Hillary Calls for Rumsfeld's Resignation

[classicman2]

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2271454

By DEVLIN BARRETT

WASHINGTON Aug 3, 2006 (AP)— Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton called Thursday for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, hours after excoriating him at a public hearing over what she said was a "failed policy" in Iraq.

"I just don't understand why we can't get new leadership that would give us a fighting chance to turn the situation around before it's too late," the New York Democrat told the Associated Press. "I think the president should choose to accept Secretary Rumsfeld's resignation."

Clinton confronted Rumsfeld directly on Iraq and Afghanistan earlier in the day, and said his answers left her convinced he should go.

"The secretary has lost credibility with the Congress and with the people. It's time for him to step down and be replaced by someone who can develop an effective strategy and communicate it effectively to the American people and to the world."

For months, Clinton has resisted joining the chorus of other Democrats demanding Rumsfeld's ouster. Her remarks Thursday were the harshest assessment yet from the woman considered her party's early front-runner for the 2008 presidential nomination.

The former first lady has come under attack from some in her own party for her 2002 vote for the war and her current opposition to a deadline for U.S. troop withdrawal.

"I am frankly tired of hearing the same stories from the administration's national security team," Clinton told the AP. "The president changed his economic team, he changed his White House team I think it's time for him to change his security and defense team."

Clinton said her own view of the war has not changed.

"What's been clear is that despite my being a constant and persistent critic of how the president has conducted the war, it has not achieved the goals that he has set," she said.

Earlier in the day, the senator wasted no time going after Rumsfeld when he testified in a morning hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

"Under your leadership there have been numerous errors in judgment that have led us to where we are," the New York Democrat said at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing. "We have a full-fledged insurgency and full-blown sectarian conflict in Iraq."
_________

This is only part of the article.

If one was somewhat cynical they might conclude this was a smart political move by Hillary to not distance herself too far from the Democratic base which is somewhat opposed to the war and to Donald.

[VinVega]

Originally Posted by classicman2

This is only part of the article.

If one was somewhat cynical they might conclude this was a smart political move by Hillary to not distance herself too far from the Democratic base which is somewhat opposed to the war and to Donald.

Dead on. (Yeah I'm cynical)

I think Hillary sees "Joementum" with a double digit deficit in CT and that woke her up to the fact that the Dem base is rabidly anti-war.

Polls do matter.

[classicman2]

Here's some more of the article:

The defense secretary seemed briefly stunned by the intensity of her attack, exclaiming, "My goodness," before launching into a point-by-point defense.

He rejected some of her specific criticisms as simply wrong and said the war against terror will be a drawn-out process.

"Are there setbacks? Yes," said Rumsfeld. "Is this problem going to get solved in the near term? I think it's going to take some time."

The testy exchange between Clinton and Rumsfeld came after a top general told the panel violence in Iraq is probably as bad as he's ever seen it and the country may be descending into civil war.

"We hear a lot of happy talk and rosy scenarios, but because of the administration's strategic blunders and frankly the record of incompetence in executing you are presiding over a failed policy," she said. "Given your track record, Secretary Rumsfeld, why should we believe your assurances now?"

Rumsfeld vehemently denied he'd ever glossed over the difficulties of the fighting in Iraq or elsewhere.

"There's a track record here," countered Clinton. "This is not 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, when you appeared before this committee and made many comments and presented many assurances that have frankly proven to be unfulfilled."

"Senator, I don't think that's true," Rumsfeld fired back. "I have never painted a rosy picture. I've been very measured in my words and you'd have a dickens of a time trying to find instances where I've been excessively optimistic. I understand this is tough stuff."

At that point, the Republican chairman of the committee, Sen. John Warner of Virginia, came to Rumsfeld's defense, saying his past comments had been balanced.

Clinton still shied away from a demand made by a growing number of Democrats: a deadline for withdrawing troops from Iraq.

The disagreement between the two extended to Afghanistan. The senator specifically faulted Rumsfeld for saying in 2002 that the Taliban was gone, noting that the extremist faction has grown stronger in recent months.

[Nazgul]

Originally Posted by classicman2

The defense secretary seemed briefly stunned by the intensity of her attack, exclaiming, "My goodness," before launching into a point-by-point defense.

That's not what the very, very left leaning radio hosts on an 'alternative' format said this morning as they were reading the news. They claimed that all Rumsfeld said was "My Goodness" and then kept silent.

