Via Tapped, it appears the pressure is on the GOP for Rove’s stupid and offensive remarks:
This afternoon, Tapped called the offices of every Republican senator and asked their press staff the following:
by John Cole| 52 Comments
This post is in: Republican Stupidity
Via Tapped, it appears the pressure is on the GOP for Rove’s stupid and offensive remarks:
This afternoon, Tapped called the offices of every Republican senator and asked their press staff the following:
Comments are closed.
Axien
Making it for purely political reasons. I hope it comes back to bite him in the a**.
pggaz
Neither is worse, they’re both reprehensible.
carpeicthus
Nice to see a snippet of humanity from Santorum’s office, though. I rescind my position that he should be a fry cook at McD’s instead of a senator. He should work the shake machine. It’s nicer.
Mike S
Sickening. The “architect” accuses Democrats of treason and the whitehouse is “delighted” with the outcome.
History will look back on this period of our history and wonder why people chose to piss away the unity this country had just three short years before. They will only be able to conclude that it was for political advantage. Two hundred and twenty nine years after some amazing men wrote the phrase “We the people, in order to form a more perfect union…” some people feel it is in our interest to destroy that union.
How embarrassing.
SamAm
Santorum will probably revoke that quote. But if he doesn’t, I say good for him.
But how does the senator’s distancing himself from Rove fit the Insta-NRO-Malkin-Hewittosphere’s contention that Rove was setting a devious trap for the Democrats?
If the next election’s #1 endangered GOP senator is backing away from Rove, let’s please have more of this stupendous political cleverness.
Axien
Just when I was starting to have warm fuzzys about ol’Rick, John has to go and let reality in..
James Robertson
Are you saying that MoveOn dpesn’t want to coddle terrorists?
How deeply have you been asleep?
Recall as well that the Democratic nominee last year asserted that the war should be more about law enforcement and international agreements (read: the UN) than about military force.
In light of that, the remarks aren’t that odd. In this case, I’d say that the remarks sting because they find the target…
Mr.Ortiz
You just answered your own question, SamAm. He’s an endangered GOP senator in a blue (however pale) state. He’s fighting for survivial. He won’t retract unless Rove threatens to pull the plug on his reelection campaign.
hadenoughofthisyet
Are you saying that MoveOn dpesn’t want to coddle terrorists?
Just to clarify about moveon and the petition that it allegedly sponsored, if you read further down on the link that John gave it states:
MoveOn leader Eli Pariser’s post
SamAm
Yeah, but Glenn Reynolds said this was a brilliant ploy, as did Rich Lowry who himself talked to someone in the White House about it. What’s the point of a political strategy your endangered candidates can’t get behind? So like I said, if Rove wants to go around making claims even Santorum finds outlandish, I’ll pay his honoraria
Kimmitt
Santorum might want to throw in ‘non-believing sodomites.’
Dag, you got bitter fast, man.
Brian
No. Santorum is up for re-election next year in a blue state. Any other speculation for his response is folly.
It is funny that Rove said “liberals” and all the Democrats are upset. So, they have admitted they are liberals? Kerry got all upset yesterday, yet during the campaign Kerry ran away from the liberal label.
Rove is brilliant. He is a staffer (a staffer!!) and they act like he said this from the position of Secretary of State. Just brilliant.
Axien
Brian, if you already think that they are liberal, does them admiting it help or hurt your cause? Because (I am a self admited liberal who is not a democrat) to me it would be a first step into actually growing a spine.
Josh
So I guess as long as the majority of the democrat party constantly calls their opponents evil and bloodthirsty lying warmongers the only proper response is for Republicans to roll over and take it silently until the the mountains tumble into the seas. Any attempt to call dems on their behavior in a rational and uninsulting mannor should be immediatly denounced as hate speech and squelched.
KCinDC
Brian, when someone in the White House calls a significant portion of the American public traitors, that’s a big deal. Traitors are normally hanged, or put in front of firing squads, so calling someone that is different from just calling them a wimp or an idiot or a bigot.
