November 8, 2006
Republican Rumors: Rumsfeld Resigning!
Republicans are telling the A.P. that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will be resigning. So, all it took was the Democrats winning the House and possibly the Senate.
The NY Times headlines it "Rumsfeld Resigns as Defense Secretary After Big Election Gains for Democrats." President Bush will replace Rumsfeld with Robert Gates, the current Texas A&M president who clocked in 26 years at the CIA and National Security Council.
And at this point, Montana has gone to Jon Tester, ousting Republican Senator Conrad Burns. Virginia's Senate returns are still too close to call, as the power for the Senate hangs in the balance.
|
Advertisement: Gothamist Continues Below!
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa
assholes! all of them!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahaha
Actually, I think it had to do more with a huge push in the military community to get rid of him and their unhappiness with the presidency in terms of the war in iraq - http://www.slate.com/id/2152981/
(but its still great)
listening to Bush get all touchy when asked why he said Rumsfeld wasn't leaving when obviously he had to have planned this was sweeeeet
What an colossal embarrassment that this guy is our President. To paraphrase:
"Somewhere along the line, the American people got the idea that our strategy in Iraq was to 'stay the course.' I probably need to do a better job of communicating that 'stay the course' doesn't mean to stay stuck on one strategy. We're constantly changing our strategy."
Gee, wonder where they got that idea. Or that terminology.
"This was a close election."
Yeah, real close.
Hopefully the resigning trend will continue up the chain of command.
Get the hell out Rumi! Take Condi with you.
He knew nothing about the armed forces when he became secretary of defense. He knows nothing now.
He had no business being in such a critcal, sensitive position.
He is the rason so many young men are dead. Dictator!
Listening live on NPR to the new children's story character: Querulous George.
Bush just announced Robert Gates, former CIA Chief will replace Rumsfeld.
Aren't they replace an Ex CIA guy with another Ex CIA guy?
I wonder where Nola and the rest of the douchebag brigade are. No sniping comments from them in a while.
"That's why our [armed services] enlistment rates are high."
Ummmm...WHAT?
Love the shot he took on Karl Rove. "Obviously I worked harder on the mid-term election campaign than he did."
it's like a dream. Like a dream, it's so impressive, I can't believe it is actually happening. I mean, the house, the senate, and Rummy takes a walk?! Man, I just wonder if i'm about to wake up, or if "The Current Administration" is going to send a LOUD "wake up" of their own, before the other foot really drops... But from where i'm sitting? This is the best day America has seen since the night BEFORE that stolen election back in 2000. Rummy, you won't be missed, and I continue to pray that you are on deck for a few severe war-crimes charges of your own now. GOOD RIDDANCE, it'll be nice to see you up there on the podium with Sadaam. Side by side, holding hands.
You mean hr, jmchez and some other Chineeeeee guy?
Look up an immigrant post and you'll see the posse.
This happened now for three reasons:
1. Mounting pressure on Rumsfeld to resign, from even within the military.
That's a minor one, relatively. Had the Republicans kept the House (and possibly the Senate) it might not have mattered what kind of criticism was lobbied at Rummy.
More important were the political considerations:
2. Resigning now means Rumsfeld won't have to face investigations under a Democratic Congress come January. He might be called in to testify, but at least not as the acting Sec. of Defense.
3. By accepting Rummy's resignation now, Bush can nominate someone before the next Congress takes office, lessening the need for him to pick someone more palatable to the Dems.
2+ years
2 thousand+ lives
2 late.
(But, better late than never.)
My God..!
What’s that wonderful feeling..?
We live in a democracy again..!
Don't celebrate yet. His successor was likely involved in the Iran/Contra scandal.
What’s that wonderful feeling..?
We live in a democracy again..!
Don't worry. Pelosi will overreach and mess everything up. Get ready for two years of gridlock.
And thinking that anything short of leaders that you agree with 100% is not Democracy is missing the point entirely.
And thinking that anything short of leaders that you agree with 100% is not Democracy is missing the point entirely.
Thanks for telling me how I think stock market boy..!
Now stop wasting your time blogging at work, and get busy on more ideas on how to rob elderly Americans out of their retirement savings.....
