WASHINGTON, D.C. - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld reached out to Democrats late Friday, opening the door for them to retract their stinging indictment of him as Pentagon chief.
In a letter to Congress' top Democrats, Rumsfeld said recent remarks he made during a speech in Salt Lake City were misrepresented by the media, including by The Associated Press.
Rumsfeld said he was "concerned" by the reaction of Democrats, many of whom called for his resignation and said he was treading on dangerous territory.
"I know you agree that with America under attack and U.S. troops in the field, our national debate on this should be constructive," Rumsfeld wrote Friday.
The keyword is
"constructive".
When Rumsfeld says "constructive" does that mean calls for his resignation and a possible vote of no-confidence don't count?
Is debating whether we should have invaded Iraq in the first place meet Rumsfeld's definition of "constructive"?
Is disputing whether there were WMD's and links to al-Queada count as "constructive"?
Rumsfeld's call for "constructive" debate is a pre-meditative and calculated election ploy.
If the Democrats don't come to any agreement or consensus with Rumsfeld will their debate be considered "constructive"?
That only remains to be seen.
Rumsfeld is fighting for his job and his legacy. Rumsfeld is looking for appeasement from Democrats. He knows that there is no justification in sending troops to Iraq in the first place.
While soldiers are now being recommended the "death penalty" for their wartime actions, Rumsfeld's back is against the wall. When Rumsfeld's back wasn't against the wall "constructive" debates with Democrats were out of the questions. Now Rumsfeld not only wants to "reach out to Democrats" but he wants to debate them under his terms.
If Rumsfeld really cared about America's National Security, instead of his dellusions of wartime gradeur, he would realize that there is more to offer as a team player than a self-proclaimed expert. Rumsfeld knows that past incompetent decisions in the Invasion of Iraq started a never-ending quagmire that everyone else will have to finish. That is why he wants to allow Democrats to "constructive" debate him (whatever that means).