How disgusting can Donald Rumsfeld be?

[Landslide Lyndon]

I'm reading the excellent GQ piece on Rumsfeld disastrous tenure as SecDef during the Bush years. It's a must read with important new revelations about the runup to the Iraq War, Rumsfeld personality, his contempt for many of his fellow Bush officials (a feeling reciprocated in full) and his role in the Katrina catastrophe.

http://men.style.com/gq/features/landing?id=content_9217

But the most eye-opening tidbit IMHO is the one regarding his role in preventing Bush from awarding the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Ted Kennedy.


''During the final months of the Bush presidency, a White House program had been quietly under way to award numerous Presidential Medals of Freedom. Nomination forms were distributed, and several in the White House—apparently including Condi Rice and Chief of Staff Josh Bolten—suggested Kennedy, without whose support Bush’s single most important domestic-policy achievement, the No Child Left Behind education initiative, would never have been realized. Administration sources say Bush was warm to the idea of awarding a medal to the cancer-stricken senator. Doing so would have come across as a bighearted, postpartisan gesture in the unpopular president’s final days. But ultimately he chose not to, siding with the more conservative members of the White House who had been receiving encouragement from the vice president’s longtime friend Donald Rumsfeld. The former SecDef had even made a point of bringing up the subject at a Beltway social gathering late last year.

“They can’t give Kennedy a medal!” he’d declared. “Not after he murdered that woman!”—referring to the Mary Jo Kopechne incident on Chappaquiddick Island nearly forty years earlier.''



What a pathetic excuse of a human being.

[Franzl]

What?  It's not like Rumsfeld's opinion on the matter is outside the mainstream.

Claiming "murder" isn't all that common.

[Landslide Lyndon]

What?  It's not like Rumsfeld's opinion on the matter is outside the mainstream.

Claiming "murder" isn't all that common.

Then again, Rumsfeld is an expert on murder.

[Keystone Phil]

Rumsfeld is totally wrong about this. How can one argue that Kennedy doesn't deserve a medal for his Olympic swimming abilities?

[??????????]

Kennedy is certainly guilty of negligence, to say the least.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Rumsfeld is totally wrong about this. How can one argue that Kennedy doesn't deserve a medal for his Olympic swimming abilities?

Of course he isn't as worthy as other notable recipents: George Tenet, Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld himself.
Because nothing says Freedom Fighter like engaging in torture and war crimes.

[Franzl]

Kennedy is certainly guilty of negligence, to say the least.

Certainly, I agree completely, that's the only logical position.

But negligene isn't quite the same thing as murder.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Kennedy deserved the medal

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Kennedy is certainly guilty of negligence, to say the least.

Certainly, I agree completely, that's the only logical position.

But negligene isn't quite the same thing as murder.

Of course no one died in the Iraq war under Rumsfeld.

[Magic 8-Ball]

Rumsfeld was surely an awful administrator.  Wasn't he the one who convinced Bush not to follow the plan for nation building in Iraq that Powell had the State Department develop?

[cinyc]

What?  It's not like Rumsfeld's opinion on the matter is outside the mainstream.

Claiming "murder" isn't all that common.

Outside of the liberal bubble that many posters here seem to be living in, it is. 

While it might not be technically correct from a legal standpoint, many conservatives believe Ted Kennedy murdered Mary Jo Kopechne - as in, he drunk drove her into a pond and left her to die without ever calling the police for help, and then swam to Edgartown in a botched attempt to cover up his crime.   Were his last name anything but Kennedy (and the moon landing didn't wipe his wrongdoing off the front pages), Ted Kennedy's political career would have been over.   

[Landslide Lyndon]

What?  It's not like Rumsfeld's opinion on the matter is outside the mainstream.

Claiming "murder" isn't all that common.

Outside of the liberal bubble that many posters here seem to be living in, it is. 

While it might not be technically correct from a legal standpoint, many conservatives believe Ted Kennedy murdered Mary Jo Kopechne - as in, he drunk drove her into a pond and left her to die without ever calling the police for help, and then swam to Edgartown in a botched attempt to cover up his crime.   Were his last name anything but Kennedy (and the moon landing didn't wipe his wrongdoing off the front pages), Ted Kennedy's political career would have been over.   

I don't know if it's extreme hackiness or sheer stupidity, but apparently nobody of our Republican friends understands the irony of WHO is accusing Kennedy of murder.

Of course it shouldn't surprise us so much that they consider an incompetent war criminal to be a respected voice of conservatism. These are the same people who say with a straight face that torture is OK, as long as it's done by Americans on muslims, but start breathing fire when the President gives a speech at a Catholic university or when gays demand equal rights.

