Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
Don's Donnybrooks
Why congressional Republicans are taking Rumsfeld to task
By Mary Lynn F. Jones
Web Exclusive: 10.28.03
Print Friendly | Email Article
In mid-2001, Washington's chattering classes were abuzz with talk about which of George W. Bush's cabinet secretaries would be the first to resign. Most of the attention focused on one person: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Rumsfeld wasn't a popular figure around town. Democrats, of course, had never liked him. And the career military people at the Pentagon made clear from the start of the Bush administration that they disagreed with his plans for military transformation. Such animosities weren't really unexpected. More surprising, though, was Rumsfeld's rapidly deteriorating relationship with congressional Republicans, whose ranks he had once belonged to. According to a piece John Bresnahan wrote for Roll Call in October 2001, Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) yelled, "I am discouraged, I am frustrated and I am angry," at Rumsfeld during a hearing. Things got bad enough that Rumsfeld, according to the piece, sought advice from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich on how to cajole Congress.
Then came September 11, which overnight transformed Rumsfeld into a hero of sorts and, more than likely, saved his job. It also seemed to change his relationship with Republicans on the Hill. Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) probably spoke for many of his colleagues when, in October 2001, he told Bresnahan that Rumsfeld was "the ideal person to balance . . . the intellectual challenges of an extremely difficult job."
But in recent weeks, Rumsfeld's relationship with Hill Republicans has apparently soured to pre-9-11 levels. Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), who heads the Senate Committee on Armed Services, recently sent Rumsfeld a letter expressing his concern about inflammatory remarks made by Lt. Gen. William Boykin regarding Muslims. (Playing hardball and showing his typical diplomatic finesse, Rumsfeld dismissed the letter, saying it hadn't made it to his desk.) Meanwhile, Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), a member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, voiced regret that Congress had given the president -- and, by implication, the administration -- too much freedom in dealing with Iraq. "We probably have given this president more flexibility, more latitude, more range, unquestioned, than any president since Franklin Roosevelt -- probably too much," Hagel said. "The Congress, in my opinion, really abrogated its responsibility." And, in the wake of the leak of a memo in which the Pentagon chief warned of a "long, hard slog ahead" in Iraq, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) claimed that Rumsfeld and his deputies had not been candid with Congress about the situation on the ground. "The leaked memo, I think, puts things in a better perspective than the briefings that we've had from them," he said, according to an account by Douglas Jehl and David Firestone in The New York Times.
Democrats have been raising these questions for months. But why the change now in GOP attitudes on the Hill toward both the war and the Pentagon's civilian leadership?
One reason is that legislators are tired of being treated as a lesser branch of government by the administration. As one GOP staffer told Jehl and Firestone, "The Pentagon is not exactly Capitol Hill's favorite department anymore. Rumsfeld and [Deputy Defense Secretary Paul] Wolfowitz just give off this sense that they know better than thou, and that they don't have to answer our questions."
For the last two years, many members of Congress have been willing to give the administration the benefit of the doubt, especially regarding the war on terrorism. Administration officials tended not to share information -- and when lawmakers demonstrated, on a few occasions, that they couldn't be trusted to keep a secret, the administration's reluctance to candidly brief senators and representatives only hardened.
But the more times Bush comes to the Hill to ask for money -- and the closer we get to an election in which many incumbents will face tough questions from constituents about how long our soldiers must stay abroad -- the more nervous lawmakers are getting. Hill Republicans can hope that most voters view the Iraq War as the responsibility of the president, not Congress. But they also know that voters could punish them if they are seen as being in the administration's pocket -- especially if the death toll continues to rise.
A second reason for percolating anti-Rumsfeld sentiment on the Hill is that many lawmakers feel genuinely misled. While they recognize that the war against terrorism could last decades, they envisioned that the war against Iraq would be over quickly and cost few U.S. lives. In short, they expected a repeat of the Gulf War.
Plus, the administration scared members into believing that Saddam Hussein posed an imminent threat to the United States. They were thereby led to believe that supporting the war was their only option, and that it would carry little political risk.
But now much of the administration's evidence has been debunked. On Friday, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence revealed it is working on a report that says much of the prewar intelligence on Iraq was "sloppy," according to committee Chairman Roberts.
While Rumsfeld didn't lead the Iraq intelligence-gathering efforts, he certainly used the "findings" to make the case for war. According to Dana Priest of The Washington Post, Roberts has assured Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) that he'll ask the Pentagon about its intelligence on Iraq.
So the administration is starting to test the collective patience of GOP lawmakers. If Rumsfeld keeps up the hard-line approach that's been a hallmark of his tenure, Republicans may be more willing to seek his political demise. And this time -- unlike in the summer of 2001 -- he may not get a second chance.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
__________________
26-year-old Saermengsi last season rated average 25.1 minutes, with 7.5 hours, 2.7 times and 2.7 backboard secondary attack, he Yifusen general as the replacement came in March Yifusen injuries ever period of time, three matches in a row, his secondary attack will reach 10. By Sun team, he could strengthen outer lane line, but also as the replacement fullback scored his general customary activities in the stadium two wings. On the season Saermengsi-ball hit rate reached 30%. He was in flames and Jones made a three-year teammate, Jones said that the organizers he pitches, but he can also shooting. His shooting is deceptive.
So, if it comes to the point that the majority of a republican led congress starts to question its own president's and this administration's basis for going to war, would some of you talking heads at least be willing to admit that even though one can argue that we needed to remove Hussein at some point, that you were duped into believeing the immediate necessity for it?
I still believe that. Always have, and as the months go by, and we hear less and less about our troops over there and even less and less about the hunt for WMD, I am believeing it more and more.