And as anyone who pays attention to administration rhetoric knows, “liberal” means anyone who disagrees with the administration. People call John a liberal when he deviates from the official Republican line (for that matter, you’re implying that he is simply because he objects to Rove’s statements). It doesn’t matter whether Kerry or Durbin or whoever consider themselves liberals. Rove considers them liberals, and Rove is the one saying all liberals are traitors (and specifically labeling Durbin as one).
JoshA
James, you might want to talk to Bush Admin CIA chief Porter Goss before you cast the net over this way. He claims that he knows where bin Laden is, but that he doesn’t want to go get him because it would violate national sovereignty of another country.
four possible reactions:
1. He’s lying, he has no idea where he is.
2. He’s so stupid that he doesn’t see the insanity of invading the country of someone who’s been a monster to his own people but there’s no evidence he attacked America, while at the same time respecting those who harbor a man who slaughtered 3000+ Americans.
3. He’s so left-wing that George Galloway would call him a Trotskyite popinjay.
4. Or, for some other reason, he actually doesn’t want to catch bin Laden- because he’s a good thing to have out there politically, etc, whatever.
So, um, who’s the group that’s too reluctant to use force?
And Brian, please, let’s not play that game.
1. His speech clearly mentioned Democrats.
2. Every news report after this said something like “Rove:Democrats didn’t understand 9/11.” I didn’t see the White House going “no, no, just the liberals.”
3. It has long been an RNC talking point that Democrat=liberal. See the entire ’04 campaign.
Or let’s put it this way—after 9/11, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson agreed on the air that 9/11 was God’s just punishment for America. Now, I’m guessing you’d be a little pissed if a Democrat had said “After 9/11, while the so-called Christians of the far right said it was God’s punishment for America, the rest of America grieved and vowed to bring justice to those who had butchered 3000 citizens of our great nation. Unlike conservatives, we didn’t see God’s hand in that act, but instead saw it as a declaration of war against America.”
But I didn’t mention Republicans, I said conservatives. It’d be ridiculous, and totally unfair. But I can name 2 prominent Republicans who thought that—can you name a single liberal who wanted therapy for bin Laden?
hadenoughofthisyet
Any attempt to call dems on their behavior in a rational and uninsulting mannor should be immediatly denounced as hate speech and squelched.
So saying that Democrats are motivated by the desire to have our troops killed is rational and uninsulting?
I
rrilling
“Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
-Hermann Goering 4/18/46, when the gig was up
(http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.htm)
ARROW
It is interesting that liverals are going out of their way to interpret something into what Rove said. With Durbin, they went out of his way to interpret something out… A molehill made into a mountain.
Mike S
It is interesting that liverals are going out of their way to interpret something into what Rove said. With Durbin, they went out of his way to interpret something out… A molehill made into a mountain
John Cole and Tacitus have been thrown over the side and are now “liverals.” I welcome you both to the Democratic party. I’ve been waiting for someone to call you guys RINO’s but this is much better.
SF Bay
Glad you put that Goering quote up there. I hope some Republicans squirm a little. As for Rove, no way that was any great political move, it was hubris plain and simple.
SF Bay
Glad you put that Goering quote up there. I hope some Republicans squirm a little. As for Rove, no way that was any great political move, it was hubris plain and simple.
axien
I know I’m the last person to pick on ARROW for spelling mistakes, but the first thing I thought was “Are liverals for or against organ meat?”.
Josh
Story
“Turns out that far-left groups in western Europe are carrying on a campaign dubbed Ten Euros for the Resistance, offering aid and comfort to the car bombers, kidnappers, and snipers trying to destabilize the fledgling Iraq government.”
Anyway back to liberals here. Notice how very far they are twisting Rove’s words from liberals wanting to wring their hands which would equal allowing civilians to be murdered by passive neglect of terror, into directly wishing harm on our troops. The only reason they are making the connection between those two ideas is only because liberals have indeed already said they want the freedom fighting “minutemen” who terrorize Iraq to win and our troops to lose so “Bush and rethugs will be taught a lesson” and so on such and such. This isn’t exactly being kept secret or anything, the left is extremely vocal about their beliefs. Anyway I could post the comments made on lgf and asmallvictory from 9-11 very easily and it certainly seems that a few people here need a reminder of what liberals said that very day.
hadenoughofthisyet
Anyway back to liberals here. Notice how very far they are twisting Rove’s words
Okay, so when Rove says this
Let me just put this in fairly simple terms: Al Jazeera now broadcasts the words of Senator Durbin to the Mideast, certainly putting our troops in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals.”
he is not saying that Democrats are motivated by the desire to have our troops placed in greater danger (i.e., maimed or killed)? Oh, okay. Glad you cleared that up for me.
