So, here’s another big post-election day shocker: to the delight of Democrats and moonbats howling everywhere, highly-criticized Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld steps down.

BBC News reports:

The president made it quite clear at a news conference after the election that he had decided beforehand that a “fresh perspective” was needed at the Pentagon.

This means that, win or lose the election, Mr Bush had decided that things were going badly enough to remove one of the architects of the war.

In fact, when Mr Bush told reporters last week that Mr Rumsfeld would be staying on, he had already spoken to Mr Rumsfeld about leaving. He said to the news conference that “win or lose, Bob Gates was going to become the nominee.”

Has anyone seen Karl Rove? What the Usama is going on here?

If Rumsfeld’s departure had already been decided, why didn’t they announce it BEFORE the election? Doing so might’ve assuaged many of the “moderate” Democrats who’ve been hearing the constant cricitisms and finally got fed up.

An earlier resignation would’ve also pre-empted the anti-Rumsfeld (read: anti-Republican) editorial that was published in the Army, Air Force, Marines and Navy newspapers over the weekend.

It would’ve given the President a chance to say, “Hey, we’re going in a new direction,” without even having to say it.

Quite frankly, it might’ve changed the outcome of this election.

The Bush Administration had nothing to lose, and the party had only everything to gain. Instead, now it looks like Democrats have “prevailed” for they will posture to take credit for bringing down Rumsfeld. Their first (and perhaps only) “victory” against terrorism.

If this is the kind of strategery we’re practicing in Iraq, maybe there is a problem.

UPDATE:
Further to the point, AP reports:

“Overall, Republicans lost ground with swing voters such as Catholics, independents, Hispanics and suburbanites, according to exit polls conducted for the AP and the television networks. The GOP held its conservative base, but Democrats made inroads with moderates.”

HotAir shares the sentiment.

1. Rumsfeld Resigns, Bob Gates Nominated…

   What IF President Bush and Vice President Cheney decided to join Rumsfeld on the beach with a little umbrella drink in hand, laughing their asses off, and let the Democrats see if THEY can do any better in Iraq without “cutting and running?”
   What IF…

   Trackback by Wake up America — November 8, 2006 @ 5:01 pm

2. Defending Rumsfeld…

   Compito difficile, direi ingrato. Difendere Donald Rumsfeld oggi è forse la cosa meno simpatica che si possa fare. Se c’è un vero sconfitto di queste mid term-elections è proprio lui. Specialmente gli osservatori internazionali (europei) hanno…

   Trackback by Freedomland - Il blog di Simone Bressan - — November 9, 2006 @ 3:37 am

3. Libertarian swing vote backs Chuck Hagel for president …

   First we must deal with the elephant in the room. Not just any elephant, but the wounded, clinically depressed, angry, bipolar, borderline psychotic elephant that is the GOP today….

   Trackback by Divided We Stand United We Fall — November 16, 2006 @ 12:32 am

4. Lips like morphine kill hannah….

   Morphine pills vs morphine patch. Lips like morphine. Morphine. Intrathecal morphine pump syracuse….

   Trackback by Morphine. — July 24, 2007 @ 5:28 pm

5. non prescription viagra…

   psychopathologically eternise…

   Trackback by viagra — December 25, 2007 @ 12:14 pm

1. As a supported on the wa in Iraq i have to say it is good to see rumsfield go. He couldn’t plan a piss up in a brewary

   Comment by simon — November 8, 2006 @ 6:49 pm

2. Monday morning quarterbacking?

   You make it sound like Rummy was being criticized because he was old, or ugly, or dresses funny; the truth is that he was criticized (and rightly so) for his failures to prosecute the war. And while I’m happy to see him go, it is not because I want to lose the war, nor becuase he’s just another republiCON. We are losing the war and Iraq is sliding in chaos. We must do something.

   And this is where the lunatic right has lost what little shred of integrity it had. Staying the course — or whatever you want to call it — is not an option. I’ll add my voice to the chorus screaming, “I’m sure the 105 soldiers who lost their lives in October would agree, Rumsfeld must go!”

