George Bush Sr. Tried To Get Rumsfeld Fired
The clamor to oust Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld wasn’t just limited to retired generals (who were later blasted and demonized by some talk show hosts as they defended the administration): apparently President George Bush The First was trying to find a way to have Rumself spend more time with his family, too.
Sidney Blumenthal writes in Salon:
Former President George H.W. Bush waged a secret campaign over several months early this year to remove Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. The elder Bush went so far as to recruit Rumsfeld’s potential replacement, personally asking a retired four-star general if he would accept the position, a reliable source close to the general told me. But the former president’s effort failed, apparently rebuffed by the current president. When seven retired generals who had been commanders in Iraq demanded Rumsfeld’s resignation in April, the younger Bush leapt to his defense. “I’m the decider and I decide what’s best. And what’s best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain,” he said. His endorsement of Rumsfeld was a rebuke not only to the generals but also to his father.The elder Bush’s intervention was an extraordinary attempt to rescue simultaneously his son, the family legacy and the country. The current president had previously rejected entreaties from party establishment figures to revamp his administration with new appointments. There was no one left to approach him except his father. This effort to pluck George W. from his troubles is the latest episode in a recurrent drama — from the drunken young man challenging his father to go “mano a mano” on the front lawn of the family home in Kennebunkport, Maine, to the father pulling strings to get the son into the Texas Air National Guard and helping salvage his finances from George W.’s mismanagement of Harken Energy. For the father, parental responsibility never ends. But for the son, rebellion continues. When journalist Bob Woodward asked George W. Bush if he had consulted his father before invading Iraq, he replied, “He is the wrong father to appeal to in terms of strength. There is a higher father that I appeal to.”
Yes, there is a huge difference between the kind of Republicanism practiced by the current President and his Dad, as well as the approach to foreign policy. Under Bush I the State Department seemed to have more clout. Colin Powell was an icon; he seemed to be considered by some in the current administration as more of an obstacle and a gadfly.
But Republicans are split on this. To some, George Bush I was that wishy-wash moderate whose lips couldn’t be trusted on taxes and who wasn’t man enough to take Baghdad after the first Gulf War. To some other Americans, Bush I was from the school that respected diplomacy and diplomats and used the military as a tool from strong diplomacy, versus using diplomacy to justify military plans — and someone who took into consideration the nation’s political center.
5 Responses to “George Bush Sr. Tried To Get Rumsfeld Fired”
Joe – You should give his full name: Sidney “Grassy Knoll” Blumenthal, so caled for his attachment to conspiracy theories. I would be skeptical of anything coming from this man, given his reputation.
And I think it says something that he took a job at the Guardian. Were there no American newspapers or magazines who wanted him? And if not, why not?
The only problem with dismissing him by trying to say anything he says is baloney is that this fits in perfectly with what was happening at that time and with all of the former Bush administration members who have been highly critical of this administration. There is a split there and this report is one more that you can add to it. Colin Powell was often said to have been on the same wavelength as the first George Bush, who in addition to having headed the CIA was very much into diplomacy. I don’t think SB works at a job at the Guardian; I think he contributes to it just as Kos, Andrew Sullivan and Ed Morrissey have written for various publication’s op-ed pages (and like I did years ago). You’re paid by the piece when you do that or some people have contracts where they agree to do X number of pieces. If he wrote some wild analyses before, this is one that does make sense if you go back over the past few months and look at the military and former Bush administration officials who are critical of the present administration.
Misinformational Tripe.
Joe, you may be engaging in some post hoc reconstruction, not to mention the fact that it is, IMHO, entirely ridiculous to believe that Sid Vicious is going to have any kind of sympathetic ear inside the inner circle of 41, much less 43, that would reflect accurately what is going on inside the WH or the Bush family.
Rumsfeld has not been picky about stepping on toes in the E-ring. And frequently he has done so using football cleats. He cancels weapon programs. He’s big on BRAC. He has let the Generals and Admirals know, in no uncertain terms, that the Military is subject to Civilian Authority.
And these retired Generals and Admirals, political animals all, did not lose their sense of smell of blood in the water, and when they saw that Rumsfeld might be reeling, they tried to strike.
And they missed.
The other thing about this that makes it look to me to be absolute rubbish is the fact that 41 has practically disappeared from the political stage, still maintaining the (I think) proper stance of a former POTUS not interfering in the activities of the current (twice elected) POTUS. It’s just not in 41′s makeup to tread where he ain’t supposed to tread.
If this story were about Jimmah Cahtah or The Ultimate Answer moving in the background, I might buy it, especially coming from Sid Vicious. But 41? Unh-Unh.
“To some other Americans, Bush I was from the school that respected diplomacy and diplomats and used the military as a tool from strong diplomacy, versus using diplomacy to justify military plans — and someone who took into consideration the nation’s political center.”
Yeah, the “political center”. “Concensus is the negation of leadership”, Margaret Thatcher. And if Bush I was in the political center, why did he get only 34% of the vote in ’92, while rightwing extremist Bush II got a majority? Hmmm, maybe the center ain’t what you think it is.