KCinDC
Where is the twisting? Rove clearly states, as quoted above, that Durbin and other liberals not only are endangering the troops, but intend to do so. That is an accusation of treason, no “twisting” necessary.
Nancy
Bad news for the War on Terror.
Nancy
Bad news for the War on Terror.
Sojourner
The Iranian vote must surely warm the hearts of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al. Just one more excuse to start a war against Iran.
Nancy
Bad news for the War on Terror.
CaseyL
The neo-cons jumped the shark a long time ago. Now they’re gang-raping it.
They want to call anyone who opposes Bush a liberal, and all liberals traitors.
Meanwhile, they keep their own dainty skins far, far away from the war they accuse us of not supporting fervently enough. Here’s what Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council says to Young Republicans about the war: “They’re giving their lives as you’re giving your time.”
To put not too fine a point on it, the wingnuts set new benchmarks for contemptability. They’re brownshirt wanna-be’s, cowardly, narcissic, and rotten to the core. Howard Dean and Michael Moore have more patriotism in their little fingers than the wingnuts have in their whole bodies.
Andrew J. Lazarus
JFTR, most of our success in the War on Terror has come from treating it primarily as a targeted law enforcement operation. Now, it’s not like Law and Order, it’s more like the Organized Crime Task Force plus the SWAT team. but our former allies in Europe have rolled up a few cells, and we came very close in the Afghan operation, and would have done better if we hadn’t diverted resources to Iraq.
But, no, you guys wanted a full scale war. Muy macho. If you haven’t noticed, we aren’t winning the war in Iraq, much less the War on Terror. However, haveing a mismanaged, divisive war in Iraq has been good for Rove and the Republicans, and let’s remember the enemy has always been the liberals. Osama was merely a sideshow.
Brian
santorum is consistently down 10-15 points in the polls against bob casey jr. his staff is paying attention to that.
Bruce Moomaw
Why are you so shocked, John? What we’re seeing from Rove is simply SOP for any elected administration that’s gotten itself into deep shit through incompetence and/or arrogance: hunker down, pray for a miracle, and meanwhile frantically throw as much dust into the eyes of the voters as it can possibly scrabble up (with no limits on the later except raw necessity). Sure enough, quoting Froomkin in tonight’s Washington Post:
“Why apologize when you said exactly what you meant to say?…In the wake of a hue and cry from Democrats demanding that Rove apologize or be fired, the White House distributed the full text of Rove’s remarks to the press corps yesterday and deployed a phalanx of spokespeople to rally round. At yesterday’s briefing , press secretary Scott McClellan said Rove was just ‘telling it like it is.’ ”
Of course, the Dems could make MUCH more hay out of the current Iraq mess if they pointed out that the deadliest consequence of our idiotic entanglement in Iraq is that it leaves us militarily helpless when it comes to trying to keep Iran and its extremist government from REALLY acquiring the Bomb. Not a word from that from the Dems, though. I find myself drawn more and more to Moynihan’s theory of governnance: most of the people in any elected government are simply too dumb to have any idea what they’re doing.
eileen from OH
Y’know, the one thing that hasn’t been mentioned re: Rove’s comments (or maybe it has and I’ve missed it) is this:
Supposedly, we “liberals” wanted to use law enforcement techniques, including finding out motivations, etc. And “conservatives” didn’t give a damn about these. “We don’t care why they did it, we just want to kill them.” This makes liberals “weaker.”
