Rummy is sounding a little out of it lately. He certainly contradicts himself rather ridiculously on the second point. He comes across as very phony.

He may be right about the first point, though. I wouldn't be surprised if the President was lying on that one.

Funny thing about Rumsfeld is that if he hadn't been in office these past six years and somebody else had committed exactly the same mistakes, there would be an enormous push amongst Republicans, but also perhaps more widely, to give him the job now. This is chiefly b/c his rhetoric (adaptability, be prepared for the unexpected, etc.) is so far detatched from what he actually did. This seems like another example. But, he cannot run away from the fact that he is one of the very few Sec Def's to have lost a war.

I can't help the sneaking suspicion that the ISG and all of the gruntleness since the election is designed to provide a huge left-hand barrier for Bush's policies located sufficiently on the right. Bush *has* to hand this mess off to the next administration, and he can't do that if ending the war in the next two years is still on the table. The only visible discourse on the war has been from ex-hawks coming out of the woodwork, "yearning to breathe free," but something about it just stinks. I think the fact that there is no visible Democratic rhetoric happening has something to do with it. The Right is once again controlling the dialog, the news cycle and the terms of engagement.

Lately?

Tom

It's hardly surprising that Rumsfeld has come to see the light when he has finally been held accountable, something the Republican Congress failed to so even though the Constitution entrusts them with oversight responsibility.

I trust that now that the Democrats are finally in control of both houses of Congress that they won't make the same mistake.

I hope so, but don't bet your house on it.

Tom

Rummy's retirement won't be too comfortable. He will be doing a bit of testifying. He has those potential law suits to face as well as at least four congressional committees that are going to want an accounting. Not only do they want to flesh out Iraq, they also want to evaluate his military reforms. Other committees want to discuss Contracts and Contractors and procurement matters generally. If there are hearings about Gitmo, Military Commissions, detainment policy -- Rummy will be one of the star witnesses. And yea, they will swear him in and maybe threaten contempt if he does not straightforwardly answer questions.

What I find interesting is that now that Gates has been confirmed, why isn't he at the center of this policy re-evaluation? My guess is that Cheney has not totally let go yet and come to terms with the power shift. Afterall it is Cheney who placed the network all over the Departments and Agencies -- and it twas he who had all the paper pass his desk before it moved to the President if we are to believe some of the insider stories. If Gates, as rumored, gets rid of Pace at Joint Chiefs, and otherwise cleans house, and then minimizes Cheney's influence by demanding to see the President Alone, things could get interesting.

By the way there was an interesting conversation during the Gates Confirmation between Robert Byrd and Biden and Senator Warner: Byrd proposed a new Resolution regarding Presidential Authorities vis a vis Iraq, contending that the October 2002 resolution was now long outdated. Warner and Biden agreed to work with Byrd on this. Gates was then asked his opinion -- and he said he would have to reserve judgment till he had a chance to explore the details. Then Levin chimed in and said he too would be interested.

I am actually surprised there has not been more comment on this little conversation.