Must be genetic. Robert Farley takes on Victor Davis Hanson, reference his take on “That 70s President” Jimmy Carter:

“VDH is half right; Desert One really was the Waterloo of the Carter presidency and, had it succeeded, Carter would probably have won the 1980 election and we’d have a different America. At least part of the blame for the failure of the operation must be laid at Carter’s feet, although a more sensible commentator than Hanson would probably have noted that infighting and poor planning within the uniformed services also contributed to the disaster. VDH also has the chutzpah to call Carter “historically ignorant”, a fascinating charge coming from a man whose grasp even on his specialty is tenuous, and the bulk of whose professional career has been an (often successful) effort to make Americans MORE ignorant of the history of military affairs.

The big lie here, though, is “gutting of the military.” The idea that Jimmy Carter gutted the military strength of the United States lives only in the fantasies of the most ignorant of wingnuts; US military spending bottomed out in fiscal years 1976 and 1977, both of which were on the watch of Gerald Ford. Under Carter, military spending went up in FY 1979, 1980, and 1981. It’s worse than that, even, because the high budgets of the early 1970s had a lot to do with the end in Vietnam and the cycling down of military effort in Southeast Asia. As people who take the time to learn about United States military policy know, the military build-up of the Reagan years began in the second half of Jimmy Carter’s term. If you don’t believe me, take a look at the numbers.”

I love when someone brings ignorance in a lame attempt to correct ignorance. First, even IF Desert One were successful, a logical impossibility given the half assed support it was given, Carter didn’t have a chance in ’80. Note the clueless, “Carter Sucked”, and by that time of double digit interest rates and gas lines, people had it with the peanut farmer with lust in his heart. A “different America”….yeah, like Castro would have ended up Secretary of State.

But on the military spending – of which I was intimately connected – Carter specifically sucked. Forget the numbers, the devil is in the details and I could go on and on about military logistic shortages worldwide during his tenure. Raw defense spending numbers don’t tell the story, what you bought for it does. In comparison to GDP during the years 77-79 defense spending didn’t rise, it actually fell. Where it rose was in personnel and entitilements (16.5 percent payraise to elisted members to catch up with spiraling inflation).

Which again brings to mind reasons 4,5,and 6 why Democrats like Carter suck at National Security, Carter’s actions especially egregious here:

“President Carter (4) also stopped B-1 bomber production, (5) gave away our strategically located Panama Canal and (6) made human rights the central focus of his foreign policy.

And of course reason 20:

“Carter, after nearly six months, (20) belatedly attempted a poorly executed rescue with only six Navy helicopters (three were lost or disabled in sandstorms) and Air Force planes with Delta Force commandos. The mission was aborted, but foul-ups on the ground resulted in a loss of eight aircraft, five airman and three Marines. The bungled plan was never put down on paper for the Joint Chiefs to evaluate. There were practice sessions, but no full dress rehearsal, and pilots weren’t allowed to meet with their weather forecasters because someone in authority worried about security.

This is particular interest for me as some of those lost were friends of mine.

But to Democrats, ignorance is “Bliss”, so let them bliss on.