I could be crazy, but isn’t the first strategy of fighting to KNOW THY ENEMY? Please explain why it is cowardly or stupid to want to know WHY an enemy does what they do? Rove translate this into liberals attempting to “blame America” or wanting to psychoanalyze the terrorist. But IS it? Isn’t the best way to tackle an enemy to examine what make him tick, what makes him do what he does, in order to better understand and fight him? Rove’s spin is that we libs wanted to give them therapy. I maintain that “therapy” wasn’t the goal, but prevention. We don’t want to help or fix the enemy, but we DO need and want to know everything about him. Because the more we know, the better we can predict his next move and the better prepared we are to defeat him.
So far, the cowboy tactics of “dead or alive,” as knee-jerk emotionally satisfying as that may be, hasn’t brought us the head of Usama. Could it be that there are reasons behind what happened on 911 that go beyond the simplistic “they hate us for our freedoms”? And could it be that those reasons could provide clues not only to why it happened but also to how to STOP these villains from doing it again? Could it be that “intelligence gathering” SHOULD include finding out WHY? Not that we take any culpability for the horrendous acts of 911 – that’s the Rovian spin to “liberals” asking these questions. But isn’t finding out all we can about them, including WHY they did it, the smartest way to defeat them?
eileen from OH
Antonio Manetti
As much as I would like to think otherwise, I doubt there will be significant blowback.
In this climate, Rove can get away with such comments because they work. He knows that thoughtful criticism from either side will be drowned out by the demagogues who get their talking points from him or his minions.
Antonio
jim beach
The hardline Tehran mayor steamrolled over one of Iran’s best known statesman to win the presidency Saturday in a landslide election victory that cements conservative control over nation’s political leadership….
Yep. Sure was great that Bush told the Iranians that they should vote for reformists. Iranians got mad, and voted in greater droves for Islamic fundamentalists. Smooth.
Rove et al would like to pin monumental screw-ups like this on Democrats and liberals. Democrats and Liberals are pointing out the Bush administration’s mistakes – we’re not the ones who are *making* them.
I thought that conservatism was supposed to be about real-work results, about accountability, and people accepting responsibility for their own choices and their own actions.
p.lukasiak
WHen you read the entire speech, it becomes obvious that the thrust of Rove’s speech was not to cast “Democrats” or even “liberals” as traitors, it was to cast those who criticized Bush on Iraq and the “war on terror” as traitors.
(This, of course, would include you John)
Americans are becoming increasinging disenchanted with Iraq, and that is having an impact on how American’s perceive the “war on terror” — the only policy area where Bush continued to have decent approval ratings. In the aftermath of 9-11, “the liberals” to whom Rove referred (and of whom I am proud to say I was one) were urging the nation not to over-react; to recognize that the “war on terror” was primarily a battle for “hearts and minds”, and that “militarizing” the war on terror would be counter-productive.
Bush made Iraq the “centerpiece” of his war on terror, and it is becoming increasingly obvious that his approach is a complete failure — that as we “liberals” had noted, by “militarizing” the war on terror, we have lost the battle for “hearts and minds”. Not only has the image of the United States suffered greatly, but the perception of “terrorism” as a means of resistance to the US has become, if not “legitimized”, far less objectionable that it was in the immediate aftermath of 9-11.
(And it is in this changing perception of “terrorism” that the real damage is being done. The Bush administration has muddied the definition of “terrorism” to the point where it now means any violent resistance to the USA and its military objectives. Whereas “terrorism” once meant attacks on civilian targets designed to “terrorize” people, the Bush regime now labels an IED set off under a Humvee full of occupation troops an act of “terrorism.” )
Rove’s speech was intended to stop the criticism of the Iraq war, and the “war on terror”, by delegitimizing the reasons why people are now being critical of the Iraq war, and reaffirming the centrality of the Iraq war to the “war on terror.” It is an attempt to remind people how they felt in the aftermath of 9-11, and exploit that rage and rigtheous desire for vengeance to shore up support for the Iraq misadventure.
The Bush regime relies upon irrational/emotional responses to maintain support for its policies, and the minute people “cool down” and start looking at what Bush is doing from a rational perspective, the sheer stupidity of the course it has followed becomes abundantly clear. The “liberals” that Rove referred to are those who had “cooled down” within weeks and months of 9-11 while the rest of America was obsessed with righteous anger and grief. Rove needs people to “keep the hate”, and is reminding Americans that they are now agreeing with the people who, in the aftermath of 9-11, took a rational approach to the war on terror.
