Printer friendly version

December 16, 2004

Clear as Kristol

Like Mark Levin, I'm unimpressed with Bill Kristol's Washington Post attack on Donald Rumsfeld:

Actually, we have a pretty terrific Army. It's performed a lot better in this war than the secretary of defense has. President Bush has nonetheless decided to stick for now with the defense secretary we have, perhaps because he doesn't want to make a change until after the Jan. 30 Iraqi elections. But surely Don Rumsfeld is not the defense secretary Bush should want to have for the remainder of his second term.

Contrast the magnificent performance of our soldiers with the arrogant buck-passing of Rumsfeld.

One gets the sense that he's got somebody already picked for the slot from which he would dislodge Donald Rumsfeld. Kristol is, after all, somewhat more than a mere pundit; he's a political player. It will be interesting to see who he believes would do a better job (assuming he feels it prudent to reveal the information).

Posted by Justin Katz at December 16, 2004 1:08 AM

I cannot figure out what the deal is with the Weekly Standard and Rumsfeld. The NRO editorial today implies that it has something to do with Kristol being upset that the war didn't go as smoothly as he wanted, so he's taking it out on Rummy. That seems like too small a reason, though (since the war hasn't gone all that badly, and it's ridiculous to think anyone could have done a significantly better job than Rumsfeld) - is there some kind of personal pique that we're not privy to? Is it just power politics?

The ridiculous part of this is the claim that the troops are being poorly served by Rumsfeld - perhaps Kristol should tell that to the troops, since they love him.

Posted by: Mike S. at December 16, 2004 1:45 PM

See the Belmont Club's "Total War" post, too.

Posted by: Mike S. at December 16, 2004 3:15 PM