[classicman2]

I agree that Rumsfeld's usefullness is probably past.

However, Hillary called for the resignation of the wrong person(s): She should have called for the resignation of Cheney & Bush, because they are the 'architects' of our failed Iraq policy.

[Thor Simpson]

I enjoyed the CNN analyst's statement that I saw last night.

"The odds of Bush actually taking this advice are... well, right around zero. But..."

[General Zod]

Originally Posted by Thor Simpson

I enjoyed the CNN analyst's statement that I saw last night.

"The odds of Bush actually taking this advice are... well, right around zero. But..."

If I were Bush that's about as much as I would consider it as well. Although things could be going better I don't think anyone should resign.

[nodeerforamonth]

Sounds like this is something the Onion would write.

[JasonF]

Originally Posted by General Zod

If I were Bush that's about as much as I would consider it as well. Although things could be going better I don't think anyone should resign.

Do you really think Rumsfeld has done a good job as SecDef?

[dick_grayson]

hasn't he tried to resign twice but Bush wouldn't let him? I think he knows he's fucked up but has to stick around for some reason.

[Ranger]

people have been telling him for years to quit. he even offered to resign on his own notice.

my thinking is that even with rumsfeld gone, nothing would change in iraq.

[General Zod]

Originally Posted by JasonF

Do you really think Rumsfeld has done a good job as SecDef?

I don't like Rumsfeld and never have. He just seems like a pompus arrogant jerk to me so it's pretty hard to cozy up to someone like that. Putting that aside, however, and looking and what he's been tasked to do I think he's doing as good a job of as can be done in that position. I don't think getting rid of him and getting someone else in is going to improve anything. Which is why I see no reason for him to resign. I don't think it would change anything.

Now if he resigns for political feel-good reasons that might not be a bad idea but I think the more the Democrats demand it, the less chance of it happening.

[Shemp]

Originally Posted by General Zod

Putting that aside, however, and looking and what he's been tasked to do I think he's doing as good a job of as can be done in that position.

Yeah, 'tasked to do'. Poor guy never had a say in the matter...

[VinVega]

I don't like Don Rumsfeld, but the one good thing he has begun is the reorganization of the military force structure (getting rid of divisions and converting them to brigades) and trying to add mobility to a logistically slow moving behemoth.

[DVD Polizei]

What an original plan by Hillary.

[classicman2]

Nothing will change until the CIC changes.

[CRM114]

Originally Posted by classicman2

Nothing will change until the CIC changes.

Our middle east strategy won't even change then. The power structure is too entangled with the Saudis. Sorry, been reading Bob Baer...

[classicman2]

I read & listen to Bob Baer.

[mikehunt]

"I am frankly tired of hearing the same stories from the administration's national security team,"

and I'm tired of hearing the same whining for hillary and her lib collegues where they keep saying they have a plan but never seem to give any details

[classicman2]

Did you witness the hearing?

If so, did you hear the testimony of the CJCS & the Commander of Central Command?

What details do you want them/Hillary to supply?

[Binger]

Originally Posted by mikehunt

and I'm tired of hearing the same whining for hillary and her lib collegues where they keep saying they have a plan but never seem to give any details

But don't you see it's about misdirection? That is their plan. In absence of a plan, tell 'em you have a plan. Don't explain your plan, because then they'll know you don't have plan. You need to plan for not having a plan by planing to lie about having a plan. You see, the plan is to not have a plan but tell people that you do. It's all very confusing, but if your plan works nobody knows what's going on and your plan has been successful. The problem with the democrat's plan is that if you succeed then you need a plan, which they don't have and have no plans to plan for. Understand?

[kvrdave]

Originally Posted by classicman2

Nothing will change until the CIC changes.

Agreed. If Kerry were in charge he would do the same things, but better. I like that plan.

[DVD Polizei]

Kerry & Hillary = Killary 2008.

[JasonF]

"The Democrats have no plan" is this year's "I need more proof." It's bullshit sloganeering from the President's supporters. Democrats have explained their positions consistently. You may not agree with their positions, but they have been put forth.

http://www.clinton.senate.gov/issues...pic=iraqletter
http://www.house.gov/list/press/pa12...51117iraq.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

[classicman2]

Originally Posted by kvrdave

Agreed. If Kerry were in charge he would do the same things, but better. I like that plan.

If Kerry had been president, do you seriously believe we would have invaded Iraq in the first place?

I damn sure don't.