It doesn't matter. the damage is done. It's like telling a kid not to drink out of a well because it's poisoned but the kid does anyway. We've all been poisoned and we'll only slow the process.
gridlock? i dont think so. the dems have full control of the house, and it's looking like they will have the senate too. get ready for two years of asskicking. and, you nincompoop, the reason why the past 6 years have been falling short of democracy is because the goons had control of every branch of government. the "president" had free reign from a rubber stamp congress.if he even tries to veto constantly, he will only hurt the gop's chances in '08 so basically, they are fucked, for now. and thats a good thing for our democracy.
Yahooo..!
I can't help but feel sour about this. Of course I'm glad he's resigned, but this feels planned to me, to avoid disgrace and responsibility. I can't put my finger on why I feel this way, all I can say is that intuitively I feel like this is for Rumsfeld's protection, and by extension Bush's. He'll step down without any official damage to his reputation and all asses will be covered, as has been the norm in this administration.
But, that said, perhaps now there will be some forward movement in the Middle East. It's just hard for me to dare to hope at all.
I have to admit, there is a bittersweet taste in my mouth with a unique Pelosi-like flavor.
Still, it's worth it.
I don't expect a president who will think like me 100% of the time, but I expect one with at least a minimal familiarity with reality and one who has a fighting chance of forming a complete sentence now and again. Even a complete thought would be nice from this ignoramus.
"Liberals" are far less party- and label-oriented than Republicans, proof of which is a city as traditionally liberal as NYC repeatedly electing Republican mayors.
Thank you, Whatup, for the Slate link.
The armed services publications asking for Rummy's resignation had a profound effect on what Republicans-turned-Democrats thought, and probably on how they acted on Tuesday.
The impending publication of that letter was a big conversation topic in some houses in the red states last weekend.
Get ready for two years of gridlock.
Silly stock market boy doesn't know his history. Before the Republican Devolution of 1994, Congress was less partisan than it is now, and members tended to work with each other across the aisle.
Which isn't to say that Democrats won't follow the GOP strategy of shutting out the opposition and sandbagging the president, but to suggest, sight unseen, that a Democratic congress would cause gridlock is complete, utter dumbfuckery.
The United States was never a democracy. It is a republic. If we had a democracy, we would most likely not be in this bloody mess.
: s (#'s 14,21) Good points.
There is so much damage that has been done, it will take eight additional years to get the economy to maintain some stability. The war helped they economy. What will replace to war to stablize the economy
It is time to wheel and deal. Rumi is out because the white house is trying to meet their agenda. Rumi was a bargining chip.
Typical liberal retorts. You can't make a coherent point so you attack me personally. Sad, really. Also sad is that you're all such simpletons that you assume anyone that doesn't believe everything you do must be an evil Republican. That's the kind of thinking that's going to get the Democrats into immediate trouble. The Democrats only ran an anti-Bush campaign but now they think everyone voted for their "platform". I am not a registered Republican nor have I voted for a Republican candidate other than Bloomberg in the last decade.
And yes, there will be gridlock. Pelosi is drunk on power and the idea that she'll work across party lines is laughable. The House may pass bills but they'll have a tough time reconciling them with the Senate. Plus there is the threat of veto. I'd say it looks a lot like the Clinton years when almost nothing of any consequence was done. And the stock market does indeed like when no new regulations are passed.
Both parties are really just going to wait it out until January 2009 to try anything major on the legislative front.
Ooh, "liberal"! Such a dirty word. Leaves such an icky feeling, just saying it, doesn't it? I got a huge kick out of all the conservative talking heads droning on and on about how Pelosi's an "extreme liberal." My god, what next? Will she outlaw secret tribunals and wiretapping? Will she disapprove of robocalling and telling blacks they can't vote? Will she investigate war profiteering?
Shamless l-l-li-li-LIBRUL!!!
If pelosi's drunk with power, I want what she's drinking.
I can't wait to hear real concerns, National healthcare, not a telephone book sized type medicare part D, Raise in the Minimum wage, Money for Schools, Tax credits for the middle class, reverse the new bankruptcy rules, and get rid of Sallie mae's sweetheart deals.
