Rumskull defense #1: He is a patriot with a good work ethic.

This defense comes from the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine General Peter Pace. At a press briefing on April 11, 2006, Pace said the following when asked about the recent criticism of Rumskull:

As far as Pete Pace is concerned, this country is exceptionally well-served by the man standing on my left.

Nobody, nobody works harder than he does to take care of the PFCs and lance corporals and lieutenants and the captains. He does his homework. He works weekends, he works nights. People can question my judgment or his judgment, but they should never question the dedication, the patriotism and the work ethic of Secretary Rumsfeld.

For starters, I wonder if failing to provide the PFCs, lance corporals, etc. with adequate body armor and armor for vehicles comes under the category of "nobody works harder" for our troops. Second, it is good to see that Gen. Pace has learned to utilize the Bush administration SOP of stating as a defense something that is irrelevant, non-substantive, and incapable of being refuted.

J.D. Henderson at Intel Dump explains why this "defense" is meaningless:

This is a classic example of the bait-and-switch defense. Pace is defending Rumsfeld from those who "question the dedication, the patriotism and the work ethic of Secretary Rumsfeld." Great. Who the hell questions that? NOBODY. What they do question is his competence and his arrogance.

Yes, Rummy is dedicated, patriotic, and a hard worker. Good for him. Now how competent is he? Has he ignored advice that was later seen to be correct? Has he attacked generals who disagreed with him by publicly rebuking them? Has he bullied senior military officers and stifled dissent? Has his arrogance and micromanagement led to needless deaths of American troops and harmed our national security? Is he the worst secretary of war in the history of our nation? Most importantly, has he consistently been proven wrong by events on the ground turning out just as his critics predicted, instead of how he predicted? The answer to all these questions is clear.

(emphasis in original). I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that Henderson's answer for all but the first question is "yes." I, for one, am not to going to argue with him.