Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Requiem for Rummy

[Special note: In order to show my solidarity with the stock tables, which have been drastically shortened as part of a broader transformation of The Post, I have surgically removed the "good parts" from the following item, leaving only a token remnant. Also I plan to cut some staffers as soon as I find out who they are.] [Old standard: Half-baked ideas desirable but quarter-baked acceptable. New standard: Eighth-baked all the way.]


Jeff Goldberg has an amazing little Talk piece in The New Yorker in which Ken Adelman sticks it to his long-time friend Don Rumsfeld:

"I'm heartsick about the whole matter," [Adelman] said. He does not know what to make of the disintegration of Rumsfeld's career and reputation. "How could this happen to someone so good, so competent?" he said. "This war made me doubt the past. Was I wrong all those years, or was he just better back then? The Donald Rumsfeld of today is not the Donald Rumsfeld I knew, but maybe I was wrong about the old Donald Rumsfeld. It's a terrible way to end a career. It's hard to remember, but he was once the future."


You probably saw Doug Feith's piece the other day in Outlook:

"Rumsfeld is a bundle of paradoxes, like a fascinating character in a work of epic literature. And as my high school teachers drummed into my head, the best literature reveals that humans are complex. They are not the all-good or all-bad, all-brilliant or all-dumb figures that inhabit trashy novels and news stories.

"Those of us in his inner circle heard him say, over and over again: Our intelligence, in all senses of the term, is limited. We cannot predict the future. We must continually question our preconceptions and theories. If events contradict them, don't suppress the bad news; rather, change your preconceptions and theories."

But how do you square that with the way Rummy ran the war?

More on Rumsfeld here from William Fisher. And from Woodward, whose Rumsfeld is a prickly fellow to say the least.

More politics: Really strong column from Ruth Marcus today on why Jack Murtha shouldn't be majority leader, though Arianna still wants Murtha as TIME's Person of the Year (though I like her alternate suggestion of Jon Stewart/Stephen Colbert). Here's the big Murtha investigative piece that ran in the Times in October.

Sports section: The Redskins on Sunday will start at quarterback a fellow who has barely even met the other players on offense. Jason Campbell's NFL experience to date has been to stand on the sideline, holding a clipboard. But check out this graphic: This will make 17 quarterbacks for the Skins in 14 years. The human mind has a gift for spotting patterns; we perceive something fundamentally wrong with this franchise. There's a tendency to try to buy greatness rather than let it emerge naturally. (What this team needs is....Jeff George!) But who knows, maybe Jason Campbell will be the next Brett Favre.

By Joel Achenbach  |  November 15, 2006; 8:09 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Hideous Nightmare of Wet Leaves
Next: Science and Beauty

No comments have been posted to this entry.

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company