FILE – In this Aug. 21, 2014, file photo, U.S. Navy Adm. William McRaven, the next chancellor of the University of Texas System, addresses the Texas Board of Regents, in Austin, Texas. McRaven is running into political problems in his role as chancellor of the University of Texas System. The retired Navy admiral who planned the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden faces an uncertain future as chancellor, as his three-year contract expires at the end of 2017. After multiple clashes with lawmakers, and a new makeup of the Board of Regents he works for, it remains an open question as to whether he will be back. McRaven is the second highest paid public university president in the nation making $1.5 million. (AP Photo/Eric Gay, File)

A week ago, retired Admiral William McRaven wrote an op-ed for the New York Times in which he loudly proclaimed that President Trump was a, in his words, danger to the republic.

And if this president doesn’t understand their importance, if this president doesn’t demonstrate the leadership that America needs, both domestically and abroad, then it is time for a new person in the Oval Office — Republican, Democrat or independent — the sooner, the better. The fate of our Republic depends upon it.

I found the piece to be stunning in its historical illiteracy:

We were reminded that the Greatest Generation went to war because it believed that we were the good guys — that wherever there was oppression, tyranny or despotism, America would be there.

Seriously. This is utter bullsh**. The Greatest Generation went to war because it had war brought to it, first by the Japanese at Pearl Harbor and then, a few days later, by a German declaration of war against us. The Greatest Generation fought to kick ass and go home. And, on the way, we turned over half of Europe to the Soviet Union and forcibly repatriated Russians who had fought against the USSR.

And I was also shocked by the hubris and the embrace of the failed, disastrous Responsibility to Protect (R2P) strategy that kicked off a bloodbath in Libya and an international humanitarian nightmare in Syria. Will fathers and mothers be more or less likely to send their sons and (under the aegis of the flag officers of McRaven’s cohort) daughters off to random wars of feel good? Or would they prefer their kid only be put in harm’s way if some easily articulated national security threat is at hand?

But, because OrangeManBad, all he had to do was to write this and he was a hero. Had a flag officer written a similar critique about Obama — and I truly think Obama did an immense amount of damage to our foreign policy and to our domestic politics — he would have been excoriated as some sort of racist.

McRaven’s op ed did not take place in a vacuum. It took place in the context of a presidential contest between an incumbent president so loathed by the left that there is literally no lie they will not tell nor any fable they will not believe about him, and a field of Democrats so weak that they make the Seven Dwarfs of the Democrat 1988 field look like a gathering in the Athenian Acropolis. This is from a Politico story titled ‘Can Any of These People Beat Trump?’ (Watching the Democratic debate with a serious candidate who wasn’t invited to the party and can hardly believe what’s unfolding before his eyes.)

This, Bennet fears, is how Trump might luck into a second term. Oh, sure, the president will continue to scare moderates and independents with his erratic behavior. But Bennet wonders if Democrats might scare them even more—what with talk of seizing guns, banning fracking, guaranteeing health coverage to undocumented immigrants, raising taxes across the board, imposing political litmus tests on churches, and of course, eliminating private insurance for more than 150 million people.

“Just listen to this debate,” Bennet says, motioning toward the television. “Medicare for All shouldn’t even have made it to the debate stage. I mean, we’re a free country, and that’s fine. But of the Democrats who won in 2018, in those suburban districts, all but one person won their primary running on the public option—against candidates who supported Medicare for All. I understand this has been Bernie’s thing forever. But for some of the leading candidates to sign on to his bill gave it legitimacy. It’s just…”

He drifts off, shaking his head.

“We’re going to pick a policy we can’t even unify Democrats around, much less bring in others who could support it from the outside. Which means we’ll wind up fighting a losing battle for that instead of achieving the other stuff,” Bennet adds. “That’s not catering to the people I talk to at town halls; it’s for the people on Twitter and the people on cable news at night.”

As the debate approaches the two-hour mark, Bennet goes silent, gazing emotionlessly at the television for a prolonged stretch. Finally, I ask what’s on his mind. “I’m sitting here thinking, ‘Who can beat Trump?’” he says. “Can any of these people beat Trump?”

The combination of the weakness of the field, OrangeManBad, and the Democrat propensity to swoon and genuflect to anyone if you put enough gold braid, stars, and medals on them gets you this:

Dems are struggling to find a 2020 candidate and different names are being floated.

Elaine Kamarck said retired Admiral William McRaven could be a good candidate to run against @realDonaldTrump.https://t.co/iPiCsBLbpK

— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) October 23, 2019

General Mattis still isn’t speaking out. By Admiral McRaven is. Powerful, important and overdue stuff here. It’s time for the real patriots to stand up. McRaven would make a strong SecDef. Or VP candidate. https://t.co/l1kjdNMv2z

— Paul Rieckhoff (@PaulRieckhoff) October 17, 2019

And it is sort of hard to believe this was not the intended effect of the op ed.

#WilliamMcRaven McRaven iwas once rumored to be a possible VP candidate with Hillary. https://t.co/qWUXfJsYxR pic.twitter.com/8SscA96e8A

— Free (@Highlander64) October 18, 2019

If the Democrats want McRaven, they are entitled to him. For all of his bloviating about values, when he had a chance to actually stand up for something, he folded like a cheap suit. He had the chance to take a stand against a corrupt admissions practice of the University of Texas System, of which he was chancellor, that allowed the lackwit offspring of Texas politicians to get guaranteed enrollment. Instead, he quashed the ongoing investigation. Oh, and he was adamantly opposed to firearms on campus and very much in favor of in-state tuition for illegals. If they think his military resume is going to carry him forward, they are sadly mistaken. Any flag officer, good or bad, is going to carry a lot of baggage and have a lot of detractors with a lot of documentation.

As a friend of mine says on email:

This admixture of loud proclamation of civic virtue with corrupt and unapologetic elite self-dealing is, of course, precisely how we got Trump.

The greater problem is that McRaven has only a tangential attachment to the society he devoted his life to defending. As much as I loved my time in the Army, I’d never claim that running any military organization is remotely as complicated as dealing with a pluralistic society where 40+% of the population will oppose you out of hand, and where no decision is ever quite final.

This is mostly wishcasting and desperation, but the Democrats seem intent upon finding their Man on Horseback to usher in a Progressive Garden of Eden. None of the current field can either mount a horse, or even pick it out of a line up. McRaven just may be their man.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.
Follow @streiffredstate
I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========