The right wing has been preparing for Clinton's run for eight years. Nobody will believe me but I am sure the folks at PageSix have been on the GOP payroll for years. They have a network of spies and have kept track of every move made by Hillary, Bill and Chelsea since they moved to NYC.

Perhaps. But this whole "Hillary Clinton is the preferred candidate of Karl Rove" line is simply meant to scare Democratic primary voters away from Hillary. It's meant to convince people who might genuinely support Hillary that they're walking into some sort of trap.

I'm not planning to vote for Hillary in the primaries, but I think that her supporters should feel free to do so without fear that they are somehow playing into Rove or Republican hands.

thosethingswesay.blogspot.com

"Evil-Genius" is I think the term for him. I agree this really seems to be "reverse-psychology" and he gave himself away on his "softball" interview with David Gregory on MeetThePress yesterday. He was too smug in his answer and had LosAngelesTimes immediately out of his mouth. With people like Rove, it is not the answer, but it is their manner of answer you have to watch.
On the point of savviness, which the journalists seem to admire, I think Gregory's "mild-chat" with Rove was an avid example of this. Gregory seemed totally in awe and was seeming to feel privilaged at being able to play softball with Rove. The media really needs to gear up, as they are as responsible as Big Money/Business in the pathetic state the country is in.

that article reads almost word for word like an exchange in the cafe over the weekend. right down to the reverse reverse psychology bit.

funny, but i don't think most hillary supporters would mind so much playing into republican hands.

ha.

What's Obama to Rove? Where's the history of mutual hate? Why would he even bother to go there?

You act like this whole thing has some underlying motive deeper and more subtle than personal lashing out against enemies.

Look, the man has just been forced out on his ass. It's fucking embarrassing. I can't imagine why you think he's trying to do anything more than save the sorry hide of his "reputation".

If it's true, then the next question would be, is it because Rove thinks Hillary the easiest candidate to beat or is it rather because he assumes the Dems will win the presidency in any event, and Hillary is the Dem he most prefers.

I think that to the extent that Rove was ever "disciplined" it was in contexts where it might make a difference, and it might burnish his reputation.

But he's now gone from being a "boy genius" to being a politically homeless man. Nobody wants to be seen in his presence; he might as well be Mark Foley.

Now, don't you think that's gotta smart? Don't you think he might have a little mind to lash back at his critics?

Do you really think that this is the moment when we could expect the most rational, carefully calculating behavior out of the man?

I don't think so.

Others may imagine he's still a Machiavellian genius (which I never thought). But what I'm seeing is pure Id.

Correct take on the whole issue, in my opinion. Just because we've all figured out that Rove is a wizard of oz-like projection rather than a real genius with a deep understanding of human nature, doesn't mean he acts with now straightforward, easy-to-define motives. Let's face it - it hasn't taken ANY kind of genius to out-think the Democrats over the past 6 years. They have been pretty much begging to be out-maneuvered. Rove just thinks 2 or 3 steps ahead of them, which is enough to get one called a "genius" in Washington insider circles largely populated by stupid people with good PR reps.

Does Rove want Hillary to be the candidate? If he thinks they can beat her, yes. Of course. If not, then not. Who knows whether he's using real math or his own "math", but the idea that the line of attack he's using is one he invented is just plain silly. First place I saw it laid out was Daily Kos, with Kos himself noting that her favorability numbers, "would never vote for" numbers, and general negatives amongst Dems, were so high that she would never be able to overcome them to be an effective candidate. And he's been pretty much saying the same thing ever since. Rove using that specific formula to address Clinton's campaign directly is a strange thing for sure, and its certainly not to be just taken at face value. Aside from just the fear-mongering and playing on people's hatred of difference, Rove has been very effective at splitting the Dems against one another, and this is, to whatever end, an effort in that direction. I can't imagine that he's doing this because the repugs fear her as the Dem candidate though, that seems laughable on its face.

