Well, the "the President is very angry" thing has been bullshit in the past. I recall that some Reagan aide did something scandalous, and there was much made by Reagan's staff of a meeting where Reagan "took him to the woodshed" and ragged him out. Only it never really happened that way, as it turned out. Reagan was a truly amiable guy, and apparently didn't have it in him to do that sort of thing. It was just a story that the aides put together to let the public know that the president had "punished" the miscreant, that justice was done, and they could now go back to reading the comics page.
So "unnamed sources' Bush's team can pass the word that he's angry with Rumsfeld, but we'll never really know. Unfortunately, you can't really take anybody's word at face value in politics when the spinning and damage control is under way, which it is.
I think the most damaging thing to Rumsfeld's credibility was his response to Sen. McCain's (yay!) question: who was in charge? Who gave the orders? Where did they come from on the chain of command. He neither answered nor said that he didn't know. He just waffled. Looks very, very bad, especially on a guy who's built his whole image on being competent, self-assured, and in control (ie, "Don't doubt me, I know what I'm doing.")
Last edited by Rodney; 05-08-2004 at 07:23 AM..
|