Who Exactly, Is Saying Rumsfeld Must Go?

Andrew Sullivan has a piece at his Time blog indicating that the Army Times is calling for the resignation or firing of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. The Army Times is not an official Army publication and is not a professional journal. As Oak Leaf points out over at Stop the ACLU, the Army Times is part of the Army Times Publishing Company and, in addition to the Army Times, includes the Air Force Times, Marine Corps Times, and Navy Times. It also includes the Federal Times, Defense News and Military Market. These publications are owned by the Gannett Group which also owns USA Today. Oak Leaf also reveals that the writers of the “military papers” also write for USA Today.

So the big question is, who is calling for Rumsfeld’s job? Did all the guys in the military get together and decide that they wanted Rumsfeld out and then they called the Army Times, an unofficial publication or did a bunch of folks at USA Today decide that they wanted Rumsfeld out and at the same time they would like to see Democrats do well this Tuesday so they wrote the story and published it in a paper that would make it appear as if the military were behind it? I don’t know but it is awfully strange that this is being released a few days before the election and it is being released by a surrogate of a liberal American Newspaper.

Sullivan calls the military desperate but when I read the piece I see a publication making a last minute move of desperation before an important election. It is painfully obvious that all the buzz words are there in order to influence voters. From Sullivan’s piece:

But until recently, the “hard bruising” truth about the Iraq war has been difficult to come by from leaders in Washington. One rosy reassurance after another has been handed down by President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld: “mission accomplished,” the insurgency is “in its last throes,” and “back off,” we know what we’re doing, are a few choice examples.


Since this publication is primarily bought by the military one can only conclude that the Gannett Group is either trying to persuade military members to vote Democrat (the military overwhelmingly votes Republican. This is why Democrats like Ed Rendell and Al Gore try to discount their votes) because all their leaders have lost confidence in the President’s party or they are trying to influence the general public by giving the appearance that a military publication is not backing the SECDEF. I lean toward troop influence, look at the buzz words and how they are aimed at the troops. They told you these things and they lied. Can you continue to trust them. That is how I read it. People should not be fooled by the article’s claim that this has nothing to do with the midterm elections. It has everything to do with the midterms.

I agree with Oak Leaf that many of these military papers are on their way out. I never subscribed to one and I only bought the Army Times when the promotion list was coming out so I could see if I or one of my soldiers got promoted. Usually, one of us bought the paper and shared it with all the others so no one else wasted their money. If you planned it right you could get your haircut the day the paper came out and read it for free at the barber shop. Now that we have Al Gore’s Internet, we can look up promotion information instantly.

Three days until the elections and this piece comes out. It is yet another hatchet job run on the Republicans by the liberal biased MSM and the terrible part is that they disguised it as a military piece. Liberals have no courage of their convictions, not even the libs in the newspaper business. My mother always told me to consider the source. Considering the source of this hit job, I would ignore it.

Others with an opinion:
Sister Toldjah | Blue Crab Boulevard | Macsmind | Flopping Aces | QandO

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

5 Responses to “Who Exactly, Is Saying Rumsfeld Must Go?”

  1. Bosun says:

    I thought it odd also that the military times is running such a story a couple of days before the election. I wondered if it was illegal to manipulate votes, but, freedom of speech considerations outweighed my objectionable concern.

    I should hope that the base PX and Navy Exchange outlets reconsider allowing a manipulative use of their shelf space. Military people should feel outraged that they are being used as pawns by the political pundits of the Democratic party.

    Big Dog, we are in a world of shit if Nancy Pelosi becomes the speaker of the house.

  2. Bosun says:


    I crossposted this article on my weblogs. Hope that is OK. I dislike Media Bull Shit.

    CWO Retired

  3. Big Dog says:

    You know you are welcome to use anything from here that you would like, any time you would like.

  4. Media Lies says:

    The antique media is hyperventilating…….

    ….over “4 leading military papers” saying that Rumsfeld must go. Of course the editors insist that the article coming out……