I don't believe Rove is dumb or that he is God. I believe that Rove thinks he is smart enough to get many Democratic primary voters to believe that he secretly fears Obama the most. This would be called 'reverse-reverse-psychology'. Obviously this is plausible, since we wouldn't be theorizing about reverse psychology in the first place if it weren't a practiced tactic that is currently a subject with strong focus and attention. Negative perceptions are relative. Hillary has negatives compared to who? In the end it is the Republican opponent that provides the standard of measurement.

Oh please. Stop projecting. Just because you have a one-dimensional read on Sen. Clinton that associates her primarily with Republicans, don't presume to speak for the (clearly) large percentage of Democratic voters that support her candidacy for substantive, thoughtful reasons.

You may represent a large number of people on this site who have bought into this BS about a Clinton administration being the same as a GOP administration, but that doesn't make the claim any less silly, and the last thing it does is demonstrate a prescience that gives your analysis of other's motivations any credibility.

Sorry if that's too harsh, but this Naderite crap needs to be challenged.

Let's let the Architect of the Republican Congressional loss in 2006 do what he wants. Tom

Obama is a candidate the GOP is wary of as they really do not know how to attack him. Clinton is very easy meat for GOP. And even if she wins it will be "business" as usual ...
It should be very clear by now that "the establishment" wants Clinton to be the nominee.

But it's not just Rove. Many/most of the conservative commentators on the teevee have good things to say about Hillary. They, for example, really like her foreign policy.

That, to me, means something.

Sorry (seriously) I missed that completely. I'll keep my eye out for the "ha" code and look forward to future posts illuminating your true presumptions...

well they are trying their best to keep immigration the gotv issue: the dems are the do-nothing congress that's letting all the mexicans take your jobs.

I'd like to know what those "substantive, thoughtful reasons" you support Hillary are. Is it because she's "stood up to the rightwing hate machine and come back stronger than ever," because of all her good work on behalf of the lobbyist's representing "nurses and social workers and regular people just like you," or because "she's your girl?"

the GOP afraid of hillary???!! they've had a sweatpants boner for hillary to run for president since bill's first term. only problem for them is it turns out she may have chosen the best possible cycle to run because the GOP is afraid of the anyone-but-a-republican vote (in both the general election and the primary).

Oddly enough, there is absolute silence from the Democratic side of the aisle over whom they would prefer to receive the Republican nomination. I wonder why?

/c

In the blogosphere every one is an expert, so no one is an expert.

But he's now gone from being a "boy genius" to being a politically homeless man. Nobody wants to be seen in his presence; he might as well be Mark Foley.Now, don't you think that's gotta smart? Don't you think he might have a little mind to lash back at his critics? Do you really think that this is the moment when we could expect the most rational, carefully calculating behavior out of the man? I don't think so. Others may imagine he's still a Machiavellian genius (which I never thought). But what I'm seeing is pure Id.

Sorry but yours is the type of thinking that Rove counts on to ensure his continued success. You somehow think that thisman is washed up and that folks are attributing far more to his words than what his actually 'thrownoutonhisass' circumstances lead you to beleive. Well you are barking up the wrong tree.

Do you honestly believe that a man who is responsible for singlehandedly destroying the Department of Justice and using it as the GOP's own personal weapon to criminalize voters for exercising their rights by charging them with voter fraud is somehow now all washed up?  A man who was devious enough to conceive of placing Atty Generals all over the nation to challenge every single election result is now somehow nothing but ID?

That is laughable. Rove has set out to corrupt the very foundation of American democracy. We are a nation of laws. That is the only thing that separates us from dictators and despots. If you control the justice system you control America, americans and all our civil liberties are lost. Yet you somehow believe this man corrupted the justice department to now retire and play golf?

You think the man who has set up a computerized network at the RNC to send messages for allhis covert operations is leaving to twiddle his thumbs because the GOP is angry at him?