[JSojourner]

Kennedy is certainly guilty of negligence, to say the least.

I agree and have said so for decades.  I love what the man has done since then, but I feel we liberals have been too generous to Ted.  He clearly was negligent and it caused a death.

[Keystone Phil]

Kennedy is certainly guilty of negligence, to say the least.

I agree and have said so for decades.  I love what the man has done since then, but I feel we liberals have been too generous to Ted.  He clearly was negligent and it caused a death.

Notifying the authorities ten hours after a car crash in a river is negligent? It was only ten hours...

[cinyc]

What?  It's not like Rumsfeld's opinion on the matter is outside the mainstream.

Claiming "murder" isn't all that common.

Outside of the liberal bubble that many posters here seem to be living in, it is. 

While it might not be technically correct from a legal standpoint, many conservatives believe Ted Kennedy murdered Mary Jo Kopechne - as in, he drunk drove her into a pond and left her to die without ever calling the police for help, and then swam to Edgartown in a botched attempt to cover up his crime.   Were his last name anything but Kennedy (and the moon landing didn't wipe his wrongdoing off the front pages), Ted Kennedy's political career would have been over.   

I don't know if it's extreme hackiness or sheer stupidity, but apparently nobody of our Republican friends understands the irony of WHO is accusing Kennedy of murder.

Of course it shouldn't surprise us so much that they consider an incompetent war criminal to be a respected voice of conservatism. These are the same people who say with a straight face that torture is OK, as long as it's done by Americans on muslims, but start breathing fire when the President gives a speech at a Catholic university or when gays demand equal rights.

Spare us the leftist tripe.  Donald Rumsfeld is as guilty of murder as the "progressive" members of Congress who voted for the war in Iraq, including the current Secretary of State and Vice President.  He's no war criminal.  And if you believe this nonsense about Torture, your "progressive" Speaker of the House knew and was involved in the "conspiracy" to torture.

[Torie]

Kennedy is certainly guilty of negligence, to say the least.

I agree and have said so for decades.  I love what the man has done since then, but I feel we liberals have been too generous to Ted.  He clearly was negligent and it caused a death.

Don't you think Ted lied through his teeth about the incident, JS?  Ted was drunk and when the car went into the drink, he just abandoned the gal, and then didn't bother to report it until he got his story straight per input from his brain trust (and sobered up). What Ted did is far more than mere negligence in my opinion. He lied, he committed felonies, and he used his power to get the cops to go soft on him.

But no, Ted is not a murderer.  He did commit involuntary manslaughter in my opinion however, and may well have been guilty of obstruction of justice. In a just world, he probably should have spent a couple of years in jail.

[Landslide Lyndon]

What?  It's not like Rumsfeld's opinion on the matter is outside the mainstream.

Claiming "murder" isn't all that common.

Outside of the liberal bubble that many posters here seem to be living in, it is. 

While it might not be technically correct from a legal standpoint, many conservatives believe Ted Kennedy murdered Mary Jo Kopechne - as in, he drunk drove her into a pond and left her to die without ever calling the police for help, and then swam to Edgartown in a botched attempt to cover up his crime.   Were his last name anything but Kennedy (and the moon landing didn't wipe his wrongdoing off the front pages), Ted Kennedy's political career would have been over.   

I don't know if it's extreme hackiness or sheer stupidity, but apparently nobody of our Republican friends understands the irony of WHO is accusing Kennedy of murder.

Of course it shouldn't surprise us so much that they consider an incompetent war criminal to be a respected voice of conservatism. These are the same people who say with a straight face that torture is OK, as long as it's done by Americans on muslims, but start breathing fire when the President gives a speech at a Catholic university or when gays demand equal rights.

Spare us the leftist tripe.  Donald Rumsfeld is as guilty of murder as the "progressive" members of Congress who voted for the war in Iraq, including the current Secretary of State and Vice President.  He's no war criminal.  And if you believe this nonsense about Torture, your "progressive" Speaker of the House knew and was involved in the "conspiracy" to torture.

In case you missed it, I never defended Pelosi the last days. If she knew and said nothing, then I have no problem for her to pay the appropriate price. But thanks for the try anyway, hack.

On the other hand, only a numbskull like you would come out and characterize as nonsense the fact the the United States engaged in torture under Bush and Cheney's watch. Apparently the IRC, Zellikow, Wilkerson, and everyone else who unequivocally denounced those tactics and had no qualms calling them what it is, are all of them members of a vast left wing conspiracy which is out to stain the sterling Bush and Cheney legacy of the last years.

