Qualified to Serve

Blog Post
Should a US President have military service as a qualification for the office?
I’m not asking about the Constitutional requirements because those are a matter of law and military service is not a qualification. I’m positing the question for the purpose of discussion. Is military service desirable in a president?
Let’s look at a few:
Barack Obama – no service
George W. Bush, Texas Air National Guard, First Lieutanant
Bill Clinton – no service
George H. W. Bush, Navy, Lieutenant, Combat, World War 2 (combat)
Ronald Reagan, Army Air Corps, Captain, World War 2
Jimmy Carter, Navy, Lieutenant
Gerald Ford, Navy Lieutenant Commander, World War 2 (combat)
Richard Nixon, Navy, Commander, World War 2
Lindon B. Johnson, Navy, Commander (combat)
John F. Kennedy, Navy, Lieutenant (combat)
Dwight D. Eisenhower, Army, General of the Army 
Harry S. Truman, Army, Colonel

You can pick out your favorites. The two biggest losers in recent memory are Barack Obama (no military service) and Jimmy Carter (US Naval Academy graduate). Jimmy Carter didn’t seem to be ready for the job. Barack Obama had/has an axe to grind against America as the first post-American president and he’s grinding the axe. Obama couldn’t have passed a security background investigation on the basis of past homosexuality, personal friendship with terrorists, affiliation with communists, inability to account for his whereabouts during prolonged periods in his life and drug use (though today since he’s been president, homosexuality is no longer a factor in the US Military).
Perhaps the more appropriate question is whether or not the president could hold a security clearance if they were not president?

10 thoughts on “Qualified to Serve

  1. Yep – a clearance should be part of the vetting process, without exception.

  2. Yep, security clearance and the ability to run a profitable popsicle stand are a plus.

  3. I don't think that there is anyone in Chicago government (home of the One) who could run an HONEST popsicle stand. The could only run one at a profit if they stole the popsicles that they sold.

  4. It would actually eliminate quite a number of (primarily Democratic Party faithful) candidates.

  5. Carter basically ripped the taxpayers off. He went to the Naval Academy on our dime, them spent the next four years training to to sea in submarines, but never actually set foot on a boat before his term expired and he left the service. What did we get for that?

    Oh yeah…gas lines, 18% interest rates, and an embassy in Iran taken by force and held for over a year.

    Elections have consequences. It's a damned shame that so many Democrats are unable or unwilling to choose wisely.

  6. Nothing can replace military experience. It should be a requirement for a prospective president.

  7. I think that it should also be a qualification for Congress. You should experience what it's like before you declare war and send people out there to die.

    All to often, the wars we've gleefully embraced haven't amounted to a hill of beans. And a lot of beloved family members have been chopped to pieces because of hubris from people who never "saw the elephant".

  8. Unintended consequences….

    Unfortunately, it would not make better for politicians, it would make a weaker military. Seriously, like our schools, there will be more useless administrative positions created, more officers who shouldn't be.

Comments are closed.

Scroll to top