Wednesday, November 08, 2006

This is a good thing

Rumsfeld replaced after poll loss

This is good too: Conn. Sen. Joe Lieberman wins re-election

Sadly, Lieberman would have been my choice to replace Rumsfeld.

5 comments:

David J. Betz said...

Who'd you have chosen?

http://wimw-Bachmann.blogspot.com said...

Even better:
that was it for John Bolton.

Anonymous said...

Gates is a good choice, I reckon. Right now we need somebody:

* knows the policy stuff
* is a realist (i.e., not a neocon)
* crucially, has a good working relationship with the ISG crowd
* can be trusted not to do somebody really fucking stupid.

Gates hits all those buttons for me. He will enable the Bush admin to take a major change of direction in Iraq from Jan: politically as well as in terms of getting the policy machinery behind it. That's my hope anyway.

Anonymous said...

er...that shld be "do something" and not "do somebody" really stupid. Bit of a Clinton moment there....

Mike Pryce said...

I think switching Rumsfeld with Gates immediately following the election shows that the Bush Whitehouse is making some very strategic moves. In a single blow, they’ve just pulled the long pole from the tent of the Democratic strategy for the next 2 years. That Robert Gates was ready to publicly accept the job immediately shows that it was entirely expected and planned. The Democrats are feeling good about winning the majority (and deservedly so) but it ain’t much of a majority so they know they can’t do much legislatively. They had planned on using the Iraq war as the primary vehicle to keep the heat on the administration through investigations and sound bites, however now that Rumsfeld is gone, they must dramatically recalibrate the strategy.