The first phrase from 'DODbuzz' is not made by the Admirable but by the DODcrud author. A spokesman for the Admirable clarifed the Admirable's intention later so that it reflects the Admirable's recent words below.
DoD Buzz was directly quoting the Admiral about his view on stealth, that's where the comment "Last year in an interview (DODBuzz) admiral Greenert “painted a fairly bleak picture of the value of manned stealthy combat aircraft, which seems like a vote of no confidence for the Joint Strike Fighter program in regards to its effectiveness, utility and need.” came from, it might be their interpretation but it is backed up by what the admiral said as can be checked on this Navy institute website.
Payloads over Platforms: Charting a New Course | U.S. Naval Institute
this was basically his conclusion about the subject of stealth;
Those developments do not herald the end of stealth, but they do show the limits of stealth design in getting platforms close enough to use short-range weapons. Maintaining stealth in the face of new and diverse counterdetection methods would require significantly higher fiscal investments in our next generation of platforms. It is time to consider shifting our focus from platforms that rely solely on stealth to also include concepts for operating farther from adversaries using standoff weapons and unmanned systems—or employing electronic-warfare payloads to confuse or jam threat sensors rather than trying to hide from them.
besides some more interesting stuff was said in the end
while new ship and aircraft classes likely will continue to require more than a decade to join the Fleet. We appear to be reaching the limits of how much a platform’s inherent stealth can affordably get it close enough to survey or attack adversaries. And our fiscal situation will continue to require difficult trade-offs, requiring us to look for new ways to control costs while remaining relevant.
Also again places the comments about the lack of commonality between the A/B/C and its subsequent price implications into perspective, they have now effectively become 3 separate platforms and every single one of them is hampered by the commonality part that remains, maybe scrapping the A and even B might not be a bad idea, the C can than be optimised and used by all services ,just like the F18 works today.
Common hulls and airframes will decrease and stabilize shipbuilding and aircraft construction costs through the learning curve of serial production
Somewhere down the road they seem to have lost their vision about what the JSF was supposed to be, 1 common platform for 3 services became 3 different aircraft designed around 1 common general idea, it sounds the same but is in effect diametrically opposed to the original concept.