Rumsfeld resigning?
By Sean Aqui | Related entries in Breaking News, Discuss, Elections, General Politics, Military, Partisan Hacks, The War On Terrorism, WarI just heard NPR refer to an AP report that Donald Rumsfeld is stepping down. A White House announcement is expected later today.
More as it develops.
Update: The AP story.
Asked whether his announcement signaled a new direction in the war that has claimed the lives of more than 2,800 U.S. troops, Bush said, “Well, there’s certainly going to be new leadership at the Pentagon.”
Stop the ACLU rounds up the conservative disappointment. And Daniel Drezner has some good points to make — notably how this puts the kabosh on “Santorum or Lieberman for SecDef” rumors.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, November 8th, 2006 and is filed under Breaking News, Discuss, Elections, General Politics, Military, Partisan Hacks, The War On Terrorism, War. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
November 8th, 2006 at 12:58 pm
CNN has confirmed it.
November 8th, 2006 at 1:00 pm
All I can say is, it’s about time. I’ve been campaigning for his departure for a long, long time.
The timing is interesting. It would have been better politically to cut him loose well before the election. And just a week or so ago Bush said he expected Rumsfeld to stay through the end of the administration.
November 8th, 2006 at 1:02 pm
Yes, he can go home now, all his work is done. All that remains is for Bush to slap him on the back and say “You’ve done a heckuva job Rummy!!”
November 8th, 2006 at 1:05 pm
Sean and Realist,
Who do you think should be Rumsfeld’s replacement?
November 8th, 2006 at 1:21 pm
They’ve announced it will be Robert Gates, former head of the CIA. Here’s what wikipedia says about him.
He’s currently the President of Texas A&M University.
November 8th, 2006 at 1:22 pm
Forgot to sign back in as myself after last night. That last comment was mine.
November 8th, 2006 at 1:25 pm
Denise: Frankly, I’m not qualified to say. The possible candidate pool is very large.
Normally I’d say someone who could actually implement the reform efforts that Rumsfeld botched, except that Rumsfeld has messed that up enough that there’s really no time or momentum left to achieve it.
At this point, I’d say “someone who doesn’t bring an ideological inflexibility to the fighting in Iraq.”
Bush has nominated Robert Gates, an ex-CIA chief, continuing his practice of bring in old Reagan and Bush the Elder hands. He’s part of the Iraq Study Group, so that’s a good sign.
November 8th, 2006 at 3:46 pm
Check out what OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY has to say about this “event”.
November 8th, 2006 at 5:26 pm
Sean sead:
“The timing is interesting. It would have been better politically to cut him loose well before the election. And just a week or so ago Bush said he expected Rumsfeld to stay through the end of the administration.”
I just wrote about exactly this. It seems that Bush had already decided to change out Rumsfeld. He just chose not to tell voters before the election.
Not politically astute (imho).
November 8th, 2006 at 5:54 pm
Getting rid of Rummy shortly before the elections would have done nothing. It would have been preceived as a wea,k desperation call & throwing a loyalist under the bus. It would have been a complete waste of the little bit of capital that it move creates. It would have been a waste.
Waiting until after the election was astute. An olive branch if you will.
November 8th, 2006 at 11:34 pm
Dos,
Isn’t waiting till moments after the election like saying that they knew that Rumsfield was a problem, but that the winning the election was more important than the welfare of our troops, and the success of this war?
November 9th, 2006 at 10:34 am
Waiting makes it look like a reaction to the Dem win, rather than an objective policy move.