Charles Cooke explains at National Review Online why he supports the nomination of Fox News personality Pete Hegseth as the next American defense secretary.
From my perspective, Hegseth is a fine pick. I hope the Senate will agree. …
… [I]t’s rather churlish to describe Hegseth as merely “a guy on TV,” as so many commentators have. He went to Princeton and Harvard. He served in Iraq and Afghanistan, winning two bronze stars in the process. He has experience in private enterprise. He’s been a tireless advocate for veterans — and, better still, he’s been one of those tireless advocate for veterans whom veterans actually like. Sure, he’s now on TV. So is Michael Strahan. That doesn’t tell us much about his past.
As far as I can tell, Hegseth also has the right personal qualities for the role. I am just one voter — and this is just my one view — but, as someone who regularly spent time with Pete a few years ago when we did a TV show together, I will tell happily anyone who will listen that he is a smart, caring, curious, hard-working guy who treated everyone around him with respect. …
… The broader arguments I’ve seen made against the pick do not impress me either. Yes, Hegseth is young. But so what? At 44, he’s just three years younger than Barack Obama was when Obama was elected president, and, frankly, he’s done a lot more with his life thus far than Obama had at that point. Moreover, there may actually be a benefit to his youth. The current Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, is 71. Trump’s first-term pick, Jim Mattis, was 67 when he took the job. Hegseth is thus a lot closer in age to the average deployed American than either of those men — which, given the apparent disconnect between the rank-and-file and the top brass, and the arrival of the worst recruiting crisis “since the creation of the all-volunteer force,” might not be a bad thing.