Is Dick Cheney upset that Rumseld was fired?

You may remember that when Donald Rumsfeld was 'fired' after the November 7 elections, many Republicans were upset that the announcement didn't come BEFORE the midterms, claiming the party may have fared a little better. Well, apparently, Dick Cheney is profoundly disturbed about Rumsfeld's treatment.

His treatment? You mean the fact that he wasn't fired 2 years ago? You mean the FACT that Iraq was allowed to slip into civil war under his watch?

Maybe this is why we haven't seen or heard much from Cheney in a couple of weeks...?

UPDATE: Here is Bob Novak's complete article as it appeared in today's Washington Post. This excerpt strikes me as particularly interesting:

"Apart from Rumsfeld's failures in personal relations, he never has been anything short of loyal in executing the president's wishes. But loyalty appears to be a one-way street for Bush. His shrouded decision to sack Rumsfeld after declaring that he would serve out the second term fits the pattern of a president who is secretive and impersonal."

While I agree with Novak that Bush is secretive and impersonal, I can see why he did what he did regarding Rumsfeld. Bush has been a President always noted for his "loyalty" to friends and the people working for him, no matter how intelligent or stupid they may be. Firing Rumsfeld before the elections would have been a huge risk for the President given that reputation. At the same time he obviously couldn't very well have come out and said "well if the GOP does poorly on November 7, Rumsfeld will be out." So, politically speaking, waiting until after the elections was the best decision to make. I don't think it would have made much, if any difference, and it very well may have backfired amongst the GOP conservative base.