February 9, 2011, - 1:27 am

VIDEO – Rummy the Great: Why I’ve Always Loved Don Rumsfeld

By Debbie Schlussel

I’ve always greatly respected and admired Donald Rumsfeld more than most in government, Republican or Democrat.   I defended and praised him on this site and in TV appearances, including on MSNBC.  His class, no-nonsense/blunt style, patriotism, genius, sense of humor, and decades of service to the country are unmatched and a rare combination.  And, on top of that, he always understood the Islamic threat, explicitly expressed the danger of jihad, and the importance of supporting our only friend in the Mid-East, Israel.  As you probably know, Rumsfeld’s new book, “Known and Unknown: A Memoir” is out, and he’s doing the press tour.  Despite the endless liberal attempts to savage and vilify this man, I believe history will remember Donald Rumsfeld as a great man, just as is the case now with Ronald Reagan. He will always be very cool in my book.

Today, Rumsfeld appeared to promote his memoir on the radio and cable shows of a number of conservative talking heads, but their interviews were boring, especially after I watched Rumsfeld’s best appearance on last night’s ABC News “Nightline.”  Though I normally find her loathsome, ironically Diane Sawyer’s interview was the best one I’ve seen–not because of her questions (she tried to make him look bad), but because of Rummy’s terrific, deeply felt responses. 

This man is a truly great American.  It’s hard to believe he’s 78, as he’s sharper, smarter, and quicker than most 28-year-olds, half a century his junior.  If he were running for President today, I’d campaign and vote for him.  Love this guy.  When my late father was alive, he always extolled to me the virtues of “the great mensch Rumsfeld.”  You gotta watch the videos of his ABC News interview, below.  Makes me proud he was heading the Pentagon for so many years.  Could listen to his remarks all day long.  This is a real man.  The kind of great American male leader and patriot who is, sadly, becoming extinct.

Again, LOVE. HIM.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

31 Responses


Fully agree – if Stormin Norman was an inspiration during the 1991 Gulf war, Rummy was it during the more recent one. I thought it was a shame that the Bush admin let him go after the GOP debacle in 2006. The reason they lost was not b’cos of Rummy, but b’cos of the belief of Bush that the Army should be a Meals-on-Wheels program. That’s a bad idea to start w/, and even worse when applied to savages like Muslims.

Sad thing is that while he was running things, we had those hacks like John McC(l)ain doing their best to micromanage the war in Afghanistan, and accusing Rummy of ignoring the Generals. It was particularly in the context of transformation of the military that McCain was such a saboteur.

My only reservations about him – when the Syrians were helping feed Sunni terrorists into Iraq, Rummy shied away from advocating that they be crippled as well. Since the US was in Iraq, they should have gone all the way into Syria, and even Hizbullah, and used the opportunity to take out Iran’s nukes as well.

Infidel Pride on February 9, 2011 at 2:23 am

He was real, and did not do what he did for personal gain.

Worry01 on February 9, 2011 at 4:02 am

“The reality is, however, that these weapons (nuclear weapons) are proliferating throughout the world and people unlike them (the Russians) are getting them, the Saddam Husseins of the world. And they aren’t — they don’t behave according to the same sets of rules. And I think that a policy of vulnerability to ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction in the hands of someone like Saddam Hussein is not a policy at all — it’s mindless. And we simply ought to recognize that, set aside that treaty, go beyond it, recognize the Cold War is over, get over it, change our language, change our approach, fashion a new construct that makes sense for the 21st century.”

