The Mask Comes Off
Karl Rove's thuggery at last night's New York Conservative Party bash has to be smacked down, but for far more than being what Chuck Schumer called "divisive." We need to "divide" the country against the likes of Rove.
This is the true face of the Bush crowd: extremism in pursuit of vice. It has to be said again and again. It should certainly be a 2006 theme. Opposing thuggery is a policy--it's called decency. And I suspect some elemental sense of fair play is not dead in the land.
Rove's indecency knows no limits. He parachuted into Manhattan to declare: "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers."
They lie and lie. The lies carry them into the disaster that is Iraq. They insult, they sneer, and then they lie again. This isn't an accident--it's an identity.
Are we a bunch of bleeding heart pussies or an evil, malevolent, force bent by hatred of our country and it's chosen by God president.
I can't keep track of all this.
June 23, 2005 9:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I won't repeat what I said on MY's post "A Confession". My language was R-rated.
What Karl Rove said is despicable. He invoked 9/11 as part of a partisan political attack. He has disrespected the memories of all who died on 9/11, in Afghanistan and Iraq. Dick Durbin apologized? Karl Rove should be removed from his position in the White House, he is a disgrace!!!!
June 23, 2005 9:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Where is the Real Democratic OUTRAGE! This is in effect calling all DEMS TRAITORS! Damn it we have to get some balls in our party and stand up and SHOUT out Karl Rove. He shoud be forced to apologize and then RESIGN!
DAMN I am so PISSED ON! Where are the RADICALS when we need them Remember "BURN BABY BURN!".
Sgt. ED Beckmann Disabled Viet Vet Ret.
June 23, 2005 9:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's hold on here and not usher Karl out the door too quickly. Ever since he was given more policy direct policy responsibility by Bush after the last election, the administration's fortunes have been sliding. Stuff like this is a sign they are panicing about the mess they have gotten the country into.
June 23, 2005 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
The extreme statements by Republicans are made by the most powerful men in the country, people like Tom DeLay and Karl Rove. The etremist statements by "Democrats" are made by fringe entertainers like Ward Churchill.
I get tired of saying the same thing all the time, but it's true all the time. Democrats have a lot of trouble realizing how extreme the assault is going to be. These really are not normal times. Rove wants to destroy the Democratic Party and the two-party system.
(Double-posted from Yglesias).
June 23, 2005 9:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Dems are escalating their response. Reid is calling on Rove to apologize or resign.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050623/ap_on_re_us/rove_speech
June 23, 2005 9:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pray God protect us from faith-based government.
June 23, 2005 9:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am all in favor of looking at the "political upside" of any issue, John Dillinger.
But there are some issues which politics is never a mitigating factor. And this is one of those cases. If we say nothing or pooh pooh it, we might just as well be the traitors that Rove claims we are. Rove's statements can not be anything but vigorously denounced!!!
June 23, 2005 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
I see the savagery of the GOP:
Describes Rove and Norquist perfectly.
But how do we smack them down when the media will not even let us be heard? It is sickening how they get away with saying things like this without consequences; but Durbin and Dean have their heads served to them on a platter for speaking truth to power.
June 23, 2005 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's an idea: let's demand that Rove apologize. Or we could just save some time and apologize as liberals for being soft on terrorism along with all our other sins.
I bet you will not see one Republican repudiate this statement -- and we sure won't see Rove apologize. Oh, they might say they'd word it differently, but they will continue to push the message, i.e., liberals hate America...and God...and babies...and puppies...and all that is good and right.
We need to stop apologizing and attack.
June 23, 2005 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
June 23, 2005 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
We want Rove's resignation introduced as a meme. If we ever find a way to pry Rove out of the WH, the White House is toast. We need to use every chance we can to push Rove's resignation into the M$M.
June 23, 2005 10:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let none of us ever again say something like "Bush went along with the neocons" or "Bush did so and so because he had to cater to his base, including the religious radicals".
BUSH IS a neocon and a religious radical. He is one of them and as President is their leader.
June 23, 2005 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
unless Dems start smacking back, the repubs will continue to get away with it.
I don't understand why Dems have to be so friggin cordial all the time. Look at Schumer's response in the article -- oooooo...I'm scared.
There is no high road anymore. So let's stop pretending there is, and start using the word LIAR and REPUBLICAN in the same sentence.
I'd like to see "asshole" in there, too, but that may be too much to ask of our elected officials. Let it not be said I do not know where to draw the line. :-)
June 23, 2005 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here is what Delay said about Hostettler comments about how Democrats hate Christians:
We apologize. They attack. We look weak. They look strong. They win, we lose.
June 23, 2005 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
<span>I realize what Rove said was utterly inflammatory. If Dems make a big stink, how will it affect liberals' image? If the Left takes Rove's bait, and while frothing at the mouth, berate the administration, how will that heal the accusations of Dems being unpatriotic?
Rather, we need an idea to counter the attack intelligently. How does one respond to a kick to the groin with legs tied together?
And another small reason not to burn an elephant effigy: We need to avoid the Red VS Blue nonsense. Progress is made multilaterally.
Please, someone tell me I'm not just blowing hot air.</span>
June 23, 2005 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Kind of like Hillary Clinton's lesbian lover Vince Foster.
June 23, 2005 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Listen, Rove is using some hyperbole to give his audience some red meat. Shocking! Notice he didn't say Democrates, he said liberals and there is some truth to what he said. Remember those who did not want to remove the Taliban for fear it would enrage the Arab "street", and those who were constantly asking what we did wrong to cause them to hate us?
June 23, 2005 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Democrats will only make the issue partisan.
Does the Democratic Party have a database of the family members of 9/11 victims that are Democrats?
No that would be a horrible cynical thing to do!
What I say, what you say don't mean crap.
The mother of an attractive blond who was incinerated in the Twin Towers crying on Oprah because Rove keeps calling her a traitor...just that one person with the right personal story making the right emotional appeal would put a cap in his ass.
Ask your Dem consultant…
Do you have a database of every Democratic mother of a fallen soldier?
Do you have a database of every Democratic mother of a tortured prisoner?
Do you have a database of anything?
It is the freaking information age and the instant some spew from the right blinks we should have the exact information on the right two-three people who actually can tell their story, fly them to the capital and let them confront the bastard.
But you would be manipulating people. You would be using people. That is crap. You don’t think that those people WANT to tell their story? We wouldn’t be asking anyone to lie. We wouldn’t be fabricating anything. We would just be developing a list of people who want to tell their story and giving them a platform.
You know the Swifties were not a grass roots org. They hired an ex-FBI guy to profile every possible voice; cherry-picked the most strident and helped them “find” each other. They didn’t need to tell them what to say. They knew what they would say because they picked them for what they would say on their own.
June 23, 2005 10:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's take Karl Rove to his logical conclusion. He said ... "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war."
As tempting as it is to condemn Rove for attacking liberals, we won't melt and that attack is secondary.
Our real focus should be on rebutting his statement about preparedness. Troops are dying because Bush and Rove failed to do exactly what he is claiming to have done. They DID NOT PREPARE for war. They didn't read thye intelligence, They didn't consult our allies. They didn't have enough troops to do the job. They didn't provide the troops with enough armor. They didn't have a plan for securing the country. They didn't ... it's a long list of unpreparedness.
We should use Rove's own words to remind the world that the reason Iraq is in the mess it is in is because Bush and Rove took us to war on lies and then compounded the error by being UNPREPARED.
June 23, 2005 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Should we take the high road?
"Yeah know, Karl Rove's comments we very unfortunate. We aren't the traitors he claims we are. He should stop saying such mean things, he hurt our feelings."
We need to vigorously unmercifully need to attack Rove. It isn't a red vs. blue state issue. It is all about Karl Rove and only Karl Rove.
June 23, 2005 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
First of all, while liberal may not equal democrat, democrat does, in a lot of people's minds, equal liberal. The right has spent the last 20-30 years calling ALL democrats liberal. As far as the masses are concerned there is no real difference.
