There are other sensibles, like Powerline -> War on Rummy by dummies
When you're President, you get lots of free advice. Some of it is well-intentioned; much of it is not. Here is why I think so many liberals are anxious for President Bush to replace Rumsfeld:
They have staked a great deal on the proposition that the Iraq war has not gone well, and, in fact, has been a disaster. But they are troubled because they are not at all sure that is true. By any reasonable standard, casualties have been low and Iraq's progress toward democracy has been impressive. This doesn't mean the project couldn't still go off the rails; it clearly could.
But it is also possible--likely, I think--that the Iraqis will succeed in forming a government, violence will continue to decline, our troops levels will be substantially reduced, and, in a year or two, the consensus will be that the war was pretty successful after all. This, I think, is what liberals fear most. They want President Bush to stipulate, in effect, that the war has been poorly conducted and has been a failure.
That's the way in which firing Rumsfeld would rightly be interpreted. This would largely insulate liberals against the consequences if the war does, in fact, turn out to be successful. The same logic, I think, explains why liberals are always hectoring President Bush to "admit his mistakes."
What they fear, deep down, is that the President's policies haven't been mistakes at all.
Excellent take here anita.
It pays to remember that most of the moves by the left,dnc,msm, the rest, are all designed to one end.
Impeach GWB.
That has and will be their goal between now and 08. Nothing less will be accepted. Any circuitous route available is fair game in their twisted minds. Traitors in time of war or not, little bothers these stuck on stupid left wing politicos as they seek their goal.
Good discussion on the thread