Donald Rumsfeld 2001

Preposteroso on February 9, 2011 at 4:42 am

I’m sorry Rumsfield is the guy that got the FDA to approve aspartame as a sweetener and made a bunch of money from that. When Rumsfield was with Searle, the FDA refused to approve aspartame because it was unsafe, but then he gets a high position in the government and the FDA approves it. Aspartame is toxic and should never have been approved.

fireheart on February 9, 2011 at 7:45 am

    Martini says that Aspartame, a toxic sweetener approved against better scientific judgment by an FDA Commissioner personally installed by Rumsfeld when he was working on president Reagan’s transition team, is killing thousands and the evidence is being covered up by a pliant FDA. Will Rumsfeld fall over what someone has already called Gulag Gate? – or might he fall victim to the FDA’s and his own involvement in what more and more starts to look like Aspartame Gate?


    bill on February 9, 2011 at 9:18 am

      What does the FDA(Food and Drug Administration)have to do with this subject? You really need to take your meds friend. Also, Presidents appoint such comissioners, and they are confirmed by the Senate. Also, tranistion teams are in place to prepare a take over, and are not in charge of things until the newly elected president takes office.

      Worry01 on February 9, 2011 at 2:12 pm

        What does the FDA have to do with it? This guy got the FDA to approve a product that makes ill his own countrymen. That’s what I call patriotic.

        fireheart on February 10, 2011 at 12:51 pm

Great man. I always appreciated what he did for our great country and the steel determination he showed. True warrior. Are you watching Obama….???? Learn how a real man conducts himself…

TheSarge on February 9, 2011 at 7:51 am

    Re: The Sarge:


    JeffE on February 10, 2011 at 12:31 am


I’m not sure who edited the video but they cut short a salient point the Mr. Rumsfeld was about to make regarding the criticism
that he and the Bush Admin. received over its various policies regarding Gitmo, rendition, etc. and how those same policies are still in effect today ……… go figure!

J: Hmmm . . . I saw it as it aired live on Monday Night on “Nightline,” and I assumed these videos were the full interview based on my cursory view of them. Too bad if they cut that off b/c his answer was terrific. He said that Gitmo and rendition worked and saved lives and that Obama knows this b/c he’s doing the same thing and, after campaigning to shut it down, Obama is still using Gitmo and hasn’t closed it b/c he knows it’s the best way to deal with the terrorists and save lives. DS

Joe on February 9, 2011 at 8:48 am


    Thanks for your response ….. I replayed the second video and most if not all of his reply is there. I’m not sure how i missed that the first time …. I can only assume a bad connection cut it short. Either way this is a fact that seems to be lost on all those who like to believe that we need to “make nice” with our enemies.


    Joe on February 9, 2011 at 10:42 am

I always liked Rummy—but he did support the war in Iraq, Debbie. (I didn’t support the nation building, but I did support the butt kicking to get rid of Saddam—in my view, we should have searched and destroyed, killed Saddam, and then gone after Iran while supporting the Kurds—leave Fallujah and the rest to the assorted idiots—the purpose of our military is to destroy scum, not nation build. The idea is to let our friends know we will support them, but not to beg for anyone’s good will.) That is a flaw in an otherwise estimable man.

Occam's Tool on February 9, 2011 at 10:09 am

    I stand corrected—apparently he did NOT support the Democracy project, which shows good judgment. Democracy without values is wretched.

    Occam's Tool on February 9, 2011 at 4:23 pm

This idiot was the architect of one of the worst debacles in American history, killing thousands of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians. Sen John McCain said it best:”Thank God Rumsfeld was relieved of duty!”

Rot in Hell, Rummy!

Norman Blitzer on February 9, 2011 at 12:43 pm

    Rummy was too crazy for Nixon. It appeared that every GWB honcho was a member of Nixon’s crazies. No wonder they all enjoyed their death orgy in Iraq.

    Bob Loblaw on February 9, 2011 at 1:12 pm

      Hardly. He held several positions in the Nixon Administration, including that of Ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. After Nixon’s resignation, Mr. Rumsfeld went on to become Chief of Staff and Defense Secretary in the Ford Administration. You really need to work on your accuracy my friend, rather than mindlessly reciting things you read off of bumper stickers.

      Worry01 on February 9, 2011 at 2:18 pm

    Blitzer, I have a question for you wise guy, can you ask me this, do you know why were still in Afghanistan and why has Obama increased more troops in Afghanistan? Don’t respond to me with the, “typical Bushie, blah blah blah”, truth is I was NEVER a supporter of Bush and clearly NOT a supporter of your man Obama either.