Or are you all going to stick with the tired old "Im more worried about where they moved them to!" shtick?
Where did you get this from Tom? Just wandering what the source is? I am following politics very closely, and I am not familiar with major Republicans turning on Rummy.
Bill Frist, Trent Lott and Rick Santorum- these are the tree Republicans who matter. When they start saying things about Rummy, then we have a problem, but untill then, it's all crap.
__________________
"Don't try to threaten me Mulder! I've watched presidents die."
"If people would know the things I know, we'd all fall apart."
"Once again, tonight, the course of human history will be set by two unknown men standing in the shadows."
Originally posted by SirStefan32
Bill Frist, Trent Lott and Rick Santorum- these are the tree Republicans who matter. When they start saying things about Rummy, then we have a problem, but untill then, it's all crap.
__________________
26-year-old Saermengsi last season rated average 25.1 minutes, with 7.5 hours, 2.7 times and 2.7 backboard secondary attack, he Yifusen general as the replacement came in March Yifusen injuries ever period of time, three matches in a row, his secondary attack will reach 10. By Sun team, he could strengthen outer lane line, but also as the replacement fullback scored his general customary activities in the stadium two wings. On the season Saermengsi-ball hit rate reached 30%. He was in flames and Jones made a three-year teammate, Jones said that the organizers he pitches, but he can also shooting. His shooting is deceptive.
Originally posted by SirStefan32 Trent Lott is not a racist, you might be confusing him with Rober KKK Byrd.
Trent Lott is the 2nd most powerful Republican in the Congress (Behind Frist, and above Sentorum and Deley.)
Robert Byrd renounced his past. Trent Lott celebrates it.
Good ole' Dixiecrats!
__________________
26-year-old Saermengsi last season rated average 25.1 minutes, with 7.5 hours, 2.7 times and 2.7 backboard secondary attack, he Yifusen general as the replacement came in March Yifusen injuries ever period of time, three matches in a row, his secondary attack will reach 10. By Sun team, he could strengthen outer lane line, but also as the replacement fullback scored his general customary activities in the stadium two wings. On the season Saermengsi-ball hit rate reached 30%. He was in flames and Jones made a three-year teammate, Jones said that the organizers he pitches, but he can also shooting. His shooting is deceptive.
One reason is that legislators are tired of being treated as a lesser branch of government by the administration. As one GOP staffer told Jehl and Firestone, "The Pentagon is not exactly Capitol Hill's favorite department anymore. Rumsfeld and [Deputy Defense Secretary Paul] Wolfowitz just give off this sense that they know better than thou, and that they don't have to answer our questions."
For the last two years, many members of Congress have been willing to give the administration the benefit of the doubt, especially regarding the war on terrorism. Administration officials tended not to share information -- and when lawmakers demonstrated, on a few occasions, that they couldn't be trusted to keep a secret, the administration's reluctance to candidly brief senators and representatives only hardened.
FINALLY!!!! - the congressional GOP are getting what we Democrats (other than Zell Miller) have been saying for 2 1/2 years - Bush and his cronies think that there is just one branch of government - theirs! Bush has operated in secrecy from day one, even before 9/11. His energy cartel, which he still refuses to disclose, etc. The whole administration is CORRUPT, and has operated with contempt for the American public since he was appointed president. It is high time the public wake up to this scorn and stop being played for fools.
Last night on Larry King, Bob Woodward described Rumsfeld as "wearing rubber gloves". He operates with an autocratic style and will never "leave his fingerprints" on anything that could later come back and be traced to his responsibility.
Woodward will be on Larry King again Friday night, after a few more days controversy is sure to bring up more questions.
FINALLY!!!! - the congressional GOP are getting what we Democrats (other than Zell Miller)
Because ONLY Democrats (but not Zell Miller) have the integrity required to be truthful.
Quote:
have been saying for 2 1/2 years - Bush and his cronies think that there is just one branch of government - theirs!
One branch? No. They just are treated each branch how it is intended. Funny how the Legislative Branch has no problems infringing on the Executive, but don't dare try any oversight on them!
Quote:
Bush has operated in secrecy from day one, even before 9/11.
Secrecy? You mean, holding legally confidental information confidential. The heathens!
Quote:
His energy cartel, which he still refuses to disclose, etc.
What energy cartel? Proof please? I guess I'll have to qualify. Real proof, please.
Quote:
The whole administration is CORRUPT,
Based on what?
Quote:
and has operated with contempt for the American public
Truly contemptible, daring to protect that American Public. I think you have Bush confused with Clinton.
Quote:
since he was appointed president.
OH MY GOD!!! Get over it!!!!!
If Gore had won his home state he would have been President. The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 (YES, 7-2) that the Florida rerererererererererererererererererererererecount of only TARGETED DEMOCRATIC counties was unconstitutional. 10,000 military votes which Gore and his people fought to not have counted still haven't been counted. Care to wager how those would have gone? Every single media outlet that did their own count after the fact could find NO way Gore would have won, even with a state-wide recount.
Gore never led Florida. Never. The people of the United States, in accordance with the Constitution, elected Bush president. Acknowledge, move on!
Quote:
It is high time the public wake up to this scorn and stop being played for fools.
And become enlightened, like you?
__________________
Fell deeds awake... Now for Wrath... Now for Ruin... and the Red Dawn...
It is high time the public wake up to this scorn and stop being played for fools.
If you mean the scorn of the entire federal government, I am inclined to agree with you. If you only direct your scorn to the current administration only I think you are the one with blinders on.
__________________
“votes are collared under democracy, not by talking sense but by talking nonsense.” ~H. L. Mencken