This will not end well.
Oh, I get it. Trump ran through six Defense Secretaries in four years (a record) and had an adversary relationship with the Pentagon. As with so many other Departments, entrenched resistance to Trump’s leadership flourishes there, and there are cultural issues as well.
The sort-of new President has learned a hard lesson, and wants a loyal outsider to tackle the Defense Department. Harry Truman once described the department as a feather bed where you punched a problem in one part of the bed and another problem would pop right up.
DOD is huge, a labyrinth of interlocking bureaucracies, and managing it requires superb leadership skills, diplomacy, organization and more. There is no reason to believe that Pete Hegseth possesses any of these.
True, the intentionally deceitful and misleading Axis headlines make him seem even more unqualified than he is, saying that Trump nominated a “Fox News host” as Defense Secretary, which sounds as crazy as nominating Whoopi Goldberg to head the Department of Agriculture. (This follows the pattern of the MSM calling Trump a “reality TV star” in 2016.) It’s a little better than that: the guy is a Princeton grad with a Masters in Public Policy, saw combat duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, and served with distinction, earning a bronze star among other honors.
But thousands upon thousands have the equivalent qualifications, or better. simply serving in the military is not especially useful training for running the Defense Department. What is needed is management experience. Past Defense Secretaries have been business CEOs and executives, or have headed other government agencies. Several critics have said that if confirmed, Hegseth will be the least qualified DOD chief ever. I’ve been checking, going back to the Secretaries of War, which was what the job was called until World War II. A lot of those were lawyers—not a great qualification Others were primarily politicians. That is still a better qualification than being a talking head. Trump’ pick might be the most unqualified in history. Of course, Abe Lincoln wasn’t qualified to be President, and he did a pretty good job. However, it is never wise to rely luck.
The ethical thing for Hegseth to do would have been to turn down the job. Yes, yes, I know: when your President calls, you answer as a patriot and good American. Sometimes however, a President needs to be saved from himself, and the patriotic response to a bad idea is “No,” or, less diplomatically,
And yes, it is awfully tempting to be offered a job of importance and prestige beyond your wildest dreams. Then one has to exhibit selflessness and responsibility and accept one’s own limitations.
I love the stories of prominent people turning down offers they had to be greatly tempted to accept. Most of them involve show business. Cary Grant famously told Jack Warner that he would not accept the role of Henry Higgins in the film version of “My Fair Lady” because, he told the movie mogul, Rex Harrison was better and nobody, including Cary, wanted to see anyone else play the role. Jim Carey turned down a chance to play Danny Kaye because, he said, “I’m not as good as Danny Kaye, and I’ll look like a fool.”
My favorite political example also involves an actor: in 1968, George Wallace, running as a third-party candidate, invited John Wayne to be his Vice-President. The Duke said he was honored, but that he knew his limitations. “I could play a Vice-President, but I have no business trying to be one,” he said.
John Wayne would be a better bet as Secretary of Defense than Pete Hegseth.
Hegseth’s ethical duty was to say “no.” Eventually, he, and lots of other people, will wish he had.
Ethics Alarms 
I’d put Matt Goetz in this same category, Jack, even without all his baggage. Astonishingly disappointing pick by the PEOTUS. I’d guess there are thousands of way more qualified GOP-affiliated attorneys who could take this spot, many of them with experience as federal prosecutors and managing groups of lawyers and law enforcement professionals.
Eddie Munster, Attorney General. Don’t much like the sound of that.
I agree regarding Gaetz. Despite the fact that he’s a bit slimy, always plays to the cameras, and is a bit of a loon, I don’t mind him in the House. We need a few brawlers on the right. Lord knows there are PLENTY (mostly Dems) in that den of iniquity. But him as AG? I’m not seeing it. In fact, I’m starting to suspect there’s a longer play afoot.
Apparently there’s a serious question as to whether he even has the votes to be confirmed. And, despite this, he’s already resigned his seat.
Perhaps he’s being nominated as a sacrificial lamb to grease the wheels for Trump’s other nominees. There will be the usual histrionics in the House and eventually they’ll say “fine, we’ll withdraw him as a nominee as long all those other nominees get through. Deal?”.
