Democrats raise Rumsfeld attacks to put GOP on defensive

[rodeodance]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/01/democrats.rumsfeld/index.html

Democrats raise Rumsfeld attacks to put GOP on defensive
POSTED: 9:55 a.m. EDT, September 1, 2006


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Congressional Democrats are sharpening their attacks on Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, with one senator proposing a resolution that would call on President Bush to sack the outspoken Pentagon chief.

Sen. Barbara Boxer of California said Thursday that she wants to attach the measure to the defense appropriation bill coming to the Senate floor after lawmakers' August recess.

.....

The idea is to force Republicans to cast what would amount to a vote of confidence in Rumsfeld -- one of the architects of the increasingly unpopular war in Iraq -- before November's midterm elections, said a Democratic strategist close to the House.

Such a move also would give Democrats a chance to show a united front on Iraq by calling for Rumsfeld's dismissal.

[rodeodance]

1. Boxer is putting forth this proposal (no confidence vote) in the Senate

Appeaser comments draw fire

Rumsfeld outraged many Democratic leaders with a speech Tuesday to the American Legion convention in Utah, accusing critics of the 3-year-old war of turning a blind eye to "a new type of fascism" and "returning to that old mentality of 'Blame America first.' " (Full story)

But with U.S. troops trying to quell a wave of sectarian violence in Baghdad, Boxer and other Democrats placed the blame for American troubles in Iraq squarely on Rumsfeld. (Watch as Democrats accuse Rumsfeld of political rant -- 2:43)

"This latest Rumsfeld rampage cannot stand," Boxer said in a statement Thursday. "By comparing critics of this administration's policies in Iraq with those who wanted to appease fascism and Nazism in the run-up to World War II, he is slandering the majority of the American people, who oppose the war in Iraq."

Boxer's proposal states that Rumsfeld failed to plan adequately for the U.S. occupation of Iraq and ignored the rise of the insurgency that followed. It cites the criticism of retired generals, some of whom say Rumsfeld ignored military advice before the 2003 invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.

[iconoclastic cat]

2. Are they using Rumsfailed to draw fire away from Bush? nt

[Monkeyman]

4. But its not Bush in underfire for Rummy's comments

[peaches2003]

6. Of course

Bush has Rummy say the things he know will draw fire which he would like to say himself. If Bush (and Cheney) did not approve of every vile word out of Rummy's mouth Rummy wouldn't be saying this crap. I could care less about Rumsfield; why isn't the press pointing out Bush himself, our King and Emperor, must approve of all of this or Rummy would be told to stop it.

Bush never takes responsibility for anything and our useless press doesn't do its job and place the blame where it belongs.

They are using the words fascists and nazi to preempt the Dems from using them where they really belong. How Rummy used these words doesn't even make sense.

[pinto]

8. Good move, imo. Rumsfeld's over the top, let's have Repubs explain

his latest "rampage" (Boxer's apt phrase).

[PATRICK]

3. One great defense

by Rumsfeld was that he was quoting a leading GOP senator(William Borah, the Lion of Idaho) from 1939, but too much thought there would make matters even worse in precising the analogies and common trajectories of GOP disastrous policy values.

I loved the words "strange innocence". The corporate, Hitler dealing, League of nations killing, war profiteering, Nazi investment GOP??? Strange indeed.

[gratuitous]

5. Run TO conflict, Democrats!

We fight, we win. It's that simple. Inspires your base, gives hope to the fence-sitters that you stand for something, and robs the GOP of easy, meaningless talking points.

What could be better?

[thepurpose]

7. Thank you, It's not like there aren't demo leaders out there who won't do

the fighting without fear. They don't care if they lose their seat they are speaking out to the country. Dean, Feingold, Murtha and so on, all the rest just have to do is support them and at the very least STFU if you just can't handle the heat.

[Ravy]

9. One other point....

if for some reason Rummy did leave his job soon, it may force Holy Joe into an interesting situation. Bush may be caught between the decision to woo more moderates to his defense position by appointing Lieberman, and conceding the seat to Lamont.

[pat_k]

10. Gee for a minute there, I thought they might actually do something. . .

Rumsfeld, shumsfeld.

It is time for the Democratic members of the House and Senate to fulfill their oath to support and defend the constitution by demanding Impeachment of bushcheney for their claims to, and exercise of, the unitary authoritarian power to

• terrorize Americans with threats of Mushroom clouds;


• commit war crimes;


• spy on citizens without a warrant; and


• rule by signing statement.

Unitary Authoritarian Power = Fascism

In the United States, the ONLY MORAL RESPONSE to a fascist executive
is to demand immediate Impeachment and removal.

Failure to do so is to appease the fascists.

Silence is complicity

It's pretty darn simple.

[Demeter]

11. Why Don't Congress Go Straight To War Crimes and Impeach Rummy?

Why dick around with Britishisms like no confidence?

[pat_k]

12. Why Rumsfeld? It is a dereliction of duty not to Impeach BushCheney

Giving Decider/Dictator Bush a pass and going after a minion -- Rumsfeld -- doesn't take much courage. Going after Rumsfeld doesn't spare the constitution from being nuked by Bush and Cheney.

No, rescuing our constitutional democracy must begin with the Impeachment and removal of Bush and Cheney (to be followed by turning them over to the Hague).

Sure, Rumsfeld must also face judgment -- in Congress and in the world court -- for his role in the war crimes (along with Paul Wolfowitz, John Yoo, David Addington, General Geoffrey Miller. . .) but that must be part of the house cleaning to follow the removal of the unitary authoritarian executive currently ruling by edict and signing statement from the White House.

From above http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2489540&mesg_id=2489726">Gee, for a minute there, I thought they might actually do something

[Demeter]

13. For the Torture of Watching Each Limb Fall Off the Monster

Imagine Bush and Cheney paralyzed with fear as one by one their minions and enablers fall by the wayside and into prison. It would be like chopping off the victim's limbs joint by joint. I'm sure that such connoisseurs of pain could really appreciate such a going away present.

[pat_k]

16. I'm all for any war criminal in this admin being charged. . .

. . .and I'm all for anything that forces people to touch that third rail: the fact that these people are not just nuking the constitution, they are war criminals (not even the fascists on SCOTUS could escape that grim reality).

Nevertheless, I find it disturbing that, rather than demanding that members of Congress do their duty, come what may, too many of us only seem to jump on the "Get 'em" bandwagon when the target is perceived as a politically safe one.

And so, I toss out my little reminders not to lose track of Job One -- rescuing our constitutional democracy from the urinary executive, war criminal in chief.

"Fiat justitia, ruat coelum"

"Let justice be done, though the heavens fall"

[arewenotdemo]

17. Sounds good to me

Up till now I've thought that Rumsfeld was a political liability that Bush should retain.

But I imagine that he really doesn't cost Bush many votes at all.

[Guaranteed]

14. Great idea by Boxer. nt

[Guaranteed]

15. Great idea by Boxer. nt