Another one knocked out of the Park!!
These Conservative fellas around here ain't used to this PN. But hey! If they keep setting them up, keep on knocking em down.
Set the record straight? I don't think so. The things you list are pro forma events that would be expected of ANY administration.
The President who has done more for the military in the last 30 years is Ronald Reagan. It isn't even close. Here's an outline of the accomplishments of the Reagan administration - as they relate to the military and how they impacted the U.S. economy as a whole, from our friends at u-s-history.com:
"The late 1970s had witnessed the triumph of Marxist governments in Angola and Nicaragua. El Salvador seemed ready to follow suit. The U.S. had been humiliated by the outcome of the Vietnam War (1975), and the Soviets seemed secure in their unrelenting mission to conquer Afghanistan.
Islamic fundamentalists had come to power in Iran. They had captured 52 embassy Americans as hostages, and the Jimmy Carter administration had made a bitterly unsuccessful attempt to rescue them.
As a result of Carter Administration policies, the American military was plagued by low morale, low pay, outdated equipment, and practically zero maintenance on what did exist. Important U.S. military personnel were not reenlisting; it just wasn't worth it to them. In fact, thousands of enlisted men's families survived on food stamps.
The U.S. economy was struggling, burdened by seemingly unstoppable inflation. High tax increases and an upward spiral of interest rates were an everyday occurrence for Americans. The United States seemed in an era of limits; the country seemed to be running out of oil, and in practice, U.S. foreign policy had adopted a stance of co-existence with the Soviet Union and China.
In 1980, the American electorate shooed in a leader with an eye toward countering domestic social changes wrought by Civil Rights and Affirmative Action programs and military superiority and a new sense of political direction. Ronald Reagan was inaugurated the 40th president of the United States in 1981.
Defense secretary Caspar Weinberger was the new president's right-hand man throughout his mission to build up a massive military to wear down the Soviets in what would be the final years of the Cold War. Reagan's administration revived the B-1 bomber program, which had been canceled by the Carter Administration, and began production of the MX Peacekeeper missile. Reagan's response to Soviet deployment of the SS-20 missile was his approval of NATO's deployment of the Pershing II missile in West Germany, despite much protest.
By the time Reagan stepped down from the helm, he had expanded the U.S. military budget to a staggering 43% increase over the total expenditure during the height of the Vietnam war. That meant the increase of tens of thousands of troops, more weapons and equipment, not to mention a beefed-up intelligence program."
"The Reagan administration managed to keep America out of a major war for nearly a decade — but with several scary nuclear close calls. Much of the nation's current firepower is a legacy of the Reagan years.
The Soviet Union began to crumble in 1989 with the toppling of the Berlin Wall. America had emerged triumphant and the Cold War was officially ended in 1990."
While the above is just history, unless you have walked the walk you have no idea of the tremendous positive impact on soldier morale and the overall well-being of the military that Reagan had on the troops and their leadership. He is clearly seen by those who have "been there" as the finest Commander-in-Chief since FDR.
As far as the laundry list of things you cite. I'll just use Fort Stewart as an example. Unless you worked on post in the 1980s and 1990s, you have no idea how sorry the facilities were. While they had huge firing ranges and expensive weaponry, things that actually TOOK CARE OF SOLDIERS were so substandard that they were the object of derision Army-wide. The solution? George W. Bush. Dubya was the best thing that ever happened to the soldier and family facilities at Fort Stewart. Hundreds of millions of dollars were pumped in here to create the first-class buildings (and even average facilities) because the money was appropriated in Dubya's - A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT'S - budget. Dubya was helped by 9/11, but the fact of the matter is that HE DID IT and he didn't have to.
When I was on active duty, there was a tremendous sense of pride in our Commander-in-Chief when Reagan and the Bushes were President. Why? Because not only did they say they were our friend, BUT THEY BACKED IT UP BY GIVING US WHAT WAS NECESSARY TO DO OUR JOBS. They treated us like we were important - not just because we were the instruments of their national policy, but because we were people who were deserving of respect. They also treated the military culture with respect.
Quite frankly Carter and Clinton were an embarrassment as Commander-in-Chief. Carter should have done better because he had active service, but he just bumbled and fumbled his way along. Clinton came into office with a "loathing of the military" on his record, and his appointment of Les Aspin as Secretary of Defense showed us what he thought of us. Clinton was useless as Commander-in-Chief. I give him higher marks for working with Republicans in Congress to get our fiscal house on the right path.
The entire record hasn't been written on Obama yet, but I've seen little to distinguish him from any of the Democrat Presidents since FDR. The fact of the matter is that the purpose of the military is war-fighting. Anything that subtracts or distracts from that goal is counter-productive. Period. From Republican presidents, we have gotten straightforward mission, personnel and personal support. From Democrat presidents, we have gotten subtraction and distraction.
There are many reasons why I am anti-Democrat, but one of the biggest is how they treated me and my fellow soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines when I was on active duty. For that, I neither forgive nor forget.
I need not tell you Sebe, but holding on to negativity is not good for you.
However, per my man Funks comment: I give your exuberantly verbose response, a bizzaro world fielder's choice.
Thanks, Funky. And Jimmy - I don't have to worry about "holding on to negativity" when the Democrats keep dealing it to WE THE PEOPLE every day. I'm trying to get rid of negativity. The only way to do that is to THROW THE BUMS OUT.
I can see that! Not that I am sounding the retreat, but...sebe....should I, JimmyMack, EVER do anything that even comes close to your feelings to the DEMS and not being in a forgive or forget mode, will you at least afford me the opportunity to explain myself as I am not in shape for a carpet bombing attack like the one happening here.
For the record: I am staying wid my team til the final votes are counted tho. No matter which side prevails in the end. Yellow dawg til the end.
Jimmy: this may seem bizarre, but when I say "Dems" I almost 100% of the time mean the elected politicians who wear the moniker of the Democratic party - and NOT Democratic voters or constituencies. I hold the party LEADERSHIP responsible for their policies and their philosophy - despite the fact that in many cases it is their constituencies who shape party policies. Voters and constituencies have needs, desires and problems, but it is up to the elected representatives to come up with answers/solutions in a way that balances the solutions with the wellness of our society as a whole.
I'm still hoping that you decide to become a BLUE dawg.
And speaking of our military having to watch their backs when there's a Democrat administration in power, here's another recent example. They even cite the need to "watch...their backs" and being worried about being "stab(bed)....in the back." The subjects of this article are Navy Seals - who obviously feel like used prophylactics when it comes to treatment they have received from and at the direction of the Obama administration: