Rumsfeld's delusional critics Contributed by Bill Faith
Liberal elites have offered a variety of reactions -- from contemptuous to apoplectic -- to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's address on Tuesday to the American Legion, in which he noted the many parallels between the current struggle against Islamofascism and the situation prior to World War II. Mr. Rumsfeld's critics, among them Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Sen. Jack Reed and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, are most upset over the fact that he had the temerity to point out that just as many in the West deluded themselves over the danger posed by the rise of Nazism and Japanese militarism during the 1930s, many people today do not understand that violent Islamism poses an existential threat.
Mr. Reid, for example, accused Mr. Rumsfeld of "lashing out at political enemies" in his speech, while the Los Angeles Times editorialized that Mr. Rumsfeld's criticism of a "Blame America First" mindset was a "canard." But the truth is that Mr. Rumsfeld never mentioned the Democrats in his speech. Instead ...
[.]
Greg Tinti
There is very little that truly makes me angry. But over the past couple of days, I have read many and that excoriate Defense Secretary Rumsfeld's speech delivered to American Legion as a hyper partisan, baseless attack against critics of the administration and an assault on the patriotism of all those that dare speak out.
This characterization strikes me as incredibly ironic considering that the media and the vast majority of the left in this country regularly regards Bush and his administration as simple-minded, incompetent, or just plain dumb, yet, for those that regularly employ such invective, there seems to be an incredibly weak grasp of the nuance in Rumsfeld's argument. Either that, or these critics to become so emotional that there's little hope that one could ever have a rational discussion about the threats that we--the United States--face.
This really isn't all that surprising though since this distortion of Rumsfeld's speech is hardly a new tactic. ...
[.]
***
I Question The Timing Greg Tinti
, the left--with the help of the MSM--has done a fine job of distorting Secretary Rumsfeld's speech to the American Legion portraying it as a hyper partisan attack in which he labeled all administration critics terrorist "appeasers."
Today, Jonathan Weisman of The Washington Post that the Democrats are planning "to push for a vote of no confidence in Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld this month as part of a broad effort to stay on the offensive ahead of the November midterm elections."
Hmmm. Is it possible that the Democrats actually created this whole controversy over Rumsfeld's speech in order to fit into their larger strategy of using the SecDef as a lightning rod? Weisman seems to hint that it's possible:
[.]
Contributed by Bill Faith on September 1, 2006 at 01:13 AM in , , , |