By way of analogy, I’m reminded of what Trey Parker and Matt Stone did with “Team America” to get an R rating (and not the dreaded NC-17). The filmed a MUCH more explicit “sex scene” (with puppets, if you haven’t seen it) which included…let’s just say some scatological activity. That scene was never intended for the final cut but they included it so they could say, “okay, FINE, we’ll cut the pee (and worse) but everything else stays, okay?” It worked. You can see the full scene in the “director’s cut”.
I have no idea if that’s the play but I strongly suspect he is not being nominated in earnest.
The House has no say. I believe you meant the Senate when speaking of histrionics.
You’re right. Thanks for the correction.
I do agree that Gaetz is a strange choice. I do not agree that there are thousands of potential AG’s that could be substituted; a handful maybe but how many can he trust after Bill Barr.
Without proffering alternatives who will serve the people instead of the entrenched system we really cannot say there is a better alternative.
Gaetz has already resigned his seat?
Dang! The House is already better off. Johnson really doesn’t need that little band of saboteurs who have consistently been undermining any attempts to make the House run with even a modicum of success. So that’s a win, in my book. If he isn’t confirmed — maybe that’s a win, win.
Are we sure this wasn’t some sort of deal with the Speaker to get rid of Gaetz? Barring a massive upset, it looks like a safe seat for the GOP (Gaetz won with 66% of the vote).
“Gaetz has already resigned his seat?“
I wonder what the timeline is after this. Is that seat still included in the House majority count until he’s replaced? Can he recant his resignation if he’s not approved and there hasn’t been a special election for his replacement yet? How quickly does DeSantis have to call for an election (it’s a solidly Republican district)?
Can DeSantis schedule a special election for December?
I’d put Matt Goetz in this same category, Jack, even without all his baggage. Astonishingly disappointing pick by the PEOTUS. I’d guess there are thousands of way more qualified GOP-affiliated attorneys who could take this spot, many of them with experience as federal prosecutors and managing groups of lawyers and law enforcement professionals.
Eddie Munster, Attorney General. Don’t much like the sound of that.
Matt Gaetz was #3 on my pre-election “Untrustowrthy 20.” I suppose Trump could have chosen someone worse, but off-hand I can’t think of who that would be. I’m pretty sure the Senate won’t confirm him.
Well, he supposedly has proposed implementing a 10-year ban on generals working for defense contractors after retiring from the military. So there’s that.
But never mind all that; the best thing ever is that Elon is going to head up the “Department Of Government Efficiency” (do the acronym).
“Harry Truman once described the department as a feather bed where you punched a problem in one part of the bed and another problem would pop right up.”
Didn’t FDR use a “feather bed” analogy before HST, when referring to the Navy?
PWS
My first impression was What? Who?
However, the military industrial complex has so corrupted virtually every other Defense Secretary that the chain of command has broken down to the point Generals believe they can inform our adversaries of our president’s orders to which they disagree.
Hegseth is a graduate of Princeton, Harvard (MPP) a Major in the Active duty National Guard who has done tours in Iraq, Afghanistan, Gitmo and ran a veterans advocacy organization.
Just how effective was McNamara or Casper Weinberger, Panetta, Havel, Cheney or any of the others including Rumsfeld in wringing out efficiencies among the different branches. Has Lloyd Austin evaluated and written about future types of threats or had a laser focus on lethality of the military instead of sociological experiments. Even the ones who know ‘the ropes’ or have an inside track at the Pentagon have not demonstrated they can win a war since George Marshall. The only thing any have been good at is spending vast sums of money.
Hegseth has a military background and deserves his chance to succeed. Because he does not fit the mold of past Secretaries that alone does not mean he lacks the skills necessary. There may be more to him than meets the eye and he is not beholden to any corporate or political interests.
Sorry for repeating the military and college experience. For some reason I got distracted while reading and apparently skipped over that paragraph.
I will say however, being a CEO does not make a leader. I would be inclined to examine his record as a Major while serving. All I can say is give Pete a chance.
I am inclined to agree with you. An unusual choice, sure, but I am not so sure that the thing DoD needs most are management skills. Perhaps warfighting skills are needed now.