Shalimar
Obviously, this assault was planned for political gain. Just as obviously, Rove’s charge is blatantly dishonest. The vast majority of liberals have friends or family serving in the military. To say that our motive is to cause their deaths is disgusting. That line has upset liberals far more than the coddling Bin Laden crap that has been reported extensively.
The sad part isn’t Rove. Everyone knows he’s an immoral asshole who would do anything to retain power. The depressing thing is that the “values” side of the political divide continues to encourage and promote statements they know are lies. Politics shouldn’t be treated as a perverted win-at-all-costs game. Accusing 20% of your countrymen of being traitors when you know it isn’t true shouldn’t be acceptable behavior. Does anyone really think this is the way Jesus wants people to treat others?
Snag
Sorry, but anyone who supports Rove’s words can kiss my a$#. I served 11 years with distinction. I’m indipendent with tendency toward Democrat, progressive, and liberal (It means I have a tendency to want to help my fellow American).
“liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers.”
You can question my nationalism, but don’t ever question my Patriotism!
Knowing a thing or two about terrorism (part of my specialism was Terrorism Counter-Action) I don’t suport our policy in Iraq nor the “War on Terrorism” (which is like saying a “War on Air Assault” or a “War on River Crossings”). It is a method of fighting, albeit one that is considered internationally criminal.
As demonstrated, it gives those that would politicize the issue the ability to manipulate Americans (many who have very good intentions except for their willingness to sacrifice liberty to save their own ass from the boogyman) with an undefined enemy. A vague, undefined enemy leads to unclear objectives.
This is a very bad thing for a soldier.
It is Carl Rove that undermines the ability of the U.S. forces to wage defining battles.
Shalimar
As for this: “WHITE HOUSE REACTION TO ROVE CONTROVERSY… in case you’re wondering. One word: delighted.”
Of course they’re delighted. Their goal for years has been to sow hatred. Hatred of liberals among their followers. Hatred of republicans among their opponents. We are turning into a country where everyone hates. Thank you, Karl.
mississippi scott
personally, I take it as a point of pride to be called a traitor by the likes of Karl Rove. I have yet to see him do anything I can identify with any traditional American values – you know – honesty, hard work, sacrifice for country – so if he calls me a traitor I must be doing something right.
Jeff
“We are turning into a country where everyone hates”
Yeah, because we all got along just peachy before Karl Rove came along. Do you think worthless pieces of shit like Michael Moore and Ann Coulter, or Atrios and Oliver Willis for that matter, were all just sitting around wanting to work with the other side and figure out our differences until Bush came along? Gimme a fucking break.
And John, i realize it was a joke, but Santorum’s office said exactly what they should’ve said, so i really don’t think that “update” was all that necessary. (And i say that as someone who lives in PA and has absolutely NO intention of voting for Santorum in 2006. Although, just like they did against Specter, the Dems are running a blithering idiot, so i don’t know who i’ll vote for in the Senate race.)
Nancy
Sorry John,
The message said the comment wouldn’t post and to wait and repost… so I did 3 times apparently.
ppgaz
I have the same posting difficulty, no matter what browser I use. What I do, every time unless I get distracted and forget, is (a) preview the post and try to catch the most obvious errors, (b) post, (c) wait until the hourglass goes away, (d) close the browser, (e) go back to the original browser and click on “comments” to the original article again and open a new browser, (f) check to see if my post made it.
No other strategy produces a successful, single post for me. I gave up a long time ago complaining about this or trying to figure it out, I just do it. I just figure it’s a special routine built into the thing to torture abrasive Liberals like me, and I just take my punishment and go on ;-)
Rick
John,
Is it so outrageous for Rove to serve up red-meat generalities–and fairly accurate ones– to a state faction, but a demonstration of your independence of thought to chum your blog with the same morsels?
Blowback inspired by TAPPED! Stop, you’re killing me!
