Deciding on the Defense Secretary

The Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122636621096215941.html) reported that President-elect Obama is leaning toward keeping Defense Secretary Robert Gates on for at least a year.

Conversely, the anti-war crowd believes doing so would be a "violation of the mandate for change" that Obama represents, as reported in Politico (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15512.html). Their preference is Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), who would likely make a solid bi-partisan choice. Other considerations are former Clinton Navy Secretary Richard Danzig and former Clinton Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre.

It would be a mistake not to retain Gates at least for a year to get the Obama administration up and running. It would "provide for continuity of the Pentagon" (WSJ) and solidify any transitional issues related to dealing with potential terror attacks or crises. There is also bi-partisan support to keep Gates as many notable Democrats support the job Gates has done and that he works as a non-partisan. In addition, both the President-elect and Gates support "deploying more troops to Afghanistan." (WSJ) The responsible plan would be to keep Gates on for a year and then transition to an Obama appointment who can hit the ground running.