I have a recollection, during Obama’s term, when he was contemplating intervening in Syria to try and end that horrific civil war. What I remember was that the Pentagon — not the press, not Congress, but the Pentagon — said we probably shouldn’t intervene because it might be dangerous. They couldn’t guarantee that we could totally suppress the Syrian air defenses.
My reaction — WTF!!!! People joining the military, especially since 9/11, do not do so in the expectation of a safe, uneventful career. I mean, my goodness, every soldier knows that part of the deal is that you will be likely be put in harm’s way. No, they don’t want to be killed or wounded, nor do we want them to be — but it happens.
So maybe Hegseth can instill a different attitude from the top for our military. He can hire managers if that’s what it takes. But if we’re quibbling about inefficiencies — we already have those in spades.
If he crashes and burns, well, people will ridicule Trump, right? If he doesn’t crash and burn, well, people will ridicule Trump, right?
How can the executive in charge of a department that employs 2.9 million people not be an experienced manager?
I don’t disagree with your point, Jack, but how can we have no one in charge of our military who is willing to fight wars if necessary? How can we have an Army if no one is willing to enlist?
You’re likely right, and you’ll be entitled to say ‘I told you so’, but it’s a dangerous world out there.
It is not the total number of employees it is the span of control. The Scy. of Defense sets the tone and policy. He or she manages a small group of persons who are responsible for advising the Secretary and supervising others who are responsible for other subordinates. If those he manages fail to achieve the goals set for those under his or her span of control he or she either identifies and removes the roadblocks that prevented completion of the goal or fires those who fail to achieve for what ever reason.
The necessary skills of a CEO do not necessarily require frontline or basic people management skills. The CEO is a horizon scanner who identifies opportunities, threats, strengths and weaknesses. The CEO sole focus is on the success of the whole and has the strength to discard element of the organization that prevent it from achieving maximum success. Any CEO who spends their time focusing on the activities of subordinates further down the chain of command will be utter failures.
All true. But if someone has an affinity for leadership and management, they usually demonstrate that by seeking, holding down, and being successful at positions in management.
Hegseth has managed people as a Major and the creation of the Concerned Veterans of America that was instrumental in getting the VA reorganized.
Pete, in his own words:
Pete Hegseth – Secretary of Defense Nominee | SRS #143 – YouTube
I am looking at these picks and there are two main possibilities.
(1) Trump is making terrible choices.
(2) Trump is appointing these people for specific tasks, not necessarily to run the department longterm.
Possibility 1 needs no explanation. We have seen this before.
Possibility 2 is an interesting one. The DOJ and the DOD both need major housecleaning. A normal nominee will not and cannot do it.
If the DoD needs every ‘woke’ general fired and put back on track to make the military a warfighting institution and not an equity welfare system, a nontraditional person is needed. If we need to completely refocus West Point on warfighting and not social justice, a nontraditional person is needed because he is going to have to fire and replace the leadership and most of the faculty. You can’t fix the military unless you have the willingness to do so and there is probably not an ex-general alive who will agree to do it.
The DOJ is a tyrannical weapon used to punish the enemies of the Democratic Party. It does not exist to bring ‘justice’ to anyone anymore. Every single person probably needs to be fired so they can start over. You would need a colossal asshole to do something like that. Let me introduce you to Matt Gaetz.
So, my hope is that these are short-term, task-focused appointments. Once the task is done, they will move on.
I say this because college presidents are often appointed for the same reasons. Many are appointed for short-term tasks and are relieved once that task is done.
Fund-Raising President (the bicentennial is coming up and our goal is to raise $200 million)
Law-and-order President (hired to clean up the mess left by the fund-raising president who was never there.
Turn-around President (hired after a financial crisis to deal with the debt and financial shortfalls)
I do think Rubio was appointed just to get him out of Congress, however.
Appoint someone to run a department whom you don’t want to run the department IS a terrible choice.
I’m hearing both sides on these nominations right now and obviously, there’s more negatives than positives floating around. I’m reserving judgement for the moment because “wild cards” are essentially what people were voting for with Trump. They weren’t voting for establishment puppets. So he checks the first box handily. With that, it’s a “wait and see” moment for me….on everything.
