Frankly as the recipient (mom received I was there) of such a letter I fully understand. What I do not understand is how one assumed that I was saying his character was in question. Where the hell did I say that?
He has done a fine job. If I felt other wise well then Dave would not be serving in our great military, if I lost confidence up the chain of command. Well, we would talk about but really, folks are so quick to post a response and frankly then someone else reads it, reposts it and then everyone seems to think it is true, when I only said what does this say about his character == sorry I did not put the word HONORABLE thought that was self explanatory.
Given the harshly critical tone of the article, your comment
"What does this say about the character of this man?"
strongly implies that his character was lacking by using the autopen to sign the letters of condolence. If that wasn't your intent, then my apologies. But, given the number of people who interpreted your remarks the same way, you might want to be a little more specific next time.
There's really no way to read that quote after that article, and see it as supportive of Rumsfeld.