Why Rumsfeld Stays: A Simple, But Elegant Theory

Stop me if it's already been articulated, but I was proud of it when I came up with it. After all, the axe falls on 9 people, and Rumsfeld is not one of them? Even if we assume that Bush is purging non-loyalists, and we acknowledge that Rumsfeld is a loyalist, there is still the fact that he's a gigantic liability in every conceivable way, since he can't seem to do anything right either practically or ethically. So why not dump him and look for someone who would at least do a better job of _winning_ our imperial wars?

Here is my theory, which belongs to me, and I own it and what it is too:

They can't get anyone else to take the job.

Think about it. How much would they have to offer YOU to inherit Rumsfeld's mess? No doubt you replied, as any sane person would, "The world is not enough." And you presumably are a public spirited sort who cares about the welfare of the country, unlike any of the candidates Bush would be liable to approach.

It's not important, really, since the results are the same anyhow; but it cheers me up to imagine Bush working the phone bank, desperately trying to line up a replacement. "Al? Al, it's George...no, Mr. Haig, I didn't realize it was your morning naptime...listen, I was just wondering if you would consider stepping into--oh, someone already leaked it. Well--oh, dear, that is too bad. Well, I understand. It _is_ very important to keep yourself well groomed at all times, and I wouldn't want to be responsible for your going around with unwashed hair..." *redial* "Bob? Bob, it's George. Listen, Bob, I was wondering...George Bush. George W. Bush. It's the _President,_ Mr. Macnamara. Yes, the current one. Listen, Don is getting a little burned out on this whole carnage thing, and I was wondering--hello? Hello? What the ding-dang?"

We amuse ourselves however we can,

The Plaid Adder

n/t

Certainly I wouldn't take the job unless I was convinced that Bush would take my advice and make it work.

They can't get rid of him simply because HE doesn't want to go. Who's gonna fire him? Bush? Rummy is on top of Bush in the food chain.

You have to think they'd be thinking about dumping him--but, yeah, who would want to go in?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

-That they're keeping him around because he's so universally unpopular that when the shit hits the fan he's going to be a distracting target for the mobs to attack while Georgie runs out the back door, and in the meantime they have a nice 'yesman' to tow the party line.

Because they were trying to get rid of him and then they kept him, right?

Hmmm...could the same be said for ALL of Bush's retained cabinet members?

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

so they had to call in a retired general.

is that Rumsfeld actually has Bush by the proverbial "you know what." Remember good of Donny was Reagan and Poppy's "Bag Man of Baghdad" during those Administrations. He,of all people, know where the skeletons are. Ever wonder if he hasn't already told Jr that.

. . . description? If there is, how closely has Rumsfeld followed the requirements of his job? If he has strayed significantly in his four year tenure, wouldn't that be grounds for congress to ask for his resignation and appoint a more able and better qualified individual who would do the job properly? Just because the president appoints someone and is too lazy or incompetent to see that his appointee is screwing up big time, does not mean that the person can or even should be allowed to continue in that position. Rumsfeld should be fired now.

But what about Kissinger?
Ought to be right down his alley.

Now we learn that rats not only desert a sinking ship, they also will refuse to board.
I think you're on to something.
:thumbsup:

He'll probably rule in Hell.

This administration has always been pretty much run by Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney. That neither, despite low poll numbers and a record of dismal incompetence, has been dumped pretty much cinches the case in my mind. For me there was never an iota of doubt that Rumsfeld would stay. He'd have to fire himself.

Look at it this way: This is the first administration in quite some time that has been treated as an exclusive holding of big business. Face it, what was Iraq if not a business venture designed to secure oil holdings and line the pockets of big construction and communications interests? What were the tax cuts and massive borrowing all about? What is the plan to turn Social Security over to Wall street if not big business? The cockroaches are loose in the public trust and they're sucking down whatever they can get their shit smeared mouths on.

Rummy and Dick are the executive branch managers, with Karl Rove head of sales. Shrub handles conventions and client dinners, the equivalent of a celebrity hire broguht in to make the suckers feel like they're dealing with someone important while all the while shielding the real power from the idiotic and annoying public. Think George Jessel, think Dick Clark. Everyone else? Hire and fire bodyparts, just like in any other corporate holding.

The ONLY one who could get rid of Rummy is possibly Cheney, and why would Cheney fire his bestest bud when he's doing such a fine job (from their perspective)?

Remember, Rummy's job is NOT about securing Iraq or making sure our troops are protected and well equipped, it's about syphoning off all the money in the US Treasury into the "War Effort" (IOW, into Halliburton's coffers). The bigger the mess in Iraq, the more money is poured into it and the more goes to Halliburton et al. A job well done. They WANT chaos in Iraq. Chaos is expensive and good cover for redirecting (embezzling) funds into offshore accounts.

And it's not like they have to worry about any sort of accountability or anything silly like that. What would be the fallout of NOT firing him? Losing an election or something?

She would take any job for her husband.