Mike DeWine Stabs Rumsfeld in the Back
BULLETIN: Read conservative candidate Bill Pierce’s statement on DeWine’s Rumsfeld betrayal.
_______________________________
UPDATE: Here’s my FreeRepublic post on DeWine’s Rumsfeld betrayal. I also posted at RedState.org.
_______________________________
NixGuy blogged it first, and it’s from Salon, which means it won’t be available for too long (and even now, you have to get a Free Day Pass to see it), so I’m glad he heavily excerpted.
“It” is Mike DeWine criticizing Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld in the harshest of terms (bold is mine):
But the sky rockets went off as soon as the topic turned to embattled Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
“Rumsfeld has made some very serious mistakes,†DeWine declared, repeating his verdict for emphasis. “Very serious mistakes. I think history will judge him very harshly.†Just to make sure that I was really hearing one of the harshest attacks yet on Rumsfeld by a Republican senator, I asked, “Which mistakes?†DeWine, who has never repented his 2002 vote for the Iraq war, gave me a what-planet-are-you-on look before responding, “Clearly not enough troops going in [to Iraq]. That was the biggest mistake. And a lot of mistakes would be covered under that.â€
“Historian” Mike DeWine has swallowed his daily dose of The Washington Post and The New York Times, and like so many politicians before him, seems to think the truth lies there instead of in what his guy’s administration is saying (the same guy who has appeared with him and helped him raise millions of dollars). As Nix said:
I guess we can add ‘backstabber’ to our list of reasons to vote against Michael DeWine and for BILL PIERCE in the primary.
Yup.
Really people, now that he’s jumped ship on supporting the conduct of the War on Terror, what is left about Mike DeWine that is conservative except his prolife positions?
At this point, Mike DeWine would be better off changing his registration to Democrat and trying to change that party’s proabort positions, because otherwise, he almost completely agrees with them.
If Mike DeWine wins Tuesday, conservatives had better brace themselves for another six full months of similar campaign pandering to “moderates,” followed by six more years of sellouts. Mike DeWine clearly believes that’s where both his electoral salvation and his legislative legacy reside. You can’t help but think that he finds it more important to be well-liked by the Beltway press corps than by the betrayed conservatives who put him in office, and who have (until now) kept him in office.
Betrayed conservatives have a true conservative alternative on May 2. That would be Bill Pierce (site, blog, contribute).

____________________________
NOTE: I have endorsed Bill Pierce for Senate, and have provided nominal financial support for his campaign. BizzyBlog is a member of Blogs for Pierce.











The closer to the election, the worse that Mike DeWine has gotten. Pure opportunism, plain and simple.
Comment by Steven J. Kelso Sr. — April 27, 2006 @ 4:52 pm
What an idjit. Leading up to hostilities and after shock and awe, personally I was concerned that we had way too many troops in harms way. What DeWine conveniently forgets is we (including him) believed Saddam had WMD. Is he saying he wanted the administration to put more troops in jeopardy than necessary? Fools like DeWine fail to realize we have had an extremely low casualty rate by any historical comparison precisely because we did not put extra targets in country. So, basically, DeWine is criticizing Secretary Rumsfeld for a low body count. What a clown. He needs come on home – for good.
Comment by LargeBill — April 27, 2006 @ 9:00 pm