Thus avoiding taking an entire administration down with him at the hearings and freeing him up to sell arms to South Korea. Pic of him shaking hands with Kim Jong-il in 3, 2, 1...
There is so much damage that has been done, it will take eight additional years to get the economy to maintain some stability. The war helped they economy. What will replace to war to stablize the economy
What's wrong with the economy exactly?
tax credits for the middle class
don't hold your breath. Middle class to the democrats is making $40,000 a year. Anything more and you're "wealthy". And "credits" will be offset by rate hikes.
Remember in 2000 when they said raising the IRA contribution above $2000 a year was a "boon for the wealthy". As if the wealthy get rich socking away two grand a year.
Oh yeah, they were wire tapping and reading your email when Clinton was president.
then Whoopie for me, I make less than 40k.
So when does the war crimes trial start? I hope they sell tickets, I wouldn't miss that for the world.
I think we all want some form of national healthcare but the Democrats have offered no real vision of how to provide it. So I guess we wait. Seeing as how Americans spend twice as much on healthcare as other Western countries it doesn't seem that piling on more insurance is anything but a short term fix. Also there was an MIT study that says insurance is the main driver behind cost increases because doctors and hospital buy new equipment and run tests because they know it will be paid for. So it would seem the only long term fix is rationing.
You can mock Medicare D all you want but the Democrats were in favor of some drug plan for the elderly.
stocks r us Said:
"And yes, there will be gridlock. Pelosi is drunk on power and the idea that she'll work across party lines is laughable. The House may pass bills but they'll have a tough time reconciling them with the Senate. Plus there is the threat of veto. I'd say it looks a lot like the Clinton years when almost nothing of any consequence was done. And the stock market does indeed like when no new regulations are passed.
Both parties are really just going to wait it out until January 2009 to try anything major on the legislative front."
This isn't a Personal attack so do try not to go Over board.
Your expecting her and the Democrats to be the Radical Left just like the GOP has been the Radical Right for at least 6 years. I'd bet that She and the Democrats will be the Moderates that the Public seems to want.
As for the Stock Market, it's hardly the economic indicator it once was. Traders may be making the big bucks, but it hardly trickles down to the rest of the Economy any more.
Now that Bush's blank check is gone, I do hope that something is done about the bogus rationale that caused us to go to war in Iraq. It seems disloyal to the 3,000+ servicemen and women who've died over there to not do so.
This is a wonderful day!
So when does the war crimes trial start? I hope they sell tickets, I wouldn't miss that for the world.
I wish, but it'll never happen.
"Liberals" are far less party- and label-oriented than Republicans.
Riiight, did you type that with a straight face. They certainly don't throw around Neocon or Fascist with reckless abandon.
Also, Newsflash folks. If you live in New York City, the Democratic party probably doesn't consider you middle class.
Gridlock? Bring it on!
If only we had had gridlock for the past six years. Then there might not have been a terrible war, mounting deficits, out of control spending, the suspension of habeas corpus.
Gridlock in the face of reckless spending and out of control leadership is a good thing.
Don't be afraid of a Senate and House that are completely at odds with the White House. A gridlocked Congress is better than one with a rubber stamp.
Kill the Republicans !!
Kill, Kill, get em…!
Queue the mob with torches and pitchforks…..
Tom, I meant with regard to voting.
I wonder if there is a study on what % of registered Dems vote straight down the party ticket vs. the % of registered Reps that do.
I wont knock the decision to get rid of Rummy, and I'm no fan of the administration but...
People seem to be confused about what Rumsfeld's job actually is and what the Pentagon actually does. People are blaming Rumsfeld for problems running the war, but operations in Iraq aren't run by Rumsfeld. They aren't even run by the Pentagon! They are run by CENTCOM in Tampa, FL.
Since the reorganization in the early 1990s, combat operations are run through the Unified Combatand Commands, by a 4 star general or admiral who is ultimately responsible for the combat operations in his or her geographical area and reports directly to the Commander In Chief. The SECDEF, at most, acts as an intermediary or an observing authority. Any choices on troops force levels, for example, are determined by the commanders on the ground based on what is needed for the mission. The Pentagon raises and equips the military for the future. The Unified Combatant Commands run the wars at present.
