If I'm president, I'll be a commander-in-chief, not an agitator- in-chief or a divider-in-chief, that I will lead this country in a way that will create greater security and greater safety.
There's a false narrative that only the political class has the wisdom and the ability to be commander-in- chief. But if you go back and you study the design of our country, it was really designed for the citizen statesman.
The judgment that every voter is making of every one of us [running for presidency] who has the experience, who has the vision, who has the judgment to be commander in chief. That is the most important decision for the voters to make. That's a standard I'm held to. And it's a standard everyone else is held to.
Every parent is wondering, how do we keep our kids safe? We need a commander in chief who does what Ronald Reagan did with communism, which is he set out a global strategy to defeat Soviet communism.
I can tell you is all nine of the people here [on debates] would make an infinitely better commander in chief than Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.
ISIS and Iran have declared war on America, and we need a commander in chief who will do everything necessary to keep our children safe.
The most important Bible teaching that I remembered when I was in the Navy and when I was Commander-in-Chief, was that we worshipped The Prince of Peace. Jesus Christ is The Prince of Peace. So, I considered myself, as a submarine officer, as helping to preserve the peace. And I felt the same way when I was president.
During the debate, Palin winked, wrinkled her nose, and gave a shout-out to a third-grade class. Well, you know, that says commander-in-chief to me right there. You betcha!
If Barack Obama cannot appreciate that our troops are winning in Iraq, he should not be their Commander in Chief.
On the other side, you have the conservative intelligentsia - magazines like National Review, which has a big anti-Trump issue; Weekly Standard editor, conservative talk show hosts - they're mounting a big anti-Trump effort, pro-Cruz effort because they think [Donald] Trump is dangerous and he's not qualified to be commander in chief.
Essentially Rumsfeld wins, Cheney wins, and the CIA and State Department lose. Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld have more centralized control over intelligence, analysis, and operations than ever before. And the way they interpret the law, if the President authorizes an intelligence mission to be run covertly by the Pentagon, they don't have to tell anybody, including Congress, about it because the President is the commander in chief.
Well, the most important thing a president will be is commander-in-chief. And that requires having an understanding of the complex issues on foreign policy. Foreign policy presents us often with hard choices, not black or white choices.
Barack Obama's a terrible commander-in-chief. He is gutting our military. It's not an exaggeration.
When you're the commander in chief, you're the commander in chief on day one. You don't get like a six-month grace period. The world doesn't just stop and say, well, let's wait until the president catches up before we start challenging America.
Donald Trump is great at the one-liners, but he's a chaos candidate and he'd be a chaos president. He would not be the commander in chief we need to keep our country safe.
Through my time in the military and my deployments, I have recognized the importance of having a Commander in Chief who will not only go after those who threaten the safety and security of the American people, but who will also exercise good judgment and foresight in stopping these failed interventionist wars of regime change that have cost our country so much in human lives, untold suffering, and trillions of dollars.
Donald Trump is temperamentally unfit to be president and commander-in-chief.
The president [Barack Obama] himself has said he thought part of his job was to remind the American people that being president and commander in chief is a serious responsibility.
We cannot promote someone to Commander-in-Chief who has made the world a more violent and dangerous place with every bad judgment Hillary Clinton has made.
I call George W. Bush a radical because he is undertaking a fundamental transformation of our Constitutional system of government and of our longstanding policies that have been accepted for literally generations. He thinks to concentrate unaccountable power in the Executive. He thinks you alter the laws so that, as Commander in Chief, he can determine, under what he says are wartime conditions, what the laws are, which laws should be enforced, and declare by fiat what our policy should be, even abrogating longstanding international treaties.
The issues that I think matter, that I think resonate with the voters are, No. 1, defending our freedoms, defending the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. No. 2, lifting the boot of Washington off of the back of the necks of small businesses so that people can have jobs again, wages can come back again, fighting for the working class, you are getting hammered by Washington. And, No. 3, keeping this country safe, a strong commander in chief we can trust to keep us safe. That's what I'm looking for.
I think it is appropriate when you look at the test that you have to meet to be commander-in-chief for Americans to be thoughtful about, you know, who has the experience and the approach that is best likely to work.
Donald Trump poses a serious threat to America, based on what he has said. He is unqualified to be president and he is unfit temperamentally to be commander-in-chief.
The only sin I think a commander in chief can make is exaggerating successes and not understanding the challenges.
The word 'hero' has been bandied about a lot to refer to anyone killed in Afghanistan or Iraq. But anyone who voluntarily goes to Afghanistan or Iraq [as a soldier] is fighting for an evil cause under an evil commander in chief.
Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends
or simply: