Posted on 11/12/2006 4:32:20 PM PST by Omega Man II
The White House is trying to soothe Republicans who say the party might have fared better on Election Day if President Bush had not waited until after the vote to oust Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
"You could argue that either way, of what political effect an earlier decision on Secretary Rumsfeld would have had. But it doesn't matter," White House chief of staff Josh Bolten said Sunday.
"The president correctly decided that this decision does not belong in the political realm. And a decision as important as your secretary of defense should not be made based on some partisan political advantage. It would send a terrible signal to our troops, to our allies, even to our enemies," Bolten said.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has suggested that if Bush replaced Rumsfeld two weeks before the election, voters would not have been as angry about the unpopular Iraq war. Republicans would have gained the boost they needed, according to Gingrich, to retain their majority in the Senate and hold onto 10 to 15 more House seats.
Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the outgoing chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, agreed with that assessment.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Please if Rumsfeld had resigned before the election the same old loud mouth malcontents, would still be screaming.
Maybe he'll make his happy when he legalizes all the illegals in the country and caves to the Democraps on all the other things they wants!
Lots of armchair quarterbacks in the party eh? I think you deserved to lose since you eat your own.
gingrich is right. if Bush wanted to do this, he should have done it in august. doing it the day after the election, simply emboldened the Dems, and re-inforced the idea that our team had just been slaughtered.
Well gee if you malcontents hadn't stayed home and handed the House over to nancy pelosi, you wouldn't be in that psoition.
You loud mouth malcontents are pathetic.
When I first saw a headline about this, I assumed they were squawking about how low-class, low-rent, and basically uncharacteristically LOW it was for W to throw arguably his best cabinet-member over the wall right after the elections.
But no. The screaming weenies are whining that he didn't do it sooner.
Sigh.
With all due respect to Newt; he himself bashed Bush and Rummy on numerous occasions just to get face time on MSM. The constant bashing of Bush and Rummy by the MSM, democrats, and selected republicans helped defeat the republicans on 11/07. Newt should remember that, he violated Reagan's 11th commandment. If he wants republicans to win again, he better remember to reinstate that commandment.
What does Newt know about wining midterms? And anyway, if GWB had done as Newt suggests, there would not now be such an exciting opportunity to work with the Democrats on Comprehensive Immigration Reform.
yes, that's true. but that's not the issue here.
either you stand by someone, or you don't. once Bush made up his mind that Rumsfeld was on the "jettison" list, he should have chosen the best political path.
the way it unfolded last week - was horrible. its as if Pelosi marched out of the white house with Rumsfeld head on a stick. it was disgusting to see him taken out like that, and then see the president in the white house the next day with Dick "our soldiers are like the nazis" Durbin.
I don't know if it's really fair to paint all the malcontents as people that didn't vote.
I'm livid with Bush at the moment and haven't been really happy with him or the Senate leaders for some time, but I still voted R down the line.
Forgetting that /sarcasm tag is really gonna hurt once the 'no sense of humor' crowd reads that...
"same old loud mouth malcontents?"
You mean the Republican base.
Well, those same-old loud-mouth malcontents just elected some new loud-mouth malcontents.
I'm with you on that. Why make your party's defeat look even worse than it needs to be ? Or, why look like a Pelosi toe-sucker when it would be better to go down fighting ?
Gingrich wants to score points off the President. I think he's trying to throw the President overboard in an effort to establish himself as a major voice in the party, and to cement the party on the right. Just a few drops of blood in the water, and the sharks are coming to feed already. Look for Newt, Newt, and more Newt.
I agree that it was awful, but I suspect that Rumsfeld himself may have offered to leave. I think it was very ill-advised; I think he's done a good job, although he perhaps could have been more aggressive, but I think Bush was happy with him. I think he came to see himself as a liability, and he's very much a team player. The way Bush handled this actually made me think that he really hadn't planned on having Rumsfeld leave, except that it was something declared by RUmsfeld at the last moment.
Both of them have been under attack by the press for several years now, and because the war appears to be (a) nothing threatening the average American on these shores and (b) a political stunt motivated by Bush's desire to take over the universe (I'm giving the media view, not mine), I think Rumsfeld simply couldn't take it anymore.
Baker needs Gates?
No, they said it had been decided a few weeks ago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.