While there have been plenty of planning and operational SNAFUs, people seem to forget the good things Rumsfeld has done. He is personally responsible for what has essentially been a revolution in the affairs of the Department of Defense - DoD Transformation - which will allow the US Military to do what it wasn't originally designed to do: respond to terrorism. The reorganization of Army Divisions into highly responsive Brigade Combat Teams, for example, or the reorganization or creation of new commands such as Special Operations Command and the up-and-coming United States Unified Medical Command (which is crucial for the success of vastly increased numbers of humanitarian and civil-relief missions that the military takes part in). He is also responsible for the new rapid fielding initiative, which allows new equipment to be tested on the ground and gets needed equipment (eg. armor) where it needs to as soon as it is battle ready. Before him, the military DID NOT HAVE THAT CAPABILITY.
It is because of him that the Armed Forces are positioned to respond to a multitude of asymmetric threats that they did not have the capability to defend against only 6 years ago. Just remember that as you cheer his resignation.
ivyleague grunt,
you mean ASSymetrical threats that rumsfeld, wolfowitz, perlman, bush, cheney, et al imagined and then created once they could not help themselves and let their wet dream cum true? that is absolutely ridiculous. everyone hates us BECAUSE of all our stupid wars.
most, if not all those threats did not even exist 6 years ago!!!!!
sheesh.
These threats have long existed. Not to say they haven't been exacerbated. But to say they did not exist 6 years ago is absolutely misinformed. One merely has to read the intelligence reports from the end of Clinton's term to realize this. HECK read the 9/11 Commission's report.
Just because no one listened to the intellegence just prior to the attacks does not mean that the threat wasn't there. The origin for these threats have been in the works for decades. And the military has had to change to respond to it. It is doing quite remarkably, actually, considering its size and complexity.
Exactly how has the military changed to respond to these new challenges? I guess I don't see what you're claiming reflected on the nightly news.
I also seem to recall our clueless president hailing Rumsfeld's decision to send in reduced troop levels, the logic being that with our advanced technologies, less troops could control more territory. Much to the consternation of various generals and military advisers. Ring any bells?
Oh, and one more thing - the under-armoring of troops...seems like a Rumsfeld legacy too.
Yeah, he sure accomplished a lot in 6 years. If by accomplish you mean putting a lot of young men and women's lives at risk with nary a second thought.
First, read my first post, it explains a lot.
First to the under-armoring of troops. The truth of the matter is that any time we enter a conflict, the military that we fight with is the military that built many years before. We try to do our best to predict what kind of conflict we will be fighting in the future. But it does not always work out. We took a military that was designed for force-on-force cold-war-type conflict into an asymmetric conflict. Every unit entering the conflict was equipped with the resources that unit was designed to be equipped with. When they got to the ground they found themselves being tasked by the COMBATANT COMMANDERS (not Rumsfeld, who is an administrator, not a General) to do missions they were not designed to handle. They were working with what they had. Some, for example, did not have the necessary armor on their Humvees. It was because of this fact, the necessity for these units to be able to adapt their resources to new and varied missions, that Rumsfeld created the RAPID FIELDING INITIATIVE. This initiative's purpose was to allow new equipment to be fielded quickly in response to the ever varying needs of the units on the ground. So the under-armoring of troops was a legacy of the Cold War Military that we went into Iraq with, not of Rumsfeld. The Rapid Fielding Initiative, however, is certainly a legacy of his.
Other massive changes that have been made include:
The complete and utter reorganization of the Army from Divisions to highly versatile and responsive Brigade Combat Teams. The full equipping and manning of Special Operations Command and charging them with all assymmetric warfare and counterterrorism planning and analysis. The full implementation of Network Centric Warfare, and the creation of the Global Information Grid - which, for example, give Battalion Commanders on the ground access to intelligence, information, and communications resources that used to be available only at the level of Army Divisions or Corps.
Or what about the creation of the Army's Battle Command Knowledge System, a "lesson's learned" resource which allows the Army to collect, analyze and incorporate the lessons from its operations and training into its doctrine and operating procedures in a matter of HOURS rather than months or years.