    And still don’t know why where still in Iraq either. I think where in both Afghanistan & Iraq for the “Military Industrial Complex’s” interest, that’s what I believe. Blitzer, can you ask me which former US president gave out a speech about the Military Industrial Complex? I’ll give you a hint, he’s no longer around.

    “A nation is identified by it’s borders, language & culture!”

    Sean R. on February 9, 2011 at 2:33 pm

      LOL Sean. Sorry, but you asked Boring Blitzzzzzzzer a question with too much substance and intelligence than his ant-poop brain can handle. He likes the hit-and-run and can’t handle honest debate.

      However, he’ll take one to task on minutia that even Jessica Simpson is too smart to get bogged down in.

      The debate is for the smart ones, not for Blitzzzzzzzers.

      He’s a good example of a bad example. We are all ok as long as we are on the opposite side of that butt-munch.

      Skunky on February 9, 2011 at 8:59 pm

I liked rumsfeld but he was excoriated in the press and by the talking heads. I’m glad he is being revived and praised now.
I never thought an news anchor could be as bad as Katie Couric but Diane Sawyer surpasses her in her left wing pandering and phoney emotional delivery.

Tim on February 9, 2011 at 1:36 pm

Can’t wait to read his memoirs. Finally somebody writes his story after he has accomplished something worth writing about.

I like how even this post has so many in here hating him and vilifying him, even five years in retirement. That’s what made Rummy great. He knew how to get the job done for the country, piss off those within the country who deserved to be pissed off, and crack a smile at the result. He is one of the few conservatives out there who has never bothered to try and please the liberals in the media. He understood that they would hate him, didn’t care to change the fact, and preferred to make them fume instead. Great man.

Brian R. on February 9, 2011 at 3:13 pm

Donald Rumsfeld is actually receiving the “Defender of the Constitution” award at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). Read the following article for a different take on Rumsfeld (best line in article is “Giving Rumsfeld an award for defending the Constitution is a bit like giving Kendra Wilkinson an award for sexual modesty or Charlie Sheen an award for sobriety”):


ramjordan on February 9, 2011 at 5:48 pm

Despite the endless liberal attempts to savage and vilify this man, I believe history will remember Donald Rumsfeld as a great man, just as is the case now with Ronald Reagan.


P. A. Triot on February 9, 2011 at 6:34 pm

If you want to get a better idea of what the FDA had to do with Donald Rumsfeld, take a look at Jim Turner’s interview:


Intercept Media on February 9, 2011 at 7:10 pm


I propose that next time you review a really good movie that is better than four Reagans, that you add a Rumsfeld?


“The King’s Speech”

Four Reagans, plus a Rumsfeld.

The only problem is, it might be a while before you get a chance to do it (of course, I hope that I’m wrong on this point.)


JeffE on February 10, 2011 at 12:50 am

Donald Rumsfeld is always a great American in my book. The man received the harshest criticisms from others and all bounced off from him like bullets bounced off from Superman.

Bobby on February 10, 2011 at 10:47 am

If your not For the Constitution, Rummy is a good choice.

If you like the toxic effects of Aspartame, again, Rummy is a good choice.

I do like the Constitution, and a Month ago, I removed Aspartame, MSG, and High Fructose Corn Syrup from my diet.




Neocon, Limbaugh interviewed Rummy. Never asked about the constitution.

Steve on February 10, 2011 at 11:44 am

I’ve been thinking about your post about Rumsfeld and I’m kind of torn. On the one hand, he did a great deal to force some tough thinking into the minds of the military leadership so that they actually had to justify their proposals and recommendations. I also found it touching that he would get visibly choked up about his son’s addiction and his wife’s
serious illness. But on the other hand, he dismisses his own culpability when some of his tough scrutiny backfired on him. On the need for more troops, Rumsfeld said that GEN Franks thought he had enough troops to win in Iraq. Put another way, GEN Franks was unable to convince Rumsfeld of the need for more. Was the decision process geared toward making sure we had ENOUGH troops in Iraq, or to making sure we didn’t have too many? I think there may be a few situations like that in his book. And if you believe Rumsfeld, his position at the top of the Pentagon meant he was the person ultimately culpable for that, or at least more so than Franks.