Cordially…
Sojourner
I thought we were at war, Rick. Certainly seems a lousy time to be dividing the country, don’t cha think? But then this is the same administration that also thought it was a good idea for a tax cut so there could be a similar cut in veterans benefits and an inability of the military to properly outfit its soldiers.
Rick
Soj,
Ah, but the real complaint is that we’ve had the cake (tax cuts) and eaten it as well (spending keeps going up). So the “divisiveness” that I maintain you exhibit is entirely driven by Rovian manipulations, and does not arise at all from the nature of your politics?
Interesting to contemplate a GOP mastermind wielding such remarkable power. Thrilling, actually.
Cordially…
g2
What makes Rove’s statement worse is that it’s an ad-hominem: it wasn’t directed against the *actions* of wimpy hand-wringing, it was a smear directed at half of America. And we have got to expect better from the White House than that.
I have two friends in the military, both of them are liberals. About 40% of the military are Democrats. What’s Rove got to say to them? Thank you for your service? Really?
And as for “understanding” our enemies: Rove’s comment was also a smear on the intel community. The first thing you need in wartime is to understand your enemies, or they’ll slaughter you. We didn’t, and they did, and the casualties keep coming. Plain and simple. I could fill up three pages with examples of intel failures, including quite a few that have barely made the news.
What the hell was he thinking? What ever happened to “we’re all Americans first”…?
—
Re. Porter Goss and knowing where Osama is hiding out: And what happened to the Bush Doctrine about “harboring”…? If ever there was a case for invading a country, that’s the one. Or is OBL hiding in Switzerland? Or are we so tied down in Iraq that we can’t go after our biggest enemy when we know where he is?
Or why not use UAVs? CIA has its own UAVs, with ordnance as well as intel modules, so it could do the deed on its own. And release the video to the news media. Catching him alive is better, but dead is almost as good, and right now I’ll cheer for that particular “almost.”
—
Re. “God’s punishment…” Falwell & Robertson aren’t conservatives. And think of what would have happened if some radio preacher had gone on the air after the news from Pearl Harbor, and bitched that it was God’s punishment against America for repealing the Prohibition Amendment. Traitorous wretches.
—
Re. far-lefties in Europe, and libs who root for the insurgency: Traitorous wretches also. I actually ran into some of this last year, from a far-leftie in the Bay Area who said he wanted to see it get worse before it got better. I could have puked. That kind of crap is as bad or worse than what Rove did.
—
Re. “rage and righteous desire for vengeance..” Vengeance is what our barbarian enemies do. Civilized countries go to war to defend themselves. When we say “pulverize the bastards!”, the unspoken but necessarily implied part has to be “so they can’t attack us again,” not “because it feels good.”
—
Back to liberals for a moment here: Let’s build bridges. Forums like this one and some of the liberal blogs are good because we can talk to each other, debate honestly, and build bridges. We can’t let the extremists on either side, whether Karl Rove or the “Euros for insurgents” types, divide us. There’s a great moderate majority of honest conservatives and honest liberals who can agree on many things, agree to disagree on others, and work together in a spirit of good will. That’s where we need to put the emphasis.
Sojourner
No. The devisiveness is based on Bush’s incredible incompetence. Hearing Rove lie about it is just another reminder of the incredible corruption of this administration. They seem to believe that winning through division is better than not winning at all. Even if it weakens the country. But then what should we expect from these slime balls?
What’s interesting are the symptoms of stress being displayed by Rove. He’s certainly smart enough to realize that Bush’s numbers are in a death spiral. He’s also smart enough to realize that scaring the American people with lies ain’t working any more. So all he can do is cater to his base.
I am sorry, Rick, that you share their values. It’s a shame.
Rick
He’s certainly smart enough to realize that Bush’s numbers are in a death spiral.
Oh, my sides! “Death spiral!” Guess I can write off my hopes for his third term.
Rather, I must await further developments in Araby. The momentum is all in the right direction, damn those neo-cons.
Values: you mean, working to get Republicans elected? I understand your disapproval, but how does he depart from Begala, Carville, Tuck, Shrum and other Democratic political strategists of today or yore? Other than being somewhat more successful?
Cordially…
Sojourner
He’s a paid government employee. He can be a total asshole on his dime but not mine.