Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has given President Bush a problematic Christmas present.

The flap over Rumsfeld’s tart response to Army Specialist Thomas Wilson about the lack of proper armor on vehicles in Iraq has not died down. Rummy’s response was, “You go to war with the army you have.”

The episode seems to have opened small but significant fissures in Republican support for how the war in Iraq is being waged.

All of this occurs against the background of increasing problems keeping the Army staffed. The Army National Guard announced Thursday that it had fallen 30 percent below its recruiting goals for the past two months.

Instead of being weekend warriors who drill near home, Guard members are being sent to Iraq in increasing numbers. So to “encourage” individuals with prior military service to sign up for six years, the Guard is going to try tripling enlistment bonuses to $15,000.

Some of those criticizing Rumsfeld are folks who are often off the Bush administration reservation and have a penchant for snappy soundbites that win them television time. Arizona Senator John McCain, who told the Associated Press Monday that he has “no confidence” in Rumsfeld, falls into this category. McCain and the president were bitter rivals in the 2000 election but campaigned together in 2004.

Criticism is also coming from Republicans whose rhetoric is less fiery than McCain's, but who have well-known independent streaks. Sen, Susan Collins of Maine said on Wednesday, “ I think there are increasing concerns about the secretary’s leadership of the war, the repeated failures to predict the strengths of the insurgency, the lack of essential safety equipment for our troops, the reluctance to expand the number of troops.” Her comments were reported in The New York Times.

Ominously for the president, criticism of Rumsfeld this week came from Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, heretofore a strong supporter of the war. In an Op-Ed article in the Washington Post Kristol wrote, “ All defense secretaries in wartime have, needless to say, made misjudgments. Some have stubbornly persisted in their misjudgments. But have any so breezily dodged responsibility and so glibly passed the buck? …..These soldiers deserve a better defense secretary than the one we have.”

Finally, Trent Lott told the Sun Herald of Biloxi, Mississippi that he “would like to see a change” at the top of the Defense Department in the next year or so. Lott, who did not like his treatment at the hands of the White House when he was forced out as Senate Majority Leader, added, “I am not a fan of Secretary Rumsfeld. I don’t think he listens to his uniformed officers.” Lott’s views are significant since he is rarely accused of being a moderate and is seen as in the mainstream of his party in the Senate.

For public consumption, Rummy seems unconcerned. The Washington Post notes that he told a radio interviewer in Florida, “It kind of goes with the territory….anytime there’s a war, there’s going to be criticism.”

The White House response is what might be called the total confidence defense. That is the approach White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett took at a Monitor Breakfast on Wednesday.

Rumsfeld “has a vast wealth of knowledge and experience that dates back many decades….President Bush has all the confidence that he is the right person at the right time for the challenges we face,” Bartlett told us.

I thought it was interesting when Barlett noted that Rumsfeld, “does understand the issue of accountability; he does understand that from the standpoint of the Department of Defense that the buck stops with him.” Was that a bit of distance opening between the Secretary and the White House?

Nevertheless, Bartlett concluded that, “the president has every bit of confidence in Secretary Rumsfeld.”

But protestations of “full confidence” (Bartlett avoided that precise phrase) do not always mean job security as Washington Post White House reporter Dana Milbank wrote in a trenchant column. “In fact, the phrase has become a Bush euphemism, a warning to the person in question that this might be a good time to circulate the resume…” Milbank wrote.

For the moment, Rumsfeld’s job appears safe. The President will not be eager to admit policy mistakes and certainly not right before elections scheduled in Iraq for the end of January.

But wavering Republican support for management of the war in Iraq raises the prospect that 2005 will be far from festive for the White House.