Rumsfeld hasn’t ‘reached out’ to anyone

The AP, Washington Post, ABC, and others ran the exact same headline: “Rumsfeld Reaches Out to Democrats.” The lede makes it sound like Rumsfeld took a conciliatory, almost gracious, step in the Dems’ direction. He didn’t.

Defense Secretary Donald H. [tag]Rumsfeld [/tag]reached out to [tag]Democrats[/tag] yesterday, opening the door for them to retract their stinging indictment of him as Pentagon chief.

In a letter to Congress’s top Democrats, Rumsfeld said remarks he made Tuesday during a speech in Salt Lake City were misrepresented by the news media. Rumsfeld said he was “concerned” by the reaction of Democrats, many of whom called for his resignation and said he was treading on dangerous territory.

“I know you agree that with America under attack and U.S. troops in the field, our national debate on this should be constructive,” Rumsfeld wrote.

Rumsfeld’s letter to Dems is part of the same arrogance that prompted his controversial remarks in the first place. He sent party leaders a copy of his speech, suggesting that if they knew what he said (Rumsfeld assumes they do not), they’d no doubt want to retract their criticisms.

Not surprisingly, they don’t.

“We did read the speech, and he makes comparisons to World War II” that are unjustified, said Brendan Daly, spokesman for House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.). “He needs to explain that. We stand behind what we said.”

Pelosi had said: “If Mr. Rumsfeld is so concerned with comparisons to World War II, he should explain why our troops have now been fighting in Iraq longer than it took our forces to defeat the Nazis in Europe.”

“It’s always been clear what Secretary Rumsfeld said,” said Rebecca Kirszner, a spokeswoman for Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.). “What’s not clear is that he has a strategy in Iraq and to keep America safe. This letter doesn’t change that.”

Look, Rumsfeld knew what he was doing, lashing out at his critics as “quitters,” who “cannot stomach a tough fight” and are inclined to “blame America first.” It was painfully absurd and offensive, and deserved the rebuke it received.

For Rumsfeld to write Democrats a letter, offering them a chance to retract their criticism, is not an example of “reaching out”; it’s an example of taunting. The media probably ought to appreciate the difference.

Post Script: Speaking of the media, Michael Froomkin wrote the AP a letter about the shoddy coverage on this. It’s worth checking out.

Hey, remember all those times Moe poked Larry and Curly in the eyes? He had to reach out to do that. So we can say with confidence that Rumsfeld has, technically speaking, reached out to Democrats.

  • That was my thought too, that he had simply claimed to have been misrepresented and wasn’t reaching out to Dems at all.

    I do wish the Dems would realize that everything is a sound bit and they will never be quoted at length in the news and they need to embed their points in every quote even if they have to be repetitive like Bush sometimes.

    Any ideas on how they could have improved their responses?

    “We did read the speech, and he makes comparisons to World War II” that are unjustified, said Brendan Daly, spokesman for House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.). “He needs to explain that. We stand behind what we said.”

    Maybe: He accused the American people of being appeasers and quitters and we pointed that out and we stand behind what we said.

    Pelosi had said: “If Mr. Rumsfeld is so concerned with comparisons to World War II, he should explain why our troops have now been fighting in Iraq longer than it took our forces to defeat the Nazis in Europe.”

    That one was pretty good.

    “It’s always been clear what Secretary Rumsfeld said,” said Rebecca Kirszner, a spokeswoman for Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.). “What’s not clear is that he has a strategy in Iraq and to keep America safe. This letter doesn’t change that.”

    The first part is good, but the second might be better like: He has no strategy in Iraq or to keep Americans safe. His letter is just more excuses.

    Get pithy, I say.

  • What Americans cannot, and should not, stomach is the incessant parade of lies and insults proffered by sophomoric public servants like Rumsfeld. The fact that Rummy can eat his Fruity Pebbles every morning without indigestion while he’s at the helm of a catastrophic war has nothing to do with “stomach” or “guts” or a “stiff constitution.” It has to do with the fact that Rummy could give a damn if people die. Rationalizing away the untidyness of war and keeping human suffering at an analytical arm’s distance proves that humans can do diabolical things with a sanitized conscience. Behind the Leave it to Beaver “my goodness garciousness” prissyfied persona is a man who has no grasp of human suffering or the evil he has wrought because in his mind all these little nasty things have been starched, pressed and tucked away into the compartments of his mind labeled “other people’s problems.”

  • Behind the Leave it to Beaver “my goodness garciousness” prissyfied persona is a man who has no grasp of human suffering or the evil he has wrought because in his mind all these little nasty things have been starched, pressed and tucked away into the compartments of his mind labeled “other people’s problems.”

    Comment by petorado

    That is so perfectly phrased. We have monsters in charge of the most powerful nation in the world. Contrary to what these ass-holes believe, we do live on a very small planet, and there are consequences to action. Sadly it will probably be the innocent paying the price.

  • Just include the picture of Rummy shaking hands with his (then) good buddy Saddam Hussein every time you write about Rumsfeld.

  • Perhaps the lead should have read: “Rumsfeld pulls his pants down, so patriotic Democrats should have a chance to kiss it”

  • ***Perhaps the lead should have read: “Rumsfeld pulls his pants down, so patriotic Democrats should have a chance to kiss it”***
    ——————-Jon Karak

    This would be a really good time for Cheney to break out the shotgun. Just tell him that “those cheeks have something to do with Democrats and Iraq. Shoot, damn you!”

    Sorry—the suspended humor of irony caught me unawares….

  • Why oh why does the media keep falling for this? They don’t even seem to notice that Rumsfeld says the media got the obvious meaning wrong– that they’re the villain here. They’re so used to being called “liberally-biased”, they just assume the position whenever the administration gets out the paddle.

  • Wow. Next time I say something completely nasty and unjustified, I’ll reach out by allowing those offended parties to apologize to me.

  • Comments are closed.