That said, I use the following analogy. I’m sure it’s not as smart as I think it is, but take it for whatever it’s worth:
You’re about to start a destruction derby. What car are you going to enter into the fray? Probably something you slap together on a budget. Not a classic that you’ve spent years restoring and refining the details. Probably not a new shiny vehicle with bells and whistles. Something that’s a bit run down, unapologetic, and will get the job done. Pave the way for the future.
And yet this is standard operating practice in a lot of places. See my university president examples above. As long as he has a capable secretary, thing are very likely to turn out OK.
Michael,
I worked in academia for twenty years and can attest to your assessment of leadership choices. One point that we must recognize is that the allegations against Gaetz with respect to the DOJ probe are being dredged up again despite the fact that the DOJ spent 2 years investigating him and never developed a case against him. Given the DOJ has a habit of launching probes, leaking them to the press and then quietly dropping them after some period of time makes me wonder about the claims against him. The House ethics investigation was predicated on that DOJ probe. DC does not like boat rockers who threaten the established hierarchy of power.
Come on. The Justice Department decided it couldn’t win a case against Joe Biden for illegally holding on to classified documents, pretty much like Trump. Gaetz talks like an idiot. Separating the political from basic facts is proving to be hard for the Axis too. He advocates legalizing drugs because he uses them. His public persona lacks dignity: he makes trump look like a Pilgrim. The law is a profession; Gaetz, even with just the stories surrounding him, isn’t trustworthy or a proper image for the law. If he’s trying to avoid the ethics report on him from coming out, what does that tell you?
My opinion of Gaetz was sufficiently laid out here. I just read it again, and I wouldn’t change anyone. The guy, at very least, is a creep, and creeps shouldn’t be the nation’s top lawyer.
Jack
Michael is not saying hire someone you don’t want l. He is saying hire the person who has the skills or temperament to get a job done now.
For example, most startups need a leader with specific skill set to get a product to market but as growth ramps up that leader needs to change because few entrepreneurs have the skill sets to handle the challenges that change as the firm grows. This is the argument that can be used for or against the Hegseth nomination. At issue is what is he being hired to do.
Is he being hired to talk on TV or fight in the desert? Because That’s all I see that he has demonstrable skills at doing. helping to start a small non-profit is completely useless for someone who represents our national defense to the public.
The Babylon Bee nails it:
U.S. — The party responsible for appointing a Transportation Secretary whose only relevant experience was an apparent love of for toy trains has declared Trump’s cabinet picks “unqualified.”
The Democratic Party, fresh off appointing a dude who wears dresses as a health minister, a guy who steals women’s luggage as nuclear weapons officer, and a Joker-costume-wearing lesbian who can’t answer questions as Press Secretary, felt that Trump’s choices did not have the proper credentials for their jobs.
“President-Elect Trump has beclowned himself with these appointments,” said Senator Elizabeth Warren, handing her makeup bag to Admiral Levine. “These are serious roles with real responsibilities. We need the absolute best, and — hey, has anyone seen my luggage?”
That’s OK for satire, the problem is that far too many Trump acolytes think that’s a good argument.
After my initial WTF?!? response to Hegseth, my new, tempered concern is that (as far as I have learned) he has never done a tour at Headquarters or on a General’s staff. In my experience, people in the military who have never served at a headquarters often hold those people in contempt. The people at headquarters (and the Pentagon) are pencil pushers who don’t know what it is like “in the field” and change regulations to make the operators’ lives harder. They never consider or acknowledge the fact that most military people at HQ/Pentagon have operational experience, base regulations on input from the field, and will be returning to operational units after the HQ/Pentagon tour. They are forever “the enemy”.
My main fear is not that the job is above Hegseth’s abilities, but that he will view the people he is supposed to lead with contempt, which will ultimately lead to failure. My secondary concern is that THEY will view HIM with contempt, which will also lead to failure.
Last paragraph: Bingo.
The last paragraph depends on whose spine is stronger. Change agents always face obstacles. It is possible that many of those at the Pentagon actually thought the Push for DEI and other social experiments were wrong and will be happy to get back to the mission at hand.