I do not agree there was any real truth to his argument. A few liberals may have espoused the positions you suggest, but most voices on the left, as well as the right, were supportive of the Afghanistan war. That was the real war against Osama. Now, almost to a man, liberals were against Iraq. But anyone who could see beyond their nose should have been against that war.
As for wondering why they hate us: it kind of makes sense to consider what motivates your enemies. This doesn't mean you are going to knuckle under to their demands, rather knowing their motives helps to combat them. War isn't all bullets and bombs, you know. There is also the propaganda front. Bush and his bunch showed themselves to be clueless on how to talk to the Muslim extremists from the beginning -- remember all the "crusade" talk, very helpful. In this war, we could work to minimize the number of enemies we have or we could inspire multitudes to join the fray against us. Guess which strategy we've employed?
The CIA now believes Iraq is a major training ground for terrorists and is turning them out by the gross -- Bush and the conservatives have been very effective. Thank god, they weren't like the cowardly liberals.
June 23, 2005 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
You don't deal with the bullies by looking for "healing." You deal with bullies by socking them in the mouth and daring them to give you their best shot back. Bullies never fight. Bullies intimidate. The minute a bully realizes their intimidation bluff has been called, they run away to the protection of Momma.
June 23, 2005 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
The overwhelming majority of Americans do not know who Karl Rove is. The right way to respond to this viscious opening salvo in the coming 'dolchstoss' debate is to go right at him, as I believe Harry Reid will do. Say that he called 'Democrats' traitors. It's not black-letter truth, but it is true enough, and there are alot of Democrats out there who don't like being called traitors by a Republican appratchik. The Democratic establishment should not fight with fire, it should fight fire with nukes. Smack him, and smack him hard.
June 23, 2005 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good post.
It would be great to see our guys pick this up. That's really what I mean by attacking. We need to be relentless in attacking them and their obvious LACK of war prep would be a great place to start.
But, for some reason with the exception of a few voices like Conyers, we don't want to talk about HOW we got where we are. I think we also need to find a way to talk about Bush's failure to prepare for 9-11 when he had warnings all around him. Maybe this is the hook. They didn't prepare adequately for war and they were asleep at the switch before 9-11.
June 23, 2005 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
<div>Is this more Dem baiting? If so, it is just a distraction. When not make fun of Rovian tactics instead. If the tables were turned wouldn't the Repubs do that?<br /><br />I know it is hard not to get emotional from what is happening to our country but the Dems have got to try to stay calm while fighting back. If you lose your head in battle, you can get killed. Same applies to politics. Look what happened to Durbin.<br /><br />The media will rush from one side to another over statements like these just to fill air time. How about not responding or trying to find a humorous way to speed this stuff into the memory hole as quickly as possible.<br /><br />Who needs Rove's comments echoed through thousands of liberal blogs? You risk burning out your base with too many fires.<br /><br />...<br /><br /><br /><br />...<br /></div><br />
June 23, 2005 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry about the screwy looking post above. I must have accidentally change something. Here it is cleaned up:
Is this more Dem baiting? If so, it is just a distraction. When not make fun of Rovian tactics instead. If the tables were turned wouldn't the Repubs do that?
I know it is hard not to get emotional from what is happening to our country but the Dems have got to try to stay calm while fighting back. If you lose your head in battle, you can get killed. Same applies to politics. Look what happened to Durbin.
The media will rush from one side to another over statements like these just to fill air time. How about not responding or trying to find a humorous way to speed this stuff into the memory hole as quickly as possible.
Who needs Rove's comments echoed through thousands of liberal blogs? You risk burning out your base with too many fires
June 23, 2005 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Where this kind of Republican viciousness has to be used is with moderate Republicans and with independents and apoliticals.
I have found communications with such people intensely frustrating. They usually either try to minimize the viciousness of Rove, DeLay, et al, or else assert (without evidence) that the Democrats are just as bad.
Moderates, independents, and apoliticals can be just as dogmatic and fanatical as any other ideologue. People seem to marry their political position at some point in their life, and then stick with it.
All during the 2004 campaign I kept waiting for the moderate Republicans, et al, to see the light, and very few of them ever did. A lot of people have their heads in the sand.
There's a really virulent strain of liberal-hatred out there, and it's not just conservatives who are affected by it.
June 23, 2005 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
A perfect recipe for defeat. We have been assuming that the outrageous statements of the right would fall of their own weight for years now. In that time, they have advanced steadily and never moderated their rhetoric. Voters always say they hate negative campaigning, but negative ads drive numbers better than positive ones.
IMO, if you are losing, look at what's working for the winners and adapt it for yourself. Well, take a minute and look at the way the right has used rhetoric to marginalize the left. When confronted with their outrageous rhetoric, they do not aplologize, they restate their position and attack. They are winning. We had better stop and consider our tendency toward moderate rhetoric and an apologetic attitude. Unless our goal is to remain in the minority in perpetuity.
June 23, 2005 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, but you're blowing hot air. (You asked...)
I'll turn your question around -- if the Dems don't make a big stink, how will it affect their image?
If we continue to let scum like Rove walk all over us, how does us look? Weak. Too weak to fight back, and too weak to fight for the country.
Poltics is all about image. Republicans know this well. This is why their leadership can say whatever the hell they want -- like call us Nazis over and over again -- and get away with it.
But we say the word Nazi, and Dick Durbin is crying on the Senate floor saying he's sorry.
Did the Republicans counter Durbin's words with anything "intelligent?" No -- they took him out of context, wrapped the flag around it and called him a traitor.
And it worked. Didn't it?
Politics is a dirty business. That's the reality.
PS -- I noticed you're really into giving people 2's that don't agree with your ideas. What's up with that? At the least, you should have the decency to let someone know why you thought the post was inappropriate, you know?
June 23, 2005 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
I want this statement to be in the news for weeks. The Democrats should take these words and run with them. There is blood in the water... Republicans are constantly making attacks to marginalize and polarize half the country. And it isn't going to stop.. they aren't going to let up until someone starts a CAMPAIGN to FIGHT BACK.
Every prominent Democrat should first talk about the dispicable words that the Deputy Chief of Staff uttered and then, in the same sentence, begin to say how they would do things better.
I'm so enraged by statements like this that sometimes I don't even know what to say. My number one question is... when are our Democratic politicians going to stop taking this crap? When are they going to stand up and FIGHT?!?!?!?!?! Fight godammit... fight back long and hard. Don't let these bastards marginalize you, impune your patriotism, and your leadership abilities. These people aren't good leaders... they're bullies!!! Get out and tell America the truth!!!
June 23, 2005 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hear Hear!
Rove should be our #1 target. He's largely responsible for the Republican power grab's success. Every attack & smear campaign has been orchestrated by Rove and without him we'd finally have an even chance against them.
June 23, 2005 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just a reminder of the times just after 9-11. Remember the phrase "soccer moms wanted M-16s to go to Afghanistan and kill Bin Laden?"
Ask yourself how many patriotic Americans signed up for the military after 9-11 to defend America and bring Bin Laden to justice (using whatever definition for justice you care). That selfless dedication was corrupted almost immediately (as has been irrefutably disclosed) into an irrelevant war to take the oil fields of Iraq on a no-bid, no accounting, cost plus plus plus corporate basis.
These people are disgusting and they're destroying America and when they're done with it, they'll just move to some other place to suck dry (their money is already safely in off shore tax havens).
These "people" are conservative Republicans. The hate and disregard for America is conservative in nature. Think that's too much of a broad stroke? Which party votes as a block on every issue? Which party claims that block voting is a sign of unity and strength rather than an indication of a complete lack of democracy?
"Conservative" AND "Republican" should be the reviled words in our society. Not "liberal."
What would Jesus have said and done? How would Karl Rove and Republicans have demonized and crucified Jesus?