Let me give you an example that touches on my personal life in a small way. Then-Chief of Staff of the Army, GEN Shinseki, had testified before Congress that the US probably needed over 200,000 troops to secure Iraq. [Sidebar: When I was a First Lieutenant in Germany, Shinseki was my Brigade Commander.
So he was three levels of command above me. Yet 7 years later when I met him again he remembered that I had been one of his officers and even what battalion I was in. I thought his decision on the berets was silly and disagreed with other things, but the man was a gentleman.] What many people
don’t know is that Shinseki wasn’t trying to poke Rumsfeld in the eye. He tried to get around answering directly, but couldn’t. Why? Because by law the service chiefs must give THEIR OWN opinion when testifying before Congress. They can’t just spout the party line and say everything’s fine. So how did Rumsfeld react to that? First he impugned GEN Shinseki in his press conference. Then while GEN Shinseki was getting ready to give a speech at the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, KS, he got a call from one of his aides saying that in a few minutes Rumsfeld was going to announce Shinseki’s replacement. Even though Shinseki had a year to 18 months left in his tenure (I’m foggy on the details of the timing but it’s about that), this would become public knowledge. And Shinseki had no notice of it. In a bureaucracy like the Pentagon, that hamstrings you. For
the rest of your time, everyone knows you’re leaving and they can just wait you out. ESPECIALLY because everyone knew that such an announcement was meant to publicly take the CSA down a peg, and it was meant as a warning to others. A Frenchman once said that the British would occasionally execute
one of their admirals, “pour encourager les autres” – to encourage (or warn) the rest. This was Rumsfeld’s way of doing that. All this is based on my understanding of what happened and why. I could be wrong on it, but I’m
willing to stand by my interpretation until somebody else tells me I’m wrong.

Rumsfeld’s right that the inertia in the Pentagon is staggering at times. I’ve had to deal with it many times on active duty and still do today. But in that interview he was being disingenuous when he poo-poo’d how he could
intimidate the generals by saying these men had been in combat. I’ve known lots of men who found actual combat easier than combating bureaucratic decision-making. Rumsfeld is an incredibly intense and intelligent man. His questioning no doubt included some references to the intelligence or
integrity of these men. I don’t know that first-hand but I would be surprised if it didn’t. To some of them that’s harder than combat wounds.

I’m still not convinced that he truly wanted to resign and leave. If he had honestly thought his value to the President was turning negative and distracting, he should have insisted on resigning. Leaving it up to President Bush meant that he was leaving it up to a man who was KNOWN to be loyal to his subordinates almost beyond reason (as in, “Heckuva job, Brownie!”).

I’ve bashed him a bit here, but I think he did a lot of good which I’m sure he covers in his book. I also concur with his assessment of both Powell and Rice in the State Dept. He was certainly a great American in many ways, but that is not to say he was without significant flaws. Would I vote for him for President if he were running? It depends on who he was running against. Right now, I don’t see any Republican who is as high profile who could do better…so I’d have to give it a probable yes. There are some who could do better but who are not well known across the country.

Sean on February 11, 2011 at 12:50 pm

Gee whiz you 20/20 hindsight guys are really boring. What do you want that we don’t do anything unless we’re (where!) perfect? This is the approach that Liberals take so that they can criticize everybody (except themselves, because they have good intentions.)

Good Looking on March 7, 2011 at 5:39 pm

Diane Sawyer is such a tool…Rumsfield deserves a medal for willingly sitting down with that drama queen

Gene Jarman on August 28, 2011 at 8:15 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field