So what's the big deal with Rumsfeld?

Much has been made of the retired generals who have been calling for Rumsfeld's resignation. In the end, as Bush said yesterday, [Bush] is the "decider" when it boils down to the nitty-gritty. It is not Rumsfeld's War. He serves at the pleasure of the President. But, let's face it, Bush needs someone with new ideas, new perspective. Like Bush himself, the people with whom he surrounds himself are either loyal and persistent or stubborn and unable to admit mistakes, depending on your perspective. Even if you go with the former, is it a good idea to be loyal to something that doesn't work?

Rumsfeld needs to go. Bush needs fresh blood and in a bad way. Today I was listening to American Morning on CNN as I got ready for work, and I heard an interview with Major General Tom Wilkerson, retired. He was defending Rumsfeld. His main argument seemed to be that we need to stop harping on past mistakes and start dealing with the present situation. Besides, it is now up to the Iraqis to form their government and make things work, and the lack of progress on that front is not Rumsfeld's fault.

Okay, stop a minute. Let's think about this. First of all, I am sad to say that I have been right with about 90 percent of what has happened in Iraq since Bush started saber-rattling after 9-11. I kept wishing I would be wrong, but I wasn't. I kept hoping that these well-informed Bush administration officials knew better than me, a high school Spanish teacher, but alas, they didn't. Why, if the Secretary of Defense and this whole administration have made so many mistakes from day one, do we think they are the ones who will suddenly make all the right decisions from here on out? Hello?! We need fresh blood. Now.

And this notion that we are going to blame the Iraqis for the current problems, because they have not set up a workable government seems a bit like passing the buck. Of course, it is their country and they do need to have some responsibility in this situation, but let us not forget that they wrote their constitution and held elections on our timetable after we overthrew their government. Then we told them to set up a new one. Part of the reason that our democracy has endured (not without issues--remember that period from 1860 to 1864), is because it was formed from a home-grown revolution. It was our time. We decided. Forced democracy--talk about an oximoron.

So what's the big deal with Rumsfeld? He is the biggest, loudest, and I would argue, most arrogant symbol of what is wrong with this administration and its Iraq War policy. Please, show him the door.