Tuesday, November 28, 2006

You Can't Make This Stuff Up ...

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will stay aboard until after Dec. 29, so that he can best Robert McNamara's record of longest-serving Defense Secretary, Newsweek reports, citing an anonymous White House source.

In other words, Rumsfeld's ego may be more important than turning around the mess in Iraq.

Officially, the White House spin is that Robert Gates will be sworn in as Rumsfeld's replacement -- two weeks after his confirmation -- once Gates winds up affairs as president of Texas A&M University.

But as Newsweek reports: "(T)hat's news in College Station, Texas, where Gates has been handing everything over to the man he calls "my strong right arm," the executive vice president and provost, David Pratt."

Gates on Nov. 8 announced he would quit A&M on "completion of the confirmation process and a Senate vote."

13 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

What is so wrong with this? Is this what really drives you nuts? So the man wants to be the longest serving defense secretary.

Should athletes not go after records also? I think your time can be used in a better fashion.

8:50 AM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

tell that to the families of every soldier who died between the time bush first wanted to replace rumsfeld -- but didn't for election-related reasons -- to the time he actually steps down.

it just shows how out of whack the priorities of this "leadership" are.

10:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dunderhead Dumbsfeld will end up like O.J., unable to even secure an interview on FOX News how he would have made mistakes in Iraq, had he made them.
He just wants the prestige of holding onto a high title a few moments longer before that happens.

11:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

it's extremely selfish. I agree with Rob.

1:00 PM  
Anonymous Ditto said...

"Should athletes not go after records also?"

Anonymous 1, if that is your REAL nom deplume, why don't you try out for a sport... like the Army or Marines. There are a lot of idiotic rightwingnuts posting on this blog - but YOU take the Ignorance-Is-Bliss prize. Congrats on your stunningly callous comment. You should be in the big game over in Iraq but I understand there are some minimum cerebral requirements. Put him in coach!

1:16 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

I think it's extremely petty on all of your parts. I agree with the first Anonymous. :P

Besides, some of us actually think that Rumsfeld is an honorable man who did his utmost to serve well. The mission is a very difficult one, and that fact is not going to change.

David R. Mark said...
"In other words, Rumsfeld's ego may be more important than turning around the mess in Iraq."


First off, if this is indeed a "personal gesture to Rumsfeld" on the part of the President, (which I might point out is pure speculation on the part of an anonymous WH source) it's got absolutely nothing to do with "Rumsfeld's ego".

Secondly, it's not as though there is going to be an immediate withdrawal of our troops from Iraq, regardless of who the Sec. of Defense is, so to suggest that staying on another couple of weeks is going to affect anything one way or another, is rather ludicrous.

1:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So Rob, no other soldiers would have died if Rummy resigned earlier? You libs are amazing. You can cure the disabled and protect the soldiers, just by your ideology. You libs dont give a rats fat ass about the soldiers. You need them for your talking points and thats it. You caught on to the fact the spitting on them didnt work in the 60's so now you pretend to support them. Pathetic scum thats what you are.

2:39 PM  
Anonymous Dave G. said...

Anonymous, you're an idiot.

3:08 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

I didn't say "no other soldiers would have died," anonymous. That's just your hyperbolic spin.

But if Rummy had resigned when Bush first wanted -- rather than Bush caring about midterm elections -- then Gates may have already made changes to how we're fighting the war. We might have started working with regional partners. We might have instilled confidence in some of the countries who have subsequently departed the "coalition of the willing" (see above story). A whole host of things may have happened differently.

And yes, that may have meant some troops who did die wouldn't have died.

Here's the thing. In prioritizing, most people would rank it:

1) Winning the war
2) Winning the election
3) Rumsfeld getting the record

It's unconscionable to me that the Bush team wouldn't see things that way.

And sorry, "war is hard" isn't an excuse. Rumsfeld has taken one wrong step after another, starting with predicting the war would last "five days, five weeks, maybe five months," and then not responding to the looting, not listening to Shinsecki on troop size, etc.

By any reasonable measure, the management of this war is horrific -- en par with Vietnam for how badly things have gone. Rumsfeld is the man in charge, and he has to take the brunt of the blame.

3:21 PM  
Anonymous Dave G. said...

Of course he should stay to get this record! I mean, it's not as if he's overseeing a complete disaster of a war in the most incompetent, brain-dead way possible! Oh, wait.

4:21 PM  
Blogger thewaronterrible said...

"You libs dont give a rats fat ass about the soldiers. You need them for your talking points and thats it."

On the contrary, everything we've been advocating is precisely because we do care about the welfare of the soldiers.

We believe the soldiers are being kept in Iraq largely as mere political pawns, to help the Bush Administration save face in its' failed war, that is one reason why we think they should start coming home.

We believe Rumsfeld's incompetent leadership has only acted to jeopardize the lives of the soldiers since from the very beginning of the conflict, that is why we've been advocating for a replacement for Rumsfeld.

We have for one stood up for the soldiers when Rumsfeld sharply rebuked them for complaining about being supplied with inadquate body armor.

We have also acted to stop the Bush Administration and the Republicans in congress from cutting U.S. military veteran's pension and healthcare benefits.

Want more?

4:23 PM  
Blogger LoudMouthBitch said...

You can't fix stupid.
If does not understand what this administration is doing, then we couldn't explain it to him/her with graphs and a Powerpoint.
I love the way these right wing nut jobs rant with the best of them and then hide behind ANONYMOUS.
Have the courage of your convictions.
Have you, Dear Anonymous, ever read The Constitution? Do you have any idea what the Bill Of Rights is?
But I digress...
Rumsfeld has too many good people around him to have this disaster that is Iraq. He is an egoist who refuses to listen to anyone... and for him to stay a second longer than he has to is a travesty -
PERIOD.

8:40 PM  
Blogger thewaronterrible said...

"Besides, some of us actually think that Rumsfeld is an honorable man who did his utmost to serve well. The mission is a very difficult one, and that fact is not going to change."

When did conservatives start championing delusional losers and failures whose incompetence has resulted in the death and suffering of so many?

Did they always have this condition, or was it brought upon as a result of the shock of finally opening the curtain to find Bush pulling levers and strings?

11:36 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares