White House Still in Denial as Calls for Rumsfeld’s to Resign Increase
by Pamela LeaveyI have this vision in my mind, of Bush standing in the oval office with his hands over his ears, as aides recant the calls for Rumsfeld to resign. Like a spoiled child, he’s shaking his head crying, “La, La, La, La — I can’t hear you!”
The renewed cries for Rumsfeld to step down are the latest in a long line of outcry against Rumsfeld. Just like Bush saying “Brownie, you’re doing a heck of a job,” yesterday, White House spokespuppet Scottie McClellan said at a briefing, “The president believes Secretary Rumsfeld is doing a very fine job during a challenging period in our nation’s history.” Let’s get real here — Donald Rumsfeld is a miserable failure.
Even David Ignatius got into the mix today in his column for the WaPo, saying:
With luck, Iraq will make a fresh start soon with the formation of a new government. The Bush administration should do the same thing by replacing Donald Rumsfeld as defense secretary.
The latest outcry against Rumsfeld comes from now 6 retired generals, all of whom assert that “Mr. Rumsfeld and his aides too often inserted themselves unnecessarily into military decisionmaking, often disregarding advice from military commanders.”
Speaking from experience, Major General Paul D. Eaton, General Anthony C. Zinni, Lieutenant General Gregory Newbold, Major General John Batiste, Major General John Riggs and Major General Charles H. Swannack Jr., call for Rumsfeld’s resignation.
The Bush administration needs to save face by heeding these calls and likewise pay attention to growing opposition from the American public on this unpopular, farce of a war. As John Kerry said on the floor of the Senate last week, “it’s past time for America’s political leaders” to do their job and get us out of Iraq. Firing Donald Rumsfeld is a good start on that process.
NOTE: As both Ron and I pointed out here frequently, John Kerry has been calling for for Rumsfeld to resign since ‘03 and as recently as December ‘o5.
Filed under: In The News, Iraq, OP/ED's, Politics, Republicans | Get Permalink or trackback |
Sometimes I think they didn’t intend to be this obviously bad, but bad enough to allow us to stay. I don’t know how they thought we could lose a steady stream of lives, respect in the world, just to prop up the need for bases, and not have it backfire?
Intended or not Ignatius’s article sounds like getting rid of Rumsfeld will, magically, solve all problems in Iraq, raise Bushco in the polls, elevate America’s standing in the world, and Zeus knows what else. (And then replace him with Lieberman?) Oh, if it were only that simple. You’re right that the more Bush is pushed, the more massive he becomes or, to say it another way the greater his resistance.
Leaving these bums in place makes for great Dem marketing. Unfortunately, it is getting folks needlessly killed.
http://www.CSPAN.com has a link to Col Wilkerson (Ret) who was in the State Dept under Powell. He got fed up over time and quit after abu Ghraib.
I saw the last hour and he made a lot of great points about how really bad Dumbo is dealing with foreign countries (actually is bad dealing with everybody). I am unable to open the link but hopefully it will be available (I don’t have RealOne at work).
Impossible to get through by phone, so e-mailed “The Ed Schultz Show” with a request to inform listeners that JK called for Rumsfeld’s replacement (discussion centered on the subject this afternoon) in Oct. 2003 and Dec. 2005, and kerry.senate.gov has the 2005 speech in its entirety.
Dotti
I think we must have that statement here too – I found this:
http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?page_id=1305
Pamela
I sent another message to “The Ed Schultz Show” updating info re JK’s replacement of Rumsfeld speeches in 2003 and 2005, adding your post info re JK’s appearance on FTN on 12/04/05 covering this topic.
Thanks very much.