My husband argued with me in the car last night that Rumsfeld should not be blamed, that he is a very busy man and all he saw was one isolated report that did not seem important. That he has never served in the military, so he doesn't understand the military culture and could not be expected to intuit that the problem might be more widespread than one incident. That this kind of behavior has occurred in all wars and occupations and is to be expected and while not pretty is necessary to extract information.

He's always quick to defend the status quo, but this time he went too far.

If I hadn't given my word that I would support him for the rest of his life, the above would be grounds for divorce in my book--irreconcilable differences--consider the implications the "apologia" contains unspoken but quite clear.

Just rock my world a little more.