Rumsfeld resignation right after the elections?
914674
Rumsfeld was a highly divisive figure. It's likely that a democratic legislature would have found a way to force him out of office. Rather than open himself up for that kind of fight (and, by extension, open the white house up to the fight), he resigned.\n\nI disagree with the prior poster saying leaving earlier would have hurt the Republican party. I think leaving earlier would have helped the GOP. A lot of people, not just Democrats, wanted Rumsfeld gone. If he had left prior to elections, it would have shown a white house willingness to adapt and respond to criticism -- something that it's thus far been fairly slow and unwilling to do.
751308
He resigned so he could personally go look for them...\n\nJust remember, he is doing a bang up job, but not bang up enough now that the election went the way it did. (kinda like the old head of FEMA?)
832231
It's acceptable, but I don't really see how life will change much without Rumsfeld. Politics in Washington DC will remain corrupt as usual. Life goes on.\n\nHowever, I agree that Rumsfeld took too much of the blame. The blame extends to the Bush Administration and Congress, both Democrat and Republican politicians alike... and it also extends to the Perfumed Princes and "yes-men" Generals in control of our military. The Bush Administration should be faulted for the bad policies they decide to carry out. The Congress, Democrats and Republicans, need to quit fighting each other and worrying about their own parties (and re-elections) and for once do what's best for the Country and the People. Democrat politicians need to stop complaining about why we're in Iraq and start finding solutions. Yes-Men in the Joint Chiefs and Pentagon and wherever they are need to be weeded out immediately, replaced by combat-vets who can say "No." and know the situation on the ground (probably by being in Iraq where the action is instead of an air-conditioned office in the E-Ring) And finally, Americans need to stop being polarized in politics and abandon the corrupt party platforms and start working together to find solutions.\n\nI would speculate that Rumsfeld was an easy target to become a scrapegoat. He was probably the only one to take the fall of Iraq because of the corrupt politics that goes on in our Country, but later on probably won't be the last one.
938273
Forced to resigned with a healthy pension. With Military backing the Democrats would have set sights on Donny's expulsion.\nHopefully Bush is next!
930362
DEMOCRATS WON!\nRUMSFELD RESIGNED!\nDeal with it, Repubs
704954
Not me.  The ending of a war is determined on the battlefield, not with what happens in a political election.\n\nI hope the Dems realize that troops should be withdrawn when the job is done -- not when it's politically expedient for them.\n\nThat's what happened in Vietnam -- the antiwar left convinced our leaders that we had to leave, they convinced our country that we were in a "quagmire," and millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians soon became dead or exiled as a result.   \n\nA hasty withdrawal from Iraq would yield similar results.\n\n.
888024
I hope so....\nBut the reality is, Bush actually believes what he preaches, sad really. If he fires Rumsfeld, than he is publically admitting his mistake.\nOur only hope at this point, is that the voice of country is actually heard tonight.
950032
Rummy was expendable.  Getting rid of him is an attempt by Bush to look like he been chasten by the Republican loss.  Time will tell, but I'm not counting on much from the president.
770535
Rummy should have been replaced at least two years ago.  I don't hate Rumsfeld.  I think he'd be a great grandfather, but he wasn't a good secretary of defense.
972868
Shame on you Fire God!  Condemning a man for hypocrisy and wrongdoing based on innuendo.  What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?  Stepping down from his position is NOT an admission of guilt -- it's an acknowledgment that he realizes he won't be an effective leader until this matter is properly investigated.\n\nTo answer the question:  It has absolutely nothing to do with this election.  The liberals are grasping at every straw they can get their hands on to make conservatives look bad.
384331
I really don't know. BUT I'll tell you this much. BUSHJERK comes on I change the channel. I Don't want to HEAR anything he has to say unless it is I RESIGN EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
879426
Right, until the elections are over...
824887
DEMOCRATS WON!\nRUMSFELD RESIGNED!\nDeal with it
852610
Seems likely in view of the fact that two or three weeks ago Bush lied that Rumsfeld would be staying on for the next two years.  Apparently a lie since he "accepted" Rumsfeld's resignation the morning after the election.  Speaking of....if there is to be a trial against Rumsfeld, would it consider Bush and Cheney as accomplishes?
704815
It was already planned a week ago.  If the Demo's won, he was out.  If the Republicans retained power, he was to stay.
716844
resigning from office
209563
Yes, indeed, Kerry lost. The election was NOT stolen, nor was that in 2000.  I'm glad to see that most people before Terrence were reasonable about this.   \n\nFor those who agree with Terrence, please note that many people have looked into various claims of cheating and NONE was found.\n \nIn the case of 2000 election, for instance, if you followed the news stories in the months following the election -- about things like the newspaper consortium's own recount of Florida and the proceedings of the Civil Rights Commission, you would have seen that they turned up. . . NOTHING.\n\nSo, where is your EVIDENCE of a conspiracy?!  Or do you just "know" it?  Or did you 'hear someone say...' ?\n\nAs for the remarks about Ken Blackwell, offered with NO evidence, are simply slander.   (Yes, I know some folks disagreed with Blackwell's decisions in his capacity of Secretary of State, but they took him to court about his procedures BEFORE the election. . . and lost!  All of this is official public record  -- I read several of them online just before the election.)