[bodyman5001]

Getting out while the getting is good. Smart guy.

In this instance anyway.

Can't help but wonder why they didn't throw him under the bus before the election, couldn't have hurt could it?

[hoojacks]

man, thats crazy. I never would of thought he'd be gone.

[sa1177]

Originally Posted by bodyman5001

Getting out while the getting is good. Smart guy.

In this instance anyway.

Can't help but wonder why they didn't throw him under the bus before the election, couldn't have hurt could it?

Wasn't his choice...he was essentially forced to resign...A nice way of firing him so to speak.

[crandc]

And Bush admitted he was not telling the truth (but it wasn't about sex so it's OK) last week when he said that Rumsfeld would be there until the end of his administration. He said he did not want to influence the elections, which I guess explains why he's spent the last several weeks campaiging for Republicans on the public dime.

[e_blazer1]

Originally Posted by crandc

And Bush admitted he was not telling the truth (but it wasn't about sex so it's OK) last week when he said that Rumsfeld would be there until the end of his administration. He said he did not want to influence the elections, which I guess explains why he's spent the last several weeks campaiging for Republicans on the public dime.

If Bush had canned Rumsfeld last week, he'd have been lambasted for trying to appease enough voters to influence the election. He waits until after the election and gets blasted for being a liar.

I can't understand why anyone would want that job.

[bodyman5001]

I guess I didn't know too much about the subject or that they were firing him.

What I do know is that I hate when people lie to me.

If you really really really wanted to fire someone and it had nothing to do with an election then DO IT.

Don't lie to me.

[sa1177]

Originally Posted by e_blazer1

If Bush had canned Rumsfeld last week, he'd have been lambasted for trying to appease enough voters to influence the election. He waits until after the election and gets blasted for being a liar.

I can't understand why anyone would want that job.

Or Bush was simply stupid enough and arrogant enough to believe the GOP would win....GOP wins, Rummy stays.

[e_blazer1]

Originally Posted by sa1177

Or Bush was simply stupid enough and arrogant enough to believe the GOP would win....GOP wins, Rummy stays.

I suspect you'd find that the Republicans, like the Democrats, had a pretty good handle on which way the elections were going long before the first ballots were cast. The pollsters were pretty busy last week. Besides, if Bush wanted to keep Rumsfeld, and if Rumsfeld wanted to stay, why not just tell the Democrats to stick it and stay the course? As a lame duck, he doesn't have any particular reason to be placating to the opposition.

[Zybot]

Who's to say that Bush didn't think he would do more damage for Republicans by firing Rumsfeld before the election --- admitting that Rumsfeld was doing a bad job and portraying the administration as a floundering operation.

Anyway -- what ever happened to the captain going down with the ship?

[Minstrel]

Originally Posted by e_blazer1

I suspect you'd find that the Republicans, like the Democrats, had a pretty good handle on which way the elections were going long before the first ballots were cast. The pollsters were pretty busy last week.

I think most expectations were that Democrats would win the House, Republicans would retain control of the Senate (even if just by a 50-50 tie with Cheney casting the tie-breaking votes). For the Democrats to seemingly (assuming the recount in Virginia doesn't change things) snare both the House and the Senate is a surprise to many people, an unexpectedly harsh message to Republicans.

Besides, if Bush wanted to keep Rumsfeld, and if Rumsfeld wanted to stay, why not just tell the Democrats to stick it and stay the course? As a lame duck, he doesn't have any particular reason to be placating to the opposition.

The GOP is in damage control. Bush may not have any more political wars to fight, but the GOP doesn't want to lose the White House, as well, in 2008. Rumsfeld was seen as a good political scapegoat for the Iraq debacle.

[sa1177]

Originally Posted by e_blazer1

I suspect you'd find that the Republicans, like the Democrats, had a pretty good handle on which way the elections were going long before the first ballots were cast. The pollsters were pretty busy last week. Besides, if Bush wanted to keep Rumsfeld, and if Rumsfeld wanted to stay, why not just tell the Democrats to stick it and stay the course? As a lame duck, he doesn't have any particular reason to be placating to the opposition.

As Minstel noted...White House 2008.

If he doesn't work with democrats he'll accomplish nothing...if he accomplishes nothing the GOP will surely lose the WH in 08.

[drexlersdad]

Originally Posted by Zybot

Who's to say that Bush didn't think he would do more damage for Republicans by firing Rumsfeld before the election --- admitting that Rumsfeld was doing a bad job and portraying the administration as a floundering operation.

Anyway -- what ever happened to the captain going down with the ship?

Thats what I was thinking. He was probably trying to influence the election by NOT firing him before.

BTW too bad someone cant fire Bush.

[It's_GO_Time]

Originally Posted by e_blazer1

If Bush had canned Rumsfeld last week, he'd have been lambasted for trying to appease enough voters to influence the election. He waits until after the election and gets blasted for being a liar.

I can't understand why anyone would want that job.

True, that damned if you do, damned if you don't, goes with the territory of being a president. But if were up to me . . . being those powerful man on the planet and then writing a book about it later for millions of dollars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I would reluctantly take it.

[MARIS61]

Originally Posted by