« 4th of July on the West Bank | Home | CBO Projects Housing Bailout Program Will Send 140,000 Families Into Second Foreclosure »
Karl Rove, Reporter At Large
Obviously, the media gives a great deal of play to Karl Rove's comments. Not just Fox, but everyone reports with great attention his words. But meanwhile Mr. Rove refuses to testify to Congress. There's no law that I'm aware of which supports his position. He seems to be a willful lawbreaker. Does that not deserve mention when he is on TV or in newspapers?
I don't understand why the media, which should prize transparency as the lifeblood of reporting, doesn't seem to care about whether officials in the Administration explain themselves in public, and indeed welcomes such figures into the ranks of the media.
Advertisement
Fool. The media are in the business of selling, not telling.
July 6, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
You got that right.
Simple answers to simple questions.
July 7, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Frank Rich in todays opinions, NYT. He was discussing the hissy fits over General Clark among other things. Rich also makes the point:
Mr. McCain is a man who aspires to lead the largest economy in the world and yet recently admitted that he doesn’t know how to use a computer, the one modern tool shared by everyone from the post-industrial American work force to Middle Eastern terrorists to Pixar animators. Getting shot down over Vietnam may not be a qualification for president in 2008, but surely a rudimentary facility with a laptop is.
July 6, 2008 11:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
What I don't understand is how Karl Rove is able to maintain a veneer of respectability, despite being responsible for one of the most disastrous presidencies in American history (that's only a little bit of an overstatement). If anything, Karl Rove should have at least been hounded out of Washington a long time ago. But, I guess that wouldn't be very "polite."
July 6, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think that's rapidly disappearing, thank goodness. Eventually (sooner than later) he'll be one of the crazy token right-wingers on talking head shows. And he'll occasionally publish books that all the sane, thinking people will consider f*ck nuts. Think Pat Buchanan.
July 6, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
The disgraced Alberto Gonzalez just got a job, and FEMA-Faker Mike "Brownie" Brown runs his own disaster-preparedness firm, and Philandering-Paul Wolfowitz was handed the World Bank's top post after his disastrous tenure in DC.
There is a whole structure in place protecting right-wing criminals and liars, as long as they deliver bad policy and largess-laden contracts to their masters. Hate to sound like I believe in a conspiracy here, but we're through the looking glass now when it comes to competence and professionalism.
July 6, 2008 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure if there's a whole structure in place specifically designed to protect right-wing criminals, but it does seem like there's a really messed up feedback loop in D.C., where the only way you can actually be chastised for anything is to violate the mores and folkways of the Beltway. If Karl Rove does something like, I don't know, punch David Broder. Than maybe we'll see a little bit of justice.
July 6, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
You have me stumped. Why wouldn't someone punch David Broder? Did I miss a new law?
July 6, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
He said inside the Beltway.
Outside the Beltway, it's obvious to everyone that Broder needs at least a slap.
;-)
July 6, 2008 8:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Headline
"Karl Rove, Reporter At Large"
"reporter" heh heh heh
July 6, 2008 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed!
Indeed, Hundt himself contradicted his own title with his lede (Obviously, the media gives a great deal of play to Karl Rove's comments.)
The media's presenting Rove as an expert in election politics and not as a "reporter." Unless it can be shown that his dispute with a few Congressional Democrats seriously undermines the value of his opinions, that dispute -- legally colorable or not -- is irrelevant.
July 7, 2008 9:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ellen,
I once heard Lee Atwater describe himself as "a political operative." Hearing this, I thought to myself, 'not a very admirable occupation.'
Atwater, along with Rove, made it to the top, while others in their "profession" like David Bossie and Floyd Brown still labor in the trenches.
Rove is a political operative, a description often interchangeable with 'dirty trickster.'
July 7, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ellen,
I once heard Lee Atwater describe himself as "a political operative." Hearing this, I thought to myself, 'not a very admirable occupation.'
Atwater, along with Rove, made it to the top, while others in their "profession" like David Bossie and Floyd Brown still labor in the trenches.
Rove is best described as a political operative, a description often interchangeable with 'dirty trickster.'
July 7, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
There has to be written somewhere that once you are appointed to, elected to, hired into a job in at least the Administrative Branch of government, you're automatically immune from the laws which apply to the rest of us.
Cases in point: Nixon, "If the president does it it's not illegal;" Clinton, "the president is immune from civil litigation."
July 6, 2008 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
phelicity,
I may be wrong but I think Clinton said; the President is immune from civil litigation 'while still in office.'
July 6, 2008 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
All Presidents, Bush included, are immune from civil lawsuits or criminal prosecutions while in office, unless, of course, they are Democratic Presidents. Just this past year and a half we have learned that Republican presidents are now immune even from impeachment. A real thinking President would switch parties to Republican immediately on being elected.
July 6, 2008 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's no real point in going after Rove until after he's pardon-proof. And, at least in theory, he won't be pardon-proof until next January.
July 6, 2008 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hear Karl will be debating John Edwards on September 26 at UB. Can't wait to hear the lies he'll tell on that one!
July 7, 2008 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
GTFOOH,
I'd rather see Rove debate Barney Frank, Frank would make an ass out of him.
July 7, 2008 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't understand why the media, which should prize transparency as the lifeblood of reporting, doesn't seem to care about whether officials in the Administration explain themselves in public, and indeed welcomes such figures into the ranks of the media.
So they can appear to be 'fair and balanced'? I guess that means that partisan hacks (and sometimes criminals) must be given a forum to spread misinformation, propaganda and lies under false pretenses.
July 8, 2008 1:10 AM | Reply | Permalink