Or how about the planned creation of a Unified Medical Command which, as I mentioned, will crucial for the success of the vastly increased number of humanitarian and civil-relief missions that the military now takes part in (eg. Katrina, the Tsunami, Subsaharan Africa, Eastern Europe, &c).
These are just a few examples...
Further on under-armoring of troops
And you might ask, why didn't they just get the armor they needed before they went, or why when they found out that they needed it didn't they get it right away?
The answer to that is that we have a set amount of resources, for a military that was procured many years ago. It is the responsibility of commanders on the ground to use wisely the resources that they are given. That is why we give them officer commissions and pay for their education. To think.
Thankfully many do. And thankfully, many in the Pentagon do to. They realized that there has to be a way to get newly procured equipment to the ground quickly. To learn what critical deficiencies existed in the tables of organization and equipment (the list of what equipment is authorized to each unit), modify the TOE, contact the supply manufacturers, generate new supplies from the factory and ship it directly to those units that are most in need of it in a matter of weeks or months. So they created RFI. Keep in mind that they could not do this before. No military in the history of the world has had that ability. It is quite a logistical feat that they have been able to do this.
Jeez, IvyLeagueGrunt, knock it off with the acronyms. We get your point. You obviously believe W & Rumi & Condi have nothing to do with the current death-mess. And what the F- is an Ivory Leage Grunt anyway?
Obviously the Field CO's did not start this clusterf-ck. State your age & service & I'll educate ya. It's quite obvious the current admin had ZERO familiarity with Caesar's Gallics, Mao's Guerilla Warfare, The Art of War or Mach's Discourses. Even the friggin' Iliad. I read all that shit in HS in the 70s. And knew this "war" was a bad idea before it even started.
And before you get all "partisan" on me, give it up. Been an unregistered Anarchist since the 80's.
And ABSOLUTELY no dis to the poor folks over there (mil & civ) and their families.
My greatest heartfelt feelings to all of them (& us) who have been affected by this misguided global f-uckup.
And to all of us who must suffer the hurt and humiliation as even indirect participants in this "thing".
And before you start anymo flaming, how 'bout you start with:
Age (were even alive during the Viet "Conflict")
Ivy League Creds (years, degree?)
Creds as a "Grunt". What's your Mil Svc?
Other than listening to Rush & O'reilly, what's your background as such a mil expert.
And how about you state your occupation & number of children? If you had a kid (I've got a pair of 9 year old twins) I feel you wouldn't make such an argument.
Before you flame off, how about you answer those questions first?
Then we can discuss
Rummy knew it was time to go . His style of management wasn't sitting well with the American people . Bush is finally begaining to realize his "Fluff&Buff" Bullsh*t is losing it's appeal with people and had to make changes . There's an old saying , "When you fall, You fall hard, The easy part is staying on top "
Ivy League Grunt = Legacy with D average
IvyLeagueGrunt you many good "text book" explanations for what appears to be going on. However, you seem to be a bit NAIVE for the most part. You don't seem to understand the chain of command when it comes to power and control.
oh there is no "chain of command." there just is a chain of blame!
just look at abu ghraib. the real real crooks, the higher ups, got away with it.
Age: Was not alive for most of vietnam. Certainly not as old as you if you were in vietnam. My hat off to you if you were.
Degree: Graduated with degrees in biochemistry and national security studies. Working on another, grad degree right now while working at the same time.
Service: Army.
Other than listening to Rush & O'reilly, what's your background as such a mil expert:
Have worked at both Army and DoD, largely in medical field, though much has encompassed WMD defense. Also Army Transformation.
I do not "listen to Rush & O'reilly." I'm not even a republican. Not a fan of the administration.
But I think blaming rumsfeld is a cop-out, because he is not the guy on the ground, and he is not the Commander in Chief. And particularly since he has made such progress within the DoD, changing it rapidly to respond to new threats. It remains to be seen how well the transformation will go with the new guy.
But mainly I find it odd that people tend to think of the Secretary of Defense as some "super general." It just aint so.
Please people Don't bring Bill O'Reilly into the Gothamist fold . We don't need anymore Right Wing- Chicken shit, Bread- Flour dumping, Assholes in here ! We already got plenty of them here now . ; ')