DECONSTRUCTING DONALD….This is getting pathetic. Here is Donald Rumsfeld defending Dick Cheney’s assertion that the Iraq insurgency is in its “last throes”:

“If you look up ‘last throes,’ it can mean a violent last throe,” Rumsfeld said on ABC’s “This Week.” Violence may escalate, he said, because insurgents “have so much to lose between now and December.” he said.

I can’t even figure out what that’s supposed to mean. But unless they’ve also got a new definition of “last,” Cheney and Rumsfeld are both saying that the insurgency is near its end, right? Here’s Rumsfeld again:

“Insurgencies tend to go on five, six, eight, 10, 12 years,” Rumsfeld said on “Fox News Sunday.”

Hmmm. That’s not how my dictionary defines “last throes.” So tell us, Mr. Rumsfeld, were we prepared for this insurgency?

Rumsfeld said Sunday [that before the war] he gave President Bush a list of about 15 things “that could go terribly, terribly wrong before the war started.”

….Asked if his list included the possibility of such a strong insurgency, Rumsfeld said: “I don’t remember whether that was on there, but certainly it was discussed.”

I think we can take that as a “no,” especially since there’s pretty overwhelming evidence that no one before the war took the possibility of a sustained insurgency seriously, least of all Rumsfeld.

These guys still can’t face the reality of what’s happened to their lovely little war. They willfully ignored the advice of the uniformed military officers who had actual experience in fighting modern wars, and because of that they didn’t know what they were getting into before the war, they didn’t know what they were up against after the war, and they’re apparently still clueless about what to expect in the future. It’s long past time for George Bush to either find someone who’s serious about winning this war or else someone who’s serious about getting out. Rumsfeld is neither.