And another thing about the whole Rumsfeld quip — for him to claim that we had to go “with the Army that we’ve got” is pretty obnoxious. I mean, it’s not as if Iraq invaded the US and we had to rush off to war; they planned this little spectacle for quite a while (and what wonderful planning it was). The “Army that we’ve got” has now been under Rumsfeld’s direction for just about 4 years. He’s basically pointing the finger at himself for not preparing and outfitting the troops better. The “Army that we’ve got” is a direct reflection of his failed leadership.
Do we think that this issue will finally be the one that removes Rumsfeld from power?
Speaking of power, it’s pretty clear to me what’s happening in the second Bush cabinet. During the first term, he was more or less required to fill slots with high up people who helped him — or didn’t stand in his way. What he got were people who drew attention to themselves, a great liability in a secretive Bush White House.
Now, he’s filling the cabinet with unknowns who seem to not have opinions of their own. They are perfect for an administration that gives no power to cabinet officers, desiring instead to centralize power in the West Wing with one or two political advisors and a vice president who is all-powerful. Like many dictatorships, the voice must be unifed and centralized. There’s no room for independent voices or opinions in this new order.
