Commander and Chief? Really?

Allen Frederick
Unlike past Presidents the current resident of Pennsylvania Avenue seems to think a “weak” America is a better America. In the one area the Constitution bestows power to the President this one could care less. He would rather rewrite the Constitution to give himself powers the founding fathers never intended for the federal government to have.

So as a Commander and Chief he is a failure.

clipped from blog.heritage.org

Assuming we will remain a dominant military power under this President is a bad assumption. Since becoming Commander in Chief, President Obama has ended production of the Air Force’s top fighter, the F-22; canceled missile defense installations in central Europe; cut the Army’s Future Combat System; made large cuts to the missile defense program; and recently announced an almost 20% cut in the dedicated forces they could allocate to respond to a weapons of mass destruction attack on U.S. soil.
We are not burdened with military power—we have it for a reason. The Constitution calls for the federal government to “provide for the common defense.”
His New START agreement signed last week with Russia not only clearly links our missile defense shield with Russian missile reduction, but it also limits our own conventional weapons capabilities as well. Obama’s New START will make the United States more vulnerable.

Discover more from A View from the Nest

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

One thought on “Commander and Chief? Really?”

  1. Pingback: Tweets that mention Commander and Chief? Really? « A View from the Nest -- Topsy.com

Leave a Reply