politics

Rumsfeld Takes Editorial Fire, Bloggers Take Sides

With Election Day imminent, the Military Times Media Group calls for the defense secretary to resign, leading many bloggers to defend him.
November 6, 2006

The Military Times Media Group published an editorial in all four of its daily newspapers (Army Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times, and Marine Corps Times) today, calling for the immediate resignation of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

“Rumsfeld has lost credibility with the uniformed leadership, with the troops, with Congress and with the public at large,” the editorial states. “His strategy has failed, and his ability to lead is compromised. And although the blame for our failures in Iraq rests with the secretary, it will be the troops who bear its brunt. This is not about the midterm elections. Regardless of which party wins Nov. 7, the time has come, Mr. President, to face the hard bruising truth: Donald Rumsfeld must go.”

The timing of the editorial, which comes on the eve of the important midterm elections, has stirred emotions in the blogosphere, with many bloggers defending the defense secretary.

“It is times like these that I earn my salt around here,” writes Oak Leaf at Stop the ACLU. “First, the article implies that four different ‘military magazines’ are calling for Rumsfeld to resign. That is FALSE. These are the same publication except they are ‘wrapped up.’ These are not ‘professional military publications.’ Examples of military professional publications are Proceedings of the Naval Institute and the Officer by the Reserve Officers Association. The Army Times … used to have wide circulations. They are now part of the Gannett Group (USA Today) and the writers for these four ‘military papers’ also work at USA Today!!!!!”

As it turns out, Gannett was the focus of heated debate.

Cause of Interest asks: “Did all the guys in the military get together and decide that they wanted Rumsfeld out and then they called the Army Times, an unofficial publication or did a bunch of folks at USA Today decide that they wanted Rumsfeld out and at the same time they would like to see Democrats do well this Tuesday so they wrote the story and published it in a paper that would make it appear as if the military were behind it? I don’t know but it is awfully strange that this is being released a few days before the election and it is being released by a surrogate of a liberal American Newspaper. [Andrew] Sullivan calls the military desperate but when I read the piece I see a publication making a last-minute move of desperation before an important election. It is painfully obvious that all the buzz words are there in order to influence voters.”

Sign up for CJR's daily email

Not everyone shared that view.

“First off, Gannett would not dare publish an editorial in any of the Military Times papers lambasting the secretary of defense without getting clearance from military leaders,” writes Stranger at Blah3. “It would be circulation suicide, and an unauthorized editorial like that would put any of those papers (let alone ALL FOUR of them) straight out of business. The military would drop their endorsement and the papers would fold. Gannett would not do that, and the military would not let them do it.”

One blog, though, invited members of the armed services to comment on the editorial. An anonymous Air Force veteran of 30 years offered this:

“One important point you may have missed is that the Gannett takeover of the Military Times publications is a fairly recent development. Although Gannett seems to be pretty well established in the MSM, they do not appear to have significantly downgraded the usefulness and relevance of these military-oriented publications. Their targeted audience tends to let them know in no uncertain terms if their editorial positions blunder into the swamps of too much political correctness … The usual suspects will probably try to make political hay out of the Times editorial but I question whether it will have much real impact. Unlike Robert McNamara, Rumsfeld has shown occasional flashes of common sense, although he sometimes seems dazzled by his own brilliance. Perhaps it has something to do with the rimless glasses.”

Mark Boyer was a CJR intern.