Resign, Rumsfeld, Resign
So advises New Jersey's Republican senatorial candidate Thomas Kean Jr., according to The Moderate Voice's Joe Gandelman (linking to a prominent NYT piece).
I can say without much exaggeration that I despise Donald Rumsfeld and would be happy to see him go -- it may indeed be this year's October surprise. But what would his resignation accomplish? Would it not send the message that he, and essentially no one else in the Bush Administration, was to blame for Iraq? Would he not be scapegoated both by proponents and opponents of the war? Would it not be a great public relations event for Bush himself, who could be made to look authoritative and in control, not to mention for the militarist neocons who were behind the war far more than Rumsfeld ever was and who continue to argue that all would be wonderful if only the civilian leadership, particularly at the Pentagon, had managed the whole thing better?
On this, I'm with Yglesias: "The issue... is Bush, not Rumsfeld. It's not as if Rumsfeld just did some one dumb thing two weeks ago and Bush has the chance to wash his hands of it. The problem with Rumsfeld just is the problem with the Bush administration's national security policy. Pretending that there's some 'Rumsfeld issue' that could be resolved with a resignation at which point everything will be back on track is absurd."
It is absurd. But that's precisely how a Rumsfeld resignation could be spun. We all should know by now that Bush will never take responsibility for the disaster that has become his misadventure in Iraq.
I can say without much exaggeration that I despise Donald Rumsfeld and would be happy to see him go -- it may indeed be this year's October surprise. But what would his resignation accomplish? Would it not send the message that he, and essentially no one else in the Bush Administration, was to blame for Iraq? Would he not be scapegoated both by proponents and opponents of the war? Would it not be a great public relations event for Bush himself, who could be made to look authoritative and in control, not to mention for the militarist neocons who were behind the war far more than Rumsfeld ever was and who continue to argue that all would be wonderful if only the civilian leadership, particularly at the Pentagon, had managed the whole thing better?
On this, I'm with Yglesias: "The issue... is Bush, not Rumsfeld. It's not as if Rumsfeld just did some one dumb thing two weeks ago and Bush has the chance to wash his hands of it. The problem with Rumsfeld just is the problem with the Bush administration's national security policy. Pretending that there's some 'Rumsfeld issue' that could be resolved with a resignation at which point everything will be back on track is absurd."
It is absurd. But that's precisely how a Rumsfeld resignation could be spun. We all should know by now that Bush will never take responsibility for the disaster that has become his misadventure in Iraq.
posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at
8:16 AM
1 Comments:
I would suggest that the Democrats take a play from the McCain game plan...and keep repeating the line that Rumsfeld serves at the request of the President...thereby forcing voters to question the administration's ability to successfully prosecute not only the Iraq war, but also the war on terror. Essentially, the Democrats need voters to doubt the President's overall handling of national security and the war on terror...demonstrated by the fact that he continues to proceed with Rumsfeld as his operative...more than they need to push for the firing of Donald Rumsfeld.
The goal would be to take the accusation that Democrats are defeatists and shift the discussion to point out that so long as the President refuses to make much needed changes, we are already being defeated. If voters accept that the Bush administration is losing the war on terror or is unable to adjust in order to win it, they will be less apprehensive to give Democrats an opportunity.
Voters need to see the GOP plan as an open wound unlikely to get better without a new prescription and they need to be convinced that the President is unwilling to administer the necessary medication to make that happen. My own preference would have been for Democrats to offer a more concrete alternative plan for Iraq and the war on terror...but that is now unlikely...so it seems clear to me that they must now convince voters that keeping Republicans in power will not lead to success in Iraq and more importantly in the war on terror.
Read more here:
www.thoughttheater.com
By
Daniel DiRito, at 1:20 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home