All those with operational experience are no different than Hegseth. They are however, career officers and are only following orders. Only the flag officers may really feel the squeeze because they are the ones who will move on to lucrative jobs in the private sector as CEO’s or Board members.
Start moving them out while elevating others to replace them can be a useful strategy. The first to go is thoroughly modern Milley.
If Hegseth is smart he will consult with General Kellogg (ret.) who supports actual military readiness.
The wheels are falling off of Trumps cabinet and he hasn’t even taken office yet.
I had high hopes that he would have learned from his first tenure as President and would take time and make sure to vet his nominees carefully. looks like I was wrong.
He learned ONE lesson, and it was a big one: he can’t trust generals and the DC establishment. The lesson of not hiring and trusting dodgy characters he is incapable of learning. See: Cohen,M; Omaraosa; Moochie
How are the wheels falling off? Trump got all three Senate majority candidates to agree to recess appointments. Trump has two years to implement his agenda and recess appointments can last that long.
The last thing we need is another person as AG who is part of the swamp or is more interested in protecting his or her long term political or economic interests. Bill Barr was a good AG but did not care to ferret out activities within government trying to undermine the executive branch. Remember the civil servants who leaked phone Trumps phone conversations with world leaders only months after his inauguration.
As for Hegseth, when pentagon lobbyists say who the hell is he that tells you they are concerned about their gravy train.
ironically, Senator Warner warned the DC metro area will suffer disproportionately from government downsizing. Funny, equity goes out the window when their box will be gored. I say move some of these departments to other parts of the country. Covid proved you don’t have to be in the office. The funny part is that the federal workers were worried they would have to come back to the office and Warner is saying the area needs a sales pitch to get people back into all those vacant government office buildings
Well I just read a WSJ story that said as many as 30 Republicans might end up voting against Gaetz, which certainly would scuttle the nomination.
But that same story said that Senator Thune, who’s going to be the next majority leader, had not agreed to let Trump do recess appointments, at least not as a general rule. That’s probably a good idea.
I reckon it’s popcorn time on this one.
Thune stated he would not prevent recess appointments. If he goes back on that the Republican Party may as well forget it ever garnering mass support in the future. Who is Thune going to get to gavel in the Senate every three days?
With a 53-47 majority, they shouldn’t need to make recess appointments, unless we’re looking at someone even Republicans won’t vote for (Matt Gaetz, anyone?).
I don’t think it is a good policy to plan on recess appointments and this certainly was not what the founders envisioned when they created the capability.
Just because Trump has won a mandate from the voters, doesn’t mean he gets to do anything he wants, regardless of the rest of the government.
What they need to really be working on is to nail down some of the changes with actual legislation. Something that can’t simply be reversed with a stroke of the next president’s pen.
That was true of Obamacare, and Trump’s tax reform bill — and you’ll notice those things are still around. Where is Obama’s Power plan, or Trump’s Remain in Mexico?
I voted for Trump. I am pretty much ok with him being sort of a dictator on day 1 (those folks do have a lot to answer for). But day 2 is a horse of a different color.
As someone who has dealt with his share of general officers and DoD civilian officials, I am in favor of the SECDEF nomination. Briefly put, my argument goes something like this: if a definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results (and we do, given the performance of DoD in terms of its management at the highest levels), then this is a sane act.OK, final thought on this, then we’ll see how the hearings turn out.
I think I will agree with Jack about the Ethics Dunce designation, in that Hegseth really doesn’t have the traditional qualifications to be Secretary of Defense and I am sure he knows that.
At the same time, I will invoke the Utilitarian rationalization in that he may be the best available to accomplish Trump’s goals at DoD — and I am hoping (trusting?) that those goals coincide with what is best for the country. Here I am more sanguine.
On looking more at his record, I do share the concerns mentioned earlier about his lack of command and staff experience — the largest unit he commanded was a platoon, evidently. He does have some NGO leadership experience.
Someone needs to get our Army and its leaders back on track, and I hope he will prove to be the person to do it. As was also mentioned earlier, there may be a number of serving officers who are our traditional military leaders and are simply keeping their heads out of the line of fire. It hasn’t been a good period for non-politically correct officers. Let’s hope that is the case.