Torture is a war crime. So is starting a war under false pretenses. And since Rumsfeld was SecDef when Guantanamo, the Iraq War and Abu Ghraib took place under his watch, he is a war criminal.


  

[JSojourner]

Kennedy is certainly guilty of negligence, to say the least.

I agree and have said so for decades.  I love what the man has done since then, but I feel we liberals have been too generous to Ted.  He clearly was negligent and it caused a death.

Don't you think Ted lied through his teeth about the incident, JS?  Ted was drunk and when the car went into the drink, he just abandoned the gal, and then didn't bother to report it until he got his story straight per input from his brain trust (and sobered up). What Ted did is far more than mere negligence in my opinion. He lied, he committed felonies, and he used his power to get the cops to go soft on him.

But no, Ted is not a murderer.  He did commit involuntary manslaughter in my opinion however, and may well have been guilty of obstruction of justice. In a just world, he probably should have spent a couple of years in jail.

The reason I used the term negligent (this is for Phil) is because I am certain a reckless homicide or manslaughter charge would not hold up in most courts.  The question is, Torie, is there a difference between negligent homicide and involuntary manslaughter.  Are they one in the same?  I have covered lots of trials and, here anyway, I never hear the term negligent homicide.  I often hear the phrases "reckless homicide", "manslaughter", "involuntary manslaughter" and even "criminal recklessness".  Presumably, in Indiana, negligent homicide falls under one of these rubrics.

I do agree with you.  I believe Ted, despite the great good I feel he has done over the years, should have been tried.  If convicted, he should have spent time in jail.  My gut is that it should have been 10 to 15 years.  (I am softie on capital punishment but I generally favor stricter, longer sentences for crimes involving a victim.)

This is, of course, no excuse -- but the 1960's were a very different time with regard to the notion of drinking and driving.  Extramarital affairs were also regarded, at least by the monied classes in both parties, as "par for the course".  I even remember my arch conservative mother saying, "Powerful men have to have their little affairs..."  (Sounds ludicrous -- and it offends my ears -- but such was the time.)

I don't, for one minute, believe that Nelson Rockefeller or Barry Goldwater would have been treated any differently by the press or the public had he been the newsmaker.  The times notwithstanding, I have never really approved of Ted Kennedy the man ever since.   Nor do I warm up to armchair politicos of my ideological bent who make excuses for him. 

A crime is a crime, whether committed by a drunken, irresponsible and selfish Democrat...or a drunken, irresponsible and selfish Republican.

[Torie]

Good question JS. I am not a criminal lawyer thank heavens, but I one can kill someone (homicide) negligently without it being a crime. That would be negligent homicide, for which a civil suit for wrongful death would lie, but no criminal action. Involuntary manslaughter is killing someone while breaking some other law, such as speeding and killing someone in a traffic accident. If you are driving 160 miles per hour on the wrong side of the road and kill someone, that is one of those malignant heart killings attended by reckless and shocking to the conscience acts that rise to second degree murder.

Ted committed involuntary manslaughter and got away with it. I wonder if it still bothers his conscience, assuming that it ever did (I am not sure it ever did).

[Keystone Phil]

I don't, for one minute, believe that Nelson Rockefeller or Barry Goldwater would have been treated any differently by the press or the public had he been the newsmaker.

Oh, come on now. That family was able to get away with a lot back then. That wouldn't have been extended to people like Goldwater or Rockefeller (though I'm sure they would have received some biased treatment when going through the system). Hell, if old Joe Kennedy was sane at the time, the story would have probably been covered up.

[JSojourner]

I don't, for one minute, believe that Nelson Rockefeller or Barry Goldwater would have been treated any differently by the press or the public had he been the newsmaker.

Oh, come on now. That family was able to get away with a lot back then. That wouldn't have been extended to people like Goldwater or Rockefeller (though I'm sure they would have received some biased treatment when going through the system). Hell, if old Joe Kennedy was sane at the time, the story would have probably been covered up.

We'll have to disagree.  The old Massachusetts rum runner was very powerful, to be sure.  But plenty of conservatives -- Goldwater and Rockefeller among them -- had tons of influence.

The whole "everyone's against the poor Republicans while Democrats can get away with murder" chestnut is just silly.  Both parties have their heroes and their creeps...and both have great power and influence over both media and public opinion.  Even moreso back in the day.

[Keystone Phil]

The whole "everyone's against the poor Republicans while Democrats can get away with murder" chestnut is just silly.

Except...I never said that.

I specifically mentioned the Kennedy clan.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Agreed. I just believe the Kennedy's had more than most.