TexasCHLforum.com

I think Perry has done some good and bad for TX as governor but don't really know if I'm convinced he would be a great president. Granted nobody's perfect, BUT anybody has to be better than the idiot we have in office now. At this point, there is nobody that is really running that we think will do a good job as Commander in Chief. I have always said though that anybody that is CIF needs to either have military experience OR have a good understanding about the military and support them.

jdlott74 wrote:I think Perry has done some good and bad for TX as governor but don't really know if I'm convinced he would be a great president. Granted nobody's perfect, BUT anybody has to be better than the idiot we have in office now. At this point, there is nobody that is really running that we think will do a good job as Commander in Chief. I have always said though that anybody that is CIF needs to either have military experience OR have a good understanding about the military and support them.

Chuck

CiC is one of many hats POTUS wears. I think he or she doesn't personally need diplomatic experience unless he or she has an incompetent SecState, and he or she doesn't personally need military experience unless he or she has an incompetent SecDef. And so on.

Personally, I would vote for an anti-military capitalist in a New York minute before I would vote for a pro-military socialist.

I have never met a pro-military socialist. Can you name any?

We did vote in a socialist do we want another? As far as I can tell he is not particularly pro military.

A President that does not think too highly of our military will not usually appoint a particularly strong Sec. of Defense.

There have been a few exceptions one of which is Gates but he was just kept on as Sec. of Defense.

As much as I hate to say it I will predict an Oblah Blah re-election which will give him time to complete his first ever campaign promise,
"I will fundamentally change America!!"

Chuck