John McCain has "Zero confidence" in Rummy.

[SuaSponte]

@Diogenes the Cynic

My topic for debate is addressed to Bush supporters, particularly the warhawks. What does it mean to you that John McCain (whose military cred does not need to be recounted) is expressing disapproval of Secretary Rummy in such an unusually frank manner? Do you dismiss him out of hand? Do you have any confidence in Rummy? And if you don’t, how do you feel about Bush keeping him in such a crucial position, a position where his competence is literally of life and death importance to thousands of troops in the field?

If you do have confidence in Rummy, how do you explain McCain’s remarks?

Well, I’m not a Bush supporter, but if I were, I wouldn’t feel a need to explain McCain’s remarks. I would simply say that I disagree with them.

I mean, c’mon. McCain’s military record certainly gives him credibility, but it doesn’t mean that he is infallible on military matters. Heck, give Ollie North a call - who actually had a longer military career than McCain (and IIRC achieved higher rank), and you would get a completely different opinion of both Rummy and the Bush military record. Turn next to Jimmy Carter, with seven years of active service under his belt, and you would get a completely different answer. Gen. Shalikshavili (sp?), with more military service than all of the above combined (probably), would disagree with some of the above, and agree with others.

Sua

[John_Mace]

@SuaSponte

Heck, give Ollie North a call - who actually had a longer military career than McCain (and IIRC achieved higher rank), and you would get a completely different opinion of both Rummy and the Bush military record. Turn next to Jimmy Carter, with seven years of active service under his belt, and you would get a completely different answer. Gen. Shalikshavili (sp?), with more military service than all of the above combined (probably), would disagree with some of the above, and agree with others.

Or Norm Schwarzkopf, who ran the first Gulf War and is a regular commentator on one of the cable news channles.

[Evil_Captor]

@treis

To take it a step further:

If McCain has no faith in a presidents secretary of defense in the middle of a war he has no business campaigning for that president. He would rather have his party in power even if he has no faith in its leadership.

Oh, come now. All he really needs is more faith in Bushco than in Kerry and the Dems. If he thought Kerry and the Dems were the better crew, I bet he’d be a Democrat.

[Loopydude]

Or he could withold any endorsement. McCain was a highly visible, arguably critical participant in the Republican show of loyalty that helped Bush reelected. Hence he bears some of the responsibility. Given his low oppinion of Rumsfeld, a general of sorts in the War on Terror (the importance of which gave McCain his excuse to not support his “friend” Kerry), the discrepancy between words and deeds is especially troubling. I don’t think McCain was at any time morally forced into an either/or position; and hence I think John Mace is entirely correct: He’s just another politician with presidential ambitions.

[Malodorous]

I’m a little skeptical that McCain is setting himself up for a run in '08. He would be almost 74 by the time he assumed office, 4 years older then Reagan, who I belive was the oldest person to hold the office. I get the impression he’s pretty happy being a senator these days, especially as he didn’t seem to much enjoy his taste of presidential politics in '00

@RTF

He had by far the widest set of creative possibilities available to him of any American politician in the postwar era. And what did he do? He played it safe, kissed up to Bush

He could have done these things, but if he’d failed, then he would’ve been banished to irrelavence in the new Repub administration and congress. Kissing up to Bush gave him political capital. Remeber, people become politicians to try and change things, and being part of the winning team gives one a lot more ability to influence.

Also remember McCain is a Republican for a reason. He agrees with a far greater chunk of the party platform then he does the Dem one. Part of being a political party is compromising on some of aspects of the platform, and in McCain’s during the '04 election, Rumsfield was apparently one of those things.

And without McCain as a strong member of the Repub congress, who would protect our children from 'roid raged baseball players

[you_with_the_face]

@RTFirefly

McCain certainly has managed to convince me, this past year, that his supposed integrity is basically a pose.

Thank you for taking the words outta my mouth. I’m not able to see how anyone can continue to canonize McCain after watching him shuck 'n jive at the RNC. The man is not all that.

How long has it been evident that Rumsfeld is a liability? Quite some time now, give or take a photo. So now all of a sudden-- after we had a chance to make some changes, mind you–McCain is stepping out to say he has no confidence in the SoD? Wish he had come out and said that–oh, I don’t know–some time before the election, like when the decision to renew the administration’s contract was still open. As it is, all we can say is “So what?” Bush is not going to drop Rummy just because his former party rival has trust issues. His hubris won’t allow it and most importantly, he has nothing to lose.

McCain’s motivations are clear: he’s trying to score political points with the anti-Bush half of the nation.