   Funny, the Democrats are already effective, and they haven’t even taken office yet… the morning after the election and Bush starts governing from where he should have been 6 years ago. You can expect the worst: the country is realizing that the Dems should have been the majority party in Congress all along.

   But, would this have really changed the outcome of the election, had it been announced on Monday or before? Doubtful. The right-wing lunatics (and yes, that includes you, CalCON) would have screamed about this, saying Bush capitulated to the fear that the Dems would take Congress (maybe Michelle Malkin could post something on You Tube… err, maybe not). Was it not just a couple of days ago that you all stood up for Rummy? Or, in terms I’m sure you’ll understand, Bush was for Rumsfeld before he was against him. I guess he was just doin’ the usual republiCON heck-of-a-job.

   I’m sure Bush will give him the Presidential Medal of Freedom within a few days, and Rummy can scurry off to write his memoirs and rake in the millions of bucks some publisher will give him. I’ll bet there are more than a few soldiers out there that could use a few bucks for rehabilitation, physical therapy, and basic care, thanks to Rummy. Maybe Rummy could do the right thing and donate the proceeds to the VA. (Yeah, right… like that would ever happen.)

   This may be the first Democratic victory against terrorism, but it is hardly the last.

   In a previous post, you declared this a “dark day for America” and nothing could be further from the truth. The Democrats didn’t bring down Rummy; republiCON intransigence brought about his departure.

   The long national nightmare is ending, and the dawn is breaking on a new morning in America, indeed.

   Comment by Stop Bush! — November 8, 2006 @ 7:35 pm

3. *Yawn*

   Comment by Benn — November 8, 2006 @ 7:37 pm

4. “Maybe there is a problem” You still don’t get it , do you?

   Comment by Benn — November 8, 2006 @ 7:39 pm

5. Stop Bush, forgive me, but what do YOU know about executing war?

   Comment by Amy Proctor — November 8, 2006 @ 9:42 pm

6. “the Democrats are already effective, and they haven’t even taken office yet…”

   You’ve GOT to be kidding. What have Democrats doen effectively besides looking like pompus elitists?

   Comment by Amy Proctor — November 8, 2006 @ 9:44 pm

7. PS… Paul Bremmer may have been the one who really made the war effort difficult in 2003 by promising Baathists they could keep their jobs and then not paying them. He alienated a LOT of Iraqi Baathists who may have joined with the Coalition. Rumsfeld had nothing to do with that.

   Comment by Amy Proctor — November 8, 2006 @ 9:46 pm

8. No, but Rummy did order Saddam’s army disbanded, didn’t bother to make sure we knew where the artillary was (where, exactly, do you think they are getting all of the components to build bombs? And who do you think taught them how to put the components together, or are you forgetting about the Iran-Iraq war?) and proceeded to guard ONLY the oil ministry and production fields, leaving the rest of the country — the infrastructure, the antiquities (this is, afterall, the cradle of civilization), the people all completely vulnerable. But hey, free people are free to make mistakes in a free land, right?

   what do YOU know about executing war?

   Nothing. That’s why I’m not the secretary of defense, nor in the military, or even a politician. War isn’t my thing.

   What have Democrats doen [sic] effectively …?

   Won an election.

   Paul Bremmer may have been the one … Rumsfeld had nothing to do with that.

   So, Bremer didn’t report to Rumsfeld? Certainly the President could have called Bremer to account… oh wait, he awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, so he must have had no issues with Bremer’s performance, right? Or, was it another case of thinking that they could do anything they wanted with impunity?

   Iraq is a mess, and understanding how we got there and why, at this point, is merely a distraction. We’ve got to solve this problem (and using these terms in now way implies a lack of seriousness regarding these issues) quickly. However, if the only way to effect change is to call those responsible and hold them accountable, then nothing is off the table.

   Comment by Stop Bush! — November 8, 2006 @ 11:15 pm

9. PREVED!

   Comment by eharv ivmuk — November 26, 2006 @ 11:39 pm