June 23, 2005 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Instead of running away from the word "Liberal" let's reclaim it. Point out that despite what people label themselves, most mainstream opinions are in fact liberal.
June 23, 2005 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course you arer correct.
Rove is trying to smear the all Democrats with the views of the left wing fringe for the benefit of his base. This is not news. Democrats routinely try to smear all Republicans as racists or religious fundies due to the views of a few fringe right wingers.
June 23, 2005 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Democrats routinely try to smear all Republicans as racists
Huh? Can you point to examples of democrats doing this? Even if we stipulate that Dean was calling the GOP racist when he made his white/christian remark (which I do not accept), that would be exactly one -- hardly routine. And every democrat that got close to a microphone repudiated what Dean said.
I wish we did "routinely" smear republicans. Not necessarily as racists, though we should not shrink from pointing out that all the old democrat racists are now republicans, but smear them with their anti-American agenda.
June 23, 2005 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just read through the comments on this site. Of course most of the commenters here would be classified as the left wing fringe.
June 23, 2005 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
<span class="Apple-style-span"> "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war;</span><span class="Apple-style-span"> liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers.</span><span class="Apple-style-span">"</span><span class="Apple-style-span">
</span><span class="Apple-style-span">I realize this is a centrist Democrat site, but I still feel that the sad thing about this is that, in many senses, I agree with Rove's characterization. Conservatives and the rest who immediately girded for war were enraged idiots. And yes, I prefer indictments to guantanamo, therapy to torture, understanding to ignorance, incarceration to execution. Obviously that "offer" is a rhetorical stab, but basically he's not that wrong. The decision to skip understanding and charge directly into war was both morally and pragmatically wrong.</span>
June 23, 2005 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Erasmus said: "IMO, if you are losing, look at what's working for the winners and adapt it for yourself."
I see you are still praising folly.*
Doesn't it depend on what the winners are doing to win?
Lying, cheating, stealing, bullying, shouting and dividing US?
What's wrong with refusing to dignify idiot questions with responses?
Why not quit playing their game and start a new one.
---
*Sorry, couldn't resist.
June 23, 2005 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Equating what someone posts on this website to Karl Rove's comments is absurd. Clearly you can't come up with any comparable examples of Democrats demonizing Republicans -- certainly not of democrats "routinely" calling republicans racist.
June 23, 2005 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Liberal is a useful term. I know exactly who I'm talking about and it's crucial to have a specific term for them.
I cried when they shot John Lennon
Tears ran down my spine
And I cried when I saw "JFK"
As if I'd lost a father of mine
But Malcom-X and Ice-T had it coming
They got what they asked for this time
Chorus:
So love me, love me, love me,
I'm a liberal
I go to pro-choice rallies
Recycle my cans and jars
I'll honk if you love the Dead
Hope those funny Grunge bands become stars
But don't talk about revolution
That's going a little bit to far
Chorus:
So love me, love me, love me,
I'm a liberal
I cheered when Clinton was chosen
My faith in the system reborn
I'll do anything to save our schools
If my taxes aint too much more
And I love Blacks and Gays and Latinos
As long as they don't move next door
Chorus:
So love me, love me, love me,
I'm a liberal
Rush Limbaugh and the L.A.P.D.
Should all hang thier heads in shame
I can't understand where they're at
Arsenio should set them straight
But if neighborhood watch doesn't know you
I hope the cops take your name
Chorus:
So love me, love me, love me,
I'm a liberal
Yeah, I read the New Republican
Rolling Stone and Mother Jones too
If I vote it's a democrat
With a sensible economy view
But when it comes to terrorist Arabs
There is no one more red, white, and blue
Chorus:
So love me, love me, love me,
I'm a liberal
Once I was young and had an attitude
Stickers covered the car I drove in
Even went on some direct actions
When there weren't rent-a-cops to be seen
Ah, but now I've grown older and wiser
And that's why I'm turning you in
Chorus:
So love me, love me, love me,
I'm a liberal
*updated by Jello Biafra in '96 from the original Phil Ochs
June 23, 2005 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I'm thankful that your view is not prevailing currently with people like Harry Reid. You're welcome to hide in the corner and hope that the rightwing's characterizations of us don't take root, but THAT is the true 'folly' cause they took root a long time ago. Somehow you think your suggestion is a new tactic for the dems, but it seems to me that we've been dodging fiery rhetoric from the right for years now and it has gotten us where we are now -- in the minority and the momentum is against us. Offering a positive message is pointless if the messenger has no credibility. Thanks to relentless attacks, our credibility is in doubt.
You seem to think that fighting fire with fire means we sink to their level and are as dishonest as they are. I reject that. I believe there are valid criticisms to make about the right. Attacking them for their failures will begin to damage THEIR credibility. If they lose credibility, voters will look for alternatives, e.g., democrats.
June 23, 2005 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rove is calling half the country traitors. Forget the debates about what liberals should be called, how nice we should be, how nasty we should be -- this asshole called half the country, for nothing more than exercising rights of free speech we've held throughout this nation's history, traitors.
We're squarely in Goebbels territory now, and it's in broad daylight.
That the President's stragtegist felt the need to pull this stunt as well as the Durbin Distraction in the face of abysmal polling suggests that he's panicking. It's red meat to forestall the inevitable and call him on it.
What Dems need to do in the course of fighting back is to EXPOSE THEIR METHODS. Show how the shell game is played Point out to people exactly what they're doing and why. How they attack strengths in order to discredit; how they say the exact opposite of what they do; the timing of their outrageous inflammatory statements, etc.
These people are criminals and they know the jig is close to being up. We have to hammer them without mercy and without fear of phony censure -- and educate people as to their methods.
June 23, 2005 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Notice that Rove chose the word "Liberal" and so he and other republicans are going to delight in calling anyone who answers a "librul." No way Democrats should back down from that one though, then they'll just be "weak libruls" if they do.
Rove clearly shows Republicans know they're tanking, and hope to tar any dissent "librul" but it's already too late.
Democrats should LOUDLY challenge Republicans, individually and by name, to either endorse or repudiate these comments, and bridge that conversation into a referendum on Iraq.
They should take the oppurtunity to fire back at the WH and Repubican leadership on charges of incompetance and rubber stamping WH policy.
Democrats should point to every Republican war blunder and deceit, and every Democratic prediction which proved true but was ignored by the WH and GOP leadership.
IMO, Rove just gave Democrats an opening to come out swinging, and the polls are perfect for it.
The only reason for caution I see is that Democrats shouldn't play the issue out entirely before 2006. Get Republicans on the ropes, and keep hammering Iraq (as well as SS, corruption, etc) till 2006.
June 23, 2005 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I agree that getting a mother to go on Oprah to say she doesn't appreciate Rove calling her a traitor is good, I don't think that at all means Democrats should put Republicans on the spot for Rove's comments.
Democrats should absolutly do that ASAP.
June 23, 2005 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent. I completly agree.
Democrats should essentially say:
"Mr. Republican ______ , do you agree with Rove's McCarthy-like trash talking? and BTW, now that you mention it, Republicans haveincompetantly handled XYZ in Iraq, while being very hostile to Democratic warnings and solutions to problems of XYZ."
June 23, 2005 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
oops, meant to say:
Democrats should attack Rove and Republicans on this issue, and force them to either endorse or denounce Rove's comments.
June 23, 2005 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I see Gitlin's sputtering, but I can't see where Rove is wrong. Can someone explain that?
To be fair: some on the left opposed quick indictments, believing that a much more thorough investigation of the Bush administration was necessary before arresting the president and his cabinet.
An unhinged faction complaining about being accurately described! What to make of that?
June 23, 2005 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Rove is correct, then there are no liberals in the Democratic Party. Now that may be true, but the Right has for years now been telling us the contrary, i.e., that most, if not all, Dems are libs. Look at the votes to go to war in Afghanistan. It was essentially unanimous.
I certainly consider myself a liberal and my main problem with the Afghan war was that Bush seemed to be dragging his feet. I'm not sure he would have even gone into Afghanistan without public pressure -- he sure got out fast and on to the main event. And now the Taliban is resurfacing.
The problem with republicans and 9-11 is that it's like most things where they want to be tough without any skin in the game. It's interesting to me that the 2 cities in this country that actually had been attacked by foreign terrorist voted overwhelmingly for John Kerry. Probably because they realized what a dismal failure Bush and the republicans had been at keeping our country safe and they were determined not to let the terrorists win. By contrast, republican voters were left quivering, clasping a role of duct tape. The terrorists beat the republican citizens among us at 9-11 and they have been running scared ever since willing to strike at ghosts and mirages.
June 23, 2005 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rove is one of, if not the most cunning shrews in Duhhbya's dynasty. Knowing the shitstorm it would trigger, there is only one reason that he would make such a speech (and he read it, it wasn't off the cuff).
Can you say Downing Street Memos?
June 23, 2005 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok Draftedin68 (glad you made it out alive), I'll bite.
Here's what I think you're saying: Getting terrorism front and center, evoking 911, and reminding Americans of W's 'robust' response is intended to neutralize the DSMs. Si?
I can see that. But it seems that there's also a little trap for Rove -- besides the fact that the statement (which clearly was intentional, no doubt) would stir up a shitstorm in an environment that is trending against W, his characterization of conservatives could have been seen as overly militaristic and actually support the warmonger attitude expressed in the DSMs. Even more dangerous for W, imo, is that bringing up 911 is risky. If you ever get people to really focus on his failure pre-911, I think his polls on terrorism could take a turn south.
Fortunately for them, our side usually fails to take advantage of such opportunities. And I'm sure that's what he's counting on.
All that being said (and probably not WaS), to me this incident made sense cause it seems Rove's MO is that when things are going bad, make 'em worse. Chaos presents more opportunities than trouble for this bunch. They just float on top like turds.
June 23, 2005 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
John Emerson has it right. They do want to destroy the Democratic Party and turn this into Mexico in the old days when the PRI was the only game in town. But I think they'll be worse than that. First, they'll go after the gays; then they'll come after the liberals. And by the time it happens, the lapdog media and most of America will support them.
Rove didn't declare war on half of America, as some people asserted. He declared war on "liberals," and most of America will agree with him.
I don't think that most liberals get it yet.
We truly are the enemy now.
June 23, 2005 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
The attack has to take the form of anger over those not in the Party Hierarchy that he offended.
The attack on Durbin worked because they implied he attacked the troops--the public does not see the troops as Republicans so the fabricated hurt was a partisan attack on a non-partisan American group.
Democratic anger has to be directed at how Rove's statements hurt Democrats serving in our armed forces, and the families of the 9-11 victims who are Democrats. The party can take your smear, Mr. Rove, but there are the families of a few hundred soldiers who have given their lives for this country that are Registered Democrats, and their are thousands of relatives and hundreds of the victims of 9-11 that are registered Democrats, and you should be ashamed for questioning their love of country, their sacrifice, and their determination to see Osama Bin Ladin brought to justice.
June 23, 2005 11:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Typical reaction.
Liberals are tougher on Republicans than on the terrorists.
So, sock Rove in the mouth. But try to understand why the terrorists of 9/11 hate us.
That fits with Dean's "throw DeLay in prison", but insist on due process for bin Laden" stance.
One begins to think that the problem isn't the liberal approach, but their pathological hatred for their fellow Americans.
June 24, 2005 6:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
These Conservatives are tough-
They eat their dead, and when they don't have any to eat, they kill a few- just ask the former Gov of Ohio, Mr. Voinovich.
You gotta respect that.
So, let's finally play the game by Rove's Rules. Everyone crank up the photocopy machines and get ready for Sunday. Show up at your local fundamentalist Christian church armed with a stackful of leaflets with the message that Karl Rove has been unmasked as the Antichrist! Make up a quote from some lame preacher like Rod Parsley "testifying" to a "revelation" from the Lord. Quote the Bible with the old "wolf in sheep's clothing" reference, and claim that Rove is actually LEADING GEORGE BUSH ASTRAY!. The "base" would be out with pitchforks and torches, marching down to 1600 Pennsylvania.
That kind of campaign worked pretty good against McCain in South Carolina.....
June 24, 2005 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rove’s core argument appears to be that war was the only response to 9/11. He appears to be trying to preempt any argument that Al Queda could have been handled as a security issue, a policing effort. German intelligence paints a picture of Al Quida being a fairly small facilitator organization and once their base in Afghanistan was destroyed they were greatly weakened because like minded conservative fundamentalist muslims would have a difficult time connecting with them. In other words an intense tactically oriented policing effort was all that was needed to directly deal with Al Quida.
Shrub & CO. chose war, a broad strategic path which has achieved two major results. Iraq has become a training ground for faith based fundamentalists, which guarantees an on going war. Secondly, eternal war allows Shrub & Co to maintain blind power “support the troops (Shrub) or you are a traitor.” ( Shrub & Co could care less about the troops otherwise the troops would actually have the equipment and support they need.) Shrub’s plan is to use the popularity of being a successful war president to push though radical policy changes ( the rich pay no taxes and destroying social security ) and to establish long term political power for faith based conservatives. Running a successful policing operation does not get Shrub re-elected in 04, but conducting a war, even a botched unnecessary war did get Shrub re-elected. Rove’s comments are part of a pre-emptive strike to prevent questioning the wisdom of declaring war on Islam as opposed using tactical police and military strikes to isolate and destroy Al Quida while creating positive ties with the Middle Eastern Islamic world.
June 24, 2005 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I actually find it odd that Rove would find it unusual for liberals to want a response to a savage act to include indictments.
Whatever happened to the notion of a civil society? Is Rove proposing that we fight fire with fire? That it is best to fight terrosists who presumably want to undermine our democratic system by undermining it with the sort of overt militarism that undermined the Roman Republic?
I presume Rove would agree that Columbine was a savage act: would he suggest that we go to war against the State of Colorado, and the nearby State of Nevada besides (after all, Los Vegas has a lot of sin)? Would Rove suggest that the response to the savagery of a serial killer is not an indictment but a war?
It seems to me that the best response to those who would undermine our system of laws and liberties is to show that we have the ability and strength of national character to use those very laws against them. To call a terrorist a soldier against whom you must fight a war is to glorify the terrorist. To me it is more tough toward the terrorists to not give them the victory of being soldiers but to treat them as criminals.
At the very least, I would expect a "Christian" president such as G.W. Bush to urge his staff to start thinking of the value of "turning the other cheek" and to not be so militaristic.
To me all this militarism from the right seems not a willingness to deal with the problem but rather a refusal to constructively deal with the terrorist threat. We can fight all the wars we want, but alas terrorism will always be with us. However, we can take concrete steps, even maybe providing therapy for some of the disaffected youth of the world and certainly pursuing terrorists as the criminals they are, to limit the impact of terrorism in the future. For Rove to discount pragmatic and constructive thinking indicates that he, not us, is the one not taking the threat seriously but rather only seeking to make political hay from it.
June 24, 2005 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
We should send Rove to Durbin's Gulag.
June 24, 2005 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Democrats should quit asking for apologies. They should tell the truth without reservation and not try to be diplomatic like Biden and others. We lost the election because Kerry did not have the guts to release his military records untill long after he lost. That would have shut them up. Rove is a pig who orchestrated Florida and Ohio and no one has the guts to say anything. We have been at war for over two years and no one in the senate has the dignity to ask where are the wmd and where is Ossama? We are a party of cowards, because we haven't got the the courage to express our convictions and or the truth.
June 24, 2005 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bush, Cheney, Rove, et al....A few FRINGE right-wingers?
June 28, 2005 8:46 AM | Reply | Permalink