.
The President can introduce the legislation to Congress to extend with same or shorter term extension if he/she so chooses. In all cases Congress must approve, just as with any legislation.
If there is an agency reorganization its former self would be dissolved and their new incantation would require new regulations.
It would keep agencies from ossifying. But I’m not sure how effective redoing regulations every twenty years would work out. Seems to me worth a try at least.
When the Constitution was written, the word “regulate” did not have the meaning we give it today. Research dictionaries of the day. The word was defined as “to make regular” – almost, but not quite, a tautology.
The best example is the “commerce clause” of the Constitution. Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 3 grants Congress the power “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes;”
The purpose of this was to ensure first that the United States of America had a policy – whatever Congress established legislatively – that the country as a whole used in commerce with foreign nations, and the Indian tribes (considered foreign nations); second, that the States had a single policy, again what Congress established legislatively, for commerce among themselves. The latter was specifically aimed at preventing States from erecting trade barriers among themselves.
Here is where we can see the abdication of its power by Congress. One of the costliest aspects of medical care in the United States is that health insurance companies are prohibited by state law from offering coverage across state lines. That is the only thing with respect to health care that Congress is empowered to legislate (against) under the commerce clause, and the only thing that it has never touched. If Congress passed a federal law prohibiting any State from disallowing medical insurance companies from other states to operate within its borders, that would be an example of “regulating” commerce as the term was understood by the Founders – making it “regular.”
The only statutory requirements that can be levied on American citizens have to be in the form of laws passed by Congress. That august body had to do its damn job, and not “delegate” its powers (which it has no power to do under the Constitution) to the Executive branch, and set up laws that reasonably protect the public and preserve the Rights of the people.
Executive Branch agencies may establish rules representing good practice, but no rules with the force of law. And the Executive Branch agencies do not have the power to adjudicate any breach of law or rules by any citizen. They do it, but they have no Constitutional power to do it, so they do it unlawfully.
Congress should pass legislation regarding safety of flight for space launch that reflect whatever specifics currently covered by 14 CFR Part 400 are actually possible to require under any sane legislative regime, and leave it to Executive Branch agencies such as FAA to enforce the laws. The latter may also propose and establish rules of conduct for commercial entities, but none having the force of law. This would – properly – force Congress to understand what it was doing in its legislative function, and understand that its members membership would depend on not overstepping its powers. The horrifically onerous burden of federal control over commerce would vanish, and it would be astonishing how much better the civilization worked.