The National Enquirer Of Our Military Hates Rumsfeld

I find it quite humorous that Editor & Publisher, MSNBC, & CNN believe the Army Times, Air Force Times, Navy Times and Marine Corps Times are actually papers that represent the rank and file.

Just days after President Bush publicly affirmed Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s job security through the end of his term, a family of publications catering to the military will publish an editorial calling for the defense secretary’s removal.

The editorial, released to NBC News on Friday ahead of its Monday publication date, stated, “It is one thing for the majority of Americans to think Rumsfeld has failed. But when the nation’s current military leaders start to break publicly with their defense secretary, then it is clear that he is losing control of the institution he ostensibly leads.”.

For those of us who actually served in our Military I can tell you what these papers really are…to the troops.

The National Enquirer of our military. Their editorials are always dripping with disdain for the military and have a huge liberal bias. They are owned by the Gannett publishing company who also publish the USA Today.

They are NOT representative of our military. For the MSM to allege otherwise is being dishonest.

Not like that should surprise anyone.

UPDATE

Instapundit put up a email he received that is quite telling:

Read the critique on Rummy and felt it was not specific enough for me to judge whether or not he is performing well. It actually sounded like a lot of grousing I hear in corporate break rooms. No direction, Boss is sending me on a wild goose chase again, etc., etc.. Pretty common comments in a dynamic environment. My boss and I once decided not to put any “goals” on my annual review because it was a worthless exercise. In my business, what is important today is old news tomorrow. So I tend to discount these type of complaints.

What I want to know is:

Are the goals of the US military clearly stated to both the administration and the troops?

Are we better today than we were yesterday?

Are the risks, both military and geopolitical, clearly defined and communicated up and down the chain of command?

Can we fight a 3 block war in the Middle East and a conventional war in Korea?

Is our logistics system better than WalMart’s?

Are we prepared for today’s mission and tomorrow’s threat, what about the next decade?

What are our plans to fight the informational war?

These are the kind of things I would like to know before I pass judgment on SecDef’s performance. My son is an enlisted grunt with the Marines so I hear every gripe about “management”, and yet he can not wait to deploy to Iraq in a couple of months. I personally prefer to look at retention numbers as a good measurement of performance. When the guys that live in the organization keep coming back for another 4 years, one has to ask “what are we doing right?”

I can not say with any certainty that Rummy is performing well. I do know that I don’t want the job. Too many whiners!

And the answers to all of his questions are yes. Our military is well run with awesome employee’s. They can handle any situation thrown at them and have tackled some very difficult problems with competence.

In short, these editorials timed for the election by liberal editors are just plain bulls$#t.

Other’s Blogging:

• QandO Blog
• Blue Crab Boulevard
• Macsmind