Why is the left so obsessed with Donald Rumsfeld, and why are Republicans, too?
What a delicious topic. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumself is every American's man. He's not the Number 1 dog in the pack; no, no, that title belongs to President Bush; and the lefties lost in that attack. So why Mr. Rumsfeld? Well, yes, he does oversee our troops. And we know the left "hates" war. So why are the waging war on Mr. Rumsfeld? Politically, this is classic playbook - to pick off the leadership chain surrounding President Bush.
Mr. Rumsfeld is the embodiment of American maleness. The lefties when not directly attacking Mr. Rumself then screech like harpy feminists about the way "he says things". The left's usual attack is "sexist, racist, homophobic, anti-female, raging white male". The only thing true about Mr. Rumsfeld is that he is a white male. So, other tactics must be the order of the day.
And, Mr. Rumsfeld will stand against each charge, and perfectly. Mr. Rumsfeld embodies some characteristics, mannerisms, and responses which remind me of past President Reagan. Mr. Rumsfeld is always positive. And he always has an excellent and most times humorous reposte which he presents on the fly, and without never missing a step in the direction he is headed.
So, Republicans joining in the "question" Rumsfeld dodge ball game? What a hoot! "Gee, sorry, Dems, we couldn't get him either!". lol! "Work with us on these other issues...."
The White House and key Republicans in Congress strongly back Rumsfeld. And I concur with their strong back: Donald Rumsfeld is doing a spectacular job.
Let me be clear -- these snitty snipe attacks on Mr. Rumsfeld anger me; as these are clearly designed to distract him from his duties. A bunch of spoiled, elitist, pampered adult children have too much time on their hands -- obviously -- if going after Rumsfeld is their ice cream social of the day.
I think you are wonderful, Mr. Rumself; and doing a wonderful job. Ignore the creepy, whining voices as far as you can. "Help is on the way" -- and I do mean the "good" help.
Joe Biden says he's tired of talking about Rumsfeld but: "The only thing that bothers me about it is this arrogance of not acknowledging obvious mistakes."
Coming from Joe Biden? This assertion is a killer laugh track.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
It's a real thorn in the side, listening to all this BS, yes Alia? I agree, the continued assault on Rumsfeld is beyond annoying.
However, I believe that Tim Russert had it right. I am referring to his commentary on the same MTP show where you garnished the Biden quote.
Russert, other MSM talk jocks, and Congressmen and women are all fired up on that "admit your mistakes" gratuity. I have yet to figure out what is it's import? To verbally "admit" and show humility? Or to just take errors in stride and correct them as they come along?
I can't resist this side commentary. If admitting mistakes is the key to moving on, then it should start with Congress themselves. No one is more responsible than they on the subject of body armor, holding up delivery with the sheer inefficiency of the bureaucratic approval and requisition process. In fact, you can also hold Congress responsible for the lack of intel that would have prevented 9:11.
Do you hear them apologizing for their "mistakes"? But noooooooo....
But to get back on track: Here's Russert's take, and I agree. The "diss-appointment" of Rumsfeld would pander to all the critics: "Yep... the Iraqi war was bungled beyond belief and here is our sacrificial lamb". It's all they can get.
They can't change the course of the war, nor the decisions. And most of all, they can't claim any part of the success for Iraq once they achieve their success for self-gov't.
The critics have been nothing more than a speed bump in Bush's strategy in the WoT. The head of Rumsfeld on a plate is all they can demand, and use as an "admittance" of failure. In this case, that altho success may happen, that it wasn't done "good enough".
Frankly, I agree with Bus, you and other pro-Rumsfeld types. The flaws of the Iraqi war strategy are no more appalling than the strategic errors in other historic wars. Thus I see no reason for Rumsfeld to leave on his performance.
Nor do I think a Presidential appointee should be bullied out of office by the MSM and not-without-blame Congressional members.
If the left is looking for "perfect", they'd have to hire God. But to do that, first they'd have to acknowledge the divine existance without the apologies to non-believers... and that isn't going to happen either.
But, ya know, by all the accounts of the last election, we can see that the American voter seems to be well informed via other media. It makes a body wonder who's listening to their blustering anymore?
You are right, Mata. Especially with regard to congress -- and their -- outright hyporcrisy. I see where Charlie Rangel is calling for Mr. Rumsfeld's dismissal this morning. All I have to do to is see Charlie Rangel's name anywhere and I see "off-with-his-head, Charlie". Does this guy actually work? Did Charlie Rangel ever come clean, anywhere, to anyone that he was responsible for the "draft" rumors? That it was he who wrote legislations to bring back the draft? That the source of teen-terror in this regard was good ole' gravel-voiced Charlie? Who's he think he is? The StarKist Tuna?
I was glad to see President Bush backing Rumsfeld. From my own corner of the world, I believe in Rumsfeld, and I've witnessed him doing a terrific job.
Lastly, I *HAVE* read where Mr. Rumsfeld has apologized for this, that, and the other - over the years, when it was warranted. In this particular case, an apology was NOT warranted as the Lib Bullies in MSM took Mr. Rumsfeld sentence out of context.
Libs live in the domain of emotional manipulations: They know that if you can get a person to apologize for something he hasn't done; he'll apologize for anything.
They are not winning this one. But they hope if they can do enough of these coups.. they'll collectively add up, and they can take down Rumsfeld by the sheer weight of the "bag of innuendo".
Libs don't realize... they are dealing with a whole man. Ergo, their plot will not work. Now, then if Rumsfeld were a judicial nominee pick, then, but only then, does their ploy work but only because they are emboldened by their "very task" set in process of "reviewing" judicial nominee picks -- meaning, the "weight of law" (gravitas). But to take down someone cold, as they are trying to do with Rumsfeld? Ends up as "snow flurries": In yer face, and gone; nowhere to be found.
One More: Wesley Pruden: The moving finger must write, in ink
(http://www.washtimes.com/national/pruden.htm)
In re: Condolence Letters and the sniping by liberals.
Excellent column perfectly summed up by Mr. Pruden (facetiously, no less!): "All the man needs, obviously, is a little polish and a bottle of ink."
ROFLMAO!
Post a Comment