You must be out of your everlasting mind.  This man is getting ready to unleash all the legal forces he has put in place to steal the upcoming election. America has not seen the likes of what we are about to encounter with Rove's masterminding of the Department of Justice and stonewalling of Congress to limit oversight. Have you forgotten that the PEOPLES' attorney....Gonzales is NOT representing Americans?  Have you forgotten that Alito and Roberts are on the Supreme Court to ensure that whatever legal rulings are needed will be the law of the land.

I think you are incredibly naive or you do not read the newspapers or even TPMuckracker.

The only way to undo the damage that Rove has wrought is by a massive uprising at the grass roots level by the people. There is only one candidate capable of doing that. There is only one candidate talking about fundamental change. When the foundation of the country is corrupt (system of governance by law) then it requires the people to be galvanized to take back their country to regain their democracy. Only one candiate is inspiring the masses to act. Only one candidate is imbuing hope instead of fear into the electorate. ONLY ONE. And you can bet your sweet ass that Rove knows this!

Hillary is friggin cakewalk for the GOP. They plan to neuter Bill and spay Hillary...Romney "we should double the size of Gitmo' will be crowned the new despot.

Unless folks of your ilk...wake the hell up!!!!!!!!

I think his predictions were just brazen and trying to project confidence to voters and the news media, which is probably what someone in that role should do before a big election.

The fact that the media takes what hacks say seriously is the bigger issue.

What should be made of the fact that the most likely GOP nominee, Romney, is indeed, unlike Rove attacking Obama during the primaries?

Thank you for pointing that out. I was amazed at the difference he showed between HRC and Obama, it was startling.

Rove has audacity and an ability to exploit circumstances and has had generally lucky timing.

The republican corruption scandals destroyed his lucky timing and his ties to the Justice Department scandal have illuminated his audacity.

A great number of the religious right now realize that he has used them for political purposes.

His time in the White House has now labeled him as a Washington insider to the conservative base.

His failure in 2006 has tarnished his infallibility.

Rove staked his reputation on building the Republican Reich; just as he came within view of the summit, he fell. To fall from such a height after using up the work of so many to climb so high has left him without anyone to stop his descent. The failure of his plan has left the Republicans with no strategy and no candidates. The Rove issues of jingoism, abortion, gay hating, threatened Christianity, the strong independent American worker and the threat of the Democrats communosocialism (copyrighted) are dead.

Sure there are still the right wing Kool-Aid drinkers supported by Fox news but the great majority of America has seen the light. Not necessarily on every issue but on enough to see the failed Rovian Republican governance.

The Religious Right feels used and see enormous Republican hypocrisy toward their values. The jingoism is going down in flames with Iraq. Gay rights issues have either been controlled at the state level or socially accepted. The majority of regular Christians are talking issues of governance rather than fear of the federal annihilation of religion. The strong independent American worker is threatened by fair trade, job exportation, tax relief for the rich, gas prices and lack of medical care.

The fear of the Democratic communosocialism has been defused by the need for real renewable and independent energy production, health care access, saving Social Security without privatization and the need for serious infrastructure investment.

Rove’s mask has been removed for all to see the real face of empty promises and fealty to the rich.

Rove will hide out and heal his wounds. He will write a book about how great he was and how his tactics were perfect and only failed through the incompetence of others. He may be hired for hidden campaign work but only by the most desperate of right wing candidates. He will occasionally pontificate as a political analyst for Mr. Murdoch; just one of his masters. He will be paid very well by one of the Republican think tanks if for no other reason than to insure he keeps his mouth shut.

Rove has made his mark and his riches and is now nothing except a dimly remembered servant by his previous employers.

Rove will not crawl out of his hole unless the Democratic majority from 2008 fails in its governance; even then he will be competing against his own apprentices that are younger and more energized.

Rove’s season is over.

///Stepping softly off of my soapbox.

I never put much stock in speculation that someone is engaging in reverse psychology. What if he is engaging in REVERSE reverse psychology? Will he hurt her because you think he is trying to help her by speaking negatively about her? Where does this line of logic end?

People tend to forget this, but one more thing Rove and the other wing nut advisers to Bush did is eliminate totally the separation of church and state. Our tax dollars now finance Republican (Evangelical Christian) churches, where Repub talking points are drilled into the flock every week of the year.

Democrats let this happen with barely a peep, back when Bush announced his "faith based charities" program. Notice that the Justice Department is heavily staffed at the administrative side with "graduates" of Evangelical Christian "universities". This is one more ground for impeaching Bush - violation of the first amendment, and it gives a hint of what we face in next year's election.

Hoppy in Sacramento

You know another thought occurred to me today.

There is a pattern emerging across the country with Rove leaving the WH, Griffin resigning in ARK and Scholzman resigning as well from the DOJ.  These guys along with Gonzales, chief of staff are all of Rove's closest political strategest. Key people he delegates implementation of voting theft to.. That one guy, who couldn't say now the AG names got on the list  that worked for Gonzales, was Rove's constant traveling companion.  All of these guys are now out of the WH...but where are they all hooking up and for what purpose.

I think this is a disturbing pattern. These are all the folks involved in voter fraud and responsible for the phone jammings in NH, no?

Or, it could be that he understands that the Republican party could be cut down to only it's base by 2012, barely able to pull 25% of the electorate. Unless - unless he can keep the contempt between citizens running at full stream during the next 4 years. He sees Hillary as an easier target than Obama or Edwards (his worst nightmare would be Richardson who could effectively laugh Karl Rove right off the stage). But I think Karl's wrong. Yes Hillary IS polarizing. Which is just what we need to bury the GOP for a generation. Sure beats Obama's "Can't we all just kiss and make up?"

Don't be a vizzini, andrew. don't be a vizzini.

MAN IN BLACK
All right: where is the poison?
The battle of wits has begun. It
ends when you decide and we both
drink, and find out who is right
and who is dead.

VIZZINI
But it's so simple. All I have to
do is divine from what I know of
you. Are you the sort of man who
would put the poison into his own
goblet, or his enemy's?

He studies the Man In Black now.

VIZZINI
Now, a clever man would put the
poison into his own goblet,
because he would know that only a
great fool would reach for what
he was given. I'm not a great
fool, so I can clearly not choose
the wine in front of you. But you
must have known I was not a great
fool; you would have counted on
it, so I can clearly not choose
the wine in front of me.

MAN IN BLACK
(And now there's a
trace of nervousness beginning)
You've made your decision then7

VIZZINI
Not remotely. Because iocane
comes from Australia, as everyone
knows. And Australia is entirely
peopled with criminals. And
criminals are used to having
people not trust them, as you are
not trusted by me. So I can
clearly not choose the wine in
front of you.

MAN IN BLACK
Truly, you have a dizzying
intellect.

VIZZINI
Wait till I get going! Where was I?

MAN IN BLACK
Australia.

VIZZINI
Yes -- Australia, and you must
have suspected I would have known
the powder's origin, so I can
clearly not choose the wine in
front of me.

This is a little reminiscent of a story from 2004. Rumors that Rove was mischievously shilling for Howard Dean, believing he was the most beatable Dem candidate. Perhaps this Hillary story is more-or-less indicative of the standard Rove way of thinking. Identify the most beatable Dem, and stir the pot enough in an attempt to enable their selection.

But I think we'd be foolish to dwell on Rove's verbal machinations. Rather we should be checking, TPMmuckraker style, things like the attempted appointment of his favorite acolyte, Tim Griffin, to US attorney in place of Bud Cummins. In Arkansas.

Seems that Rove's press appearances are intended to divert attention... what really matters is what he doesn't tell us, and especially what he refuses to talk about.

If anyone out there in la-la land thinks that caucus goers in reality land (Iowa, where I'm from) is going to support or not support Ms. Clinton on the basis of whether Karl Rove wants her to be the nominee simply is nuts. Come to Iowa and climb out of whatever conspiracy you live in. Rove is ammoral and Democratic caucus goers do not give a whit what he says, though we are well aware of his benign evilness born of being amoral. By the way, not to offend anyone, but who believe that Rove is likely a closet gay, as I do?

Regarding Dean/Rove, I always had this
feeling that Dean was the one Rove feared most, and so Rove, knowing how easily the MSM is manipulated, used the right wing noise machine to spread the word that "Dean can't win," and this became the conventional wisdom.

Remember too, Dean wanted to convert the Billy Joe Bob vote.

After 4 years of Bush, Democrats didn't want to run someone who couldn't win, so we got Kerry.

Now I'm getting hints of the conventional wisdom; "Hillary can't win."

And oh yeah; "She's fatally flawed."

I have no doubt I could be completely off base with this analysis. :-)

The only way to "bury" another party, IMHO, is a crushing defeat where it matters--at the voting booth. Although we could win the Prez election in 2008 with another 51-49 split in 2008 with the corresponding electoral college results, I think the Dems need to aim much higher--in the 60% range.

Rove certainly has said ad nauseum that his goal is to build the GOP into a majority party for generations. The 2006 midterm results came as a quite unpleasant surprise.

There are two characteristics that I believe are needed in the Dem Prez candidate--and, frankly, throughout the party. First is the ability to rapidly and effective diffuse criticism--and that can range from nasty personal attacks to differences on policy issues. Second is the ability to forge a new majority that would be enduring--this would tap into young people, different ethnic groups, blacks, etc. that "lean". (Leaning is not enough. These folks have to register, show up at polls, and vote Dem for more than one election.)

The only Dem candidate I have witnessed actually discussing new majorities and a change from the WDC establishment is Obama. Simply representing change due to physical criteria--black, Hispanic, female--won't be enough. And I simply don't think it is enough to be able to fight back quickly and decisively when the GOP attacks begin.

Obama is much more than "kiss and make up"; instead he wants to forge a new majority to support the Democrats. I haven't found any evidence that Hillary understands this. If Hillary supporters have this evidence, now's the time to cough it up.

I don't even give them that much credit!  I call them "News Chucklers."  The faux banter is just as absurd but far less harmful than, for example, referring to every enemy in Iraq as "alqaeda."  Do you think there was an actual memo about it?

Jan

I wonder; if it were legal to run, would Bush win another term?

God, just the thought of it gives me the willies.

By the way, I'm in 'becoming bluer by the election Bucks County', just outside Philly.

:-)

I got dizzy reading this post.

I went to the video posted by Andrew, it was like Who's on First. :-)

jedermann;

Conventional wisdom: "Karl Rove is a genius"

If one used the same kind of analysis to arrive at the conclusion that Karl Rove is a genius, then......

John Gotti is a genius.

I understand (although I don't agree) about Fitzgerald not indicting Rove, because he simply couldn't prove motive.  My question was not about that. 

 The fact is that Rove told (at least) Matthew Cooper Plame's name, and that she worked for the CIA on WMD's.  The burden should surely be on the person with the high security clearance to know if he is blabbing the name of a protected source.  Motive doesn't matter, and neither does (pretended) ignorance of protected status.  If someone can't be trusted to keep secrets, how can they keep their security clearance; and Rove most certainly did.

This crowd poo-poohs the Geneva Convention, Habeus Corpus, and Congressional subpoenas; do you really think they would buckle to a Hatch Act infringement?  Hard to get the facts on the table when everything is hidden by Executive Priviledge.  They would ride the Hatch Act thingy all the way through until it hit the statute of limitations (if there is one).  I just don't believe that Rove left out of fear of any law.

Jan

no. the point is it doesn't matter what rove thinks. at all.

thanks for the link!!!!!!!

So this post is all about what Karl Rove is saying about Hillary Clinton and what that means in the leaves of the teacups.

I think that it means that this must be August.