Karl Rove Turning Republicans Into The 'Blame America First' Party

[Nbadan]

Rove's comments this week disparaging liberals was a premeditated and orchestrated last-ditch attempt to bring straying, war-weary conservatives back onto the farm.

Rove's comments were obviously pre-approved by the White House, which stood by them. And then Rove immediately went on Scarborough to spout off some more of his hate.

The usual Republican noise machine - Rush, Hannity, Fox, the comment-free blogs of the Fighting 101st Keyboarders - isn't working any more. The public is realizing Bush has no idea how to win in Iraq - and they're blaming him for getting us into the whole mess in the first place with his lies and his puffed-up fragile ego.

Bush's speech tonight is going to be a joke. It's supposed to commemorate the "end of hostilities in Iraq." Who the hell is dumb enough to believe that lie? Every time you turn on the TV another couple of our Marines have gotten blown up - even in towns we supposedly "control" now, like Falluja. Commander Codpiece is going to look like more and more of a buffoon if he keeps talking about how "major hostilities are over" when our soldiers keep getting their heads blown off.

I'm sure Rove and Bush and Cheney sat down in the White House and said "What are we gonna do? We've got Hagel turning on us now, and a lot of other Republicans are going to follow suit. Not to mention we've got Conyers treating the DSM like some kind of smoking gun for impeachment."

So they came up with their usual strategy. If you can't beat the Iraqis overseas, go after Americans at home. If you're losing the war, don't blame Rumsfeld, blame the Dixie Chicks. Call anyone who disagrees with Bush a traitor.

The only problem is, anyone can see that they're starting to panic and they're looking for someone to blame for the war THEY started and THEY don't know how to win. 96% of Americans in that MSNBC poll last week think Bush lied to get us into the war. 60% now think the war isn't worth it. About 75% of Dems don't approve of Bush now - but even worse for Bush, he lost the INDEPENDENTS too - 77% of them don't approve of him now.

The risk for Bush now is this. For every wavering, war-weary conservative he manages to scare back in line with Rove's new "Ann Coulter" tactics of calling liberals traitors, how many other conservatives (and liberals) is he going to turn off with this extremist, defeatist, blame-America-first rhetoric?

80% of New Yorkers for example describe themselves as "liberals". As Steve Gilliard recently pointed out (http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2005/06/hammer-those-fuckers-with-their-words.html), they probably don't take to kindly to some fat ugly wimpy Republican extremist freak like Rove telling them that they just "don't get" 9/11. As Steve Gilliard said: "So Bush thinks 80% of New Yorkers didn't give a damn about September 11. You're traitors, you dishonor the dead. When your friends died that day, you wanted to give Osama a hug."

And a lot of soldiers serving in Iraq are Democrats. A lot of soldiers are now asking "who is this Rove guy?" They're out there putting their lives on the line, watching their buddies get killed, and they aren't too happy hearing some fat pasty neocon saying that they want to give Bin Laden "therapy".

So every time Bush/Rove scare one straying conservative back onto the reservation, they're probably alienating more people as well with this extremist, desperate, whiny Ann Coulter-style rhetoric.

As many people have said: The best way for Bush to shut up the anti-war people would be to (1) Win the war in Iraq, and (2) find Bin Laden.

Instead, all they can do is "blame America" for not cheering loud enough. Ironically, Republicans are now in danger of becoming the "blame America first" crowd.

[Nbadan]

Whoa! Check out Tom Delay (http://www.dembloggers.com/story/2005/6/24/203535/424) attempting to echo-chamber Karl Rove's statements about Liberals.

Perhaps ole Tom had one to many?

:hat

[Nbadan]

Here is a handy quiz to help forum readers put Karl Rove's comments about liberals and 911 into proper prespective...

1) "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war" said Karl. What was the most important part of that preparation?
a) Sitting motionlessly to listen to schoolchildren read "My Pet Goat"before sprinting for a bunker in Nebraska to hide for the rest of the day.
b) Preventing Dixie Chicks records from being played on the radio.
c) Re-naming fried potatoes and fried, egg-dipped bread so that France doesn't get credit for them.
d) Making officers who point out what was actually needed for war resign from the Pentagon.
e) All of the above.

2) "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war" said Karl. What was the SECOND most important part of that preparation?
a) Trying to get the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge opened for drilling because otherwise the terrorists would win.
b) Trying to get a massive tax break for the richest 1% of Americans.
c) Letting the guy who masterminded that 9/11 savagery stroll unimpeded into Pakistan.
d) Destroying evidence in the anthrax attack case.
e) All of the above.

3) "I don't know about you, but moderation and restraint is not what I felt when I watched the twin towers crumble to the ground, a side of the Pentagon destroyed, and almost 3,000 of our fellow citizens perish in flames and rubble." Karl told his conservative audience. Which of these noted young conservatives felt just like Karl, threw moderation and restraint aside, and joined the military immediately?
a) George P. Bush, nephew of the current White House occupant.
b) Jeb Bush Junior, nephew of the current White House occupant.
c) Billy Bush, cousin of the current White House occupant.
d) Andrew M. Rove, son of Karl Rove.
e) None of the above.

4) "I don't know about you, but moderation and restraint is not what I felt when I watched the twin towers crumble to the ground, a side of the Pentagon destroyed, and almost 3,000 of our fellow citizens perish in flames and rubble." Karl told his conservative audience. Which of these was the most valuable result of conservatives not being moderate or restrained?
a) We invaded a country that had nothing at all to do with the 9/11 attacks, and now 135,000 American troops are bogged down in a futile occupation.
b) Osama Bin Laden, the architect of the 9/11 savagery, remains at large, with his criminal organization much larger and more powerful than before the attacks.
c) Virtually every ally we had in the world is estranged, and this country, which was a beacon of human rights, is now synonymous with torture.
d) Our troops are fighting alone while the White House pretends that countries like Eritrea and the Solomon Islands are helping the war effort.
e) All of the above.

5) Rove fretted aloud to his audience about the danger to our troops. Which of these actions is least likely to increase this danger?
a) Claiming that war is a cakewalk and refusing to adequately prepare for the effort needed.
b) Failing to secure weapons depots and ammuntions dumps after the invasion.
c) Equipping the troops with inadequate and antiquated gear and publicly sneering at their concerns.
d) Keeping battle-weary troops on the front lines indefinitely.