SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: DMaA who wrote (187690)11/25/2006 1:04:25 PM
From: Ichy Smith  Respond to of 794024
 
I think he did the only thing that was possible. he was not going to fire Rumsfeld that day. He had still to discuss it with his choice of candidate, who could have said no, and he was not in a position where Rumsfeld knew what was happening. He had a great deal to gain politically if he got rid of Rumsfeld, but he also would like like he was caving in. so I think that he did the least offensive thing. making announcements like that close to an election always is a bad thing in my opinion.



To: DMaA who wrote (187690)11/25/2006 4:27:10 PM
From: Ish  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 794024
 
<<What he is asked: "Are you going to fire Rumsfeld?">>

Technically he didn't fire Rumsfeld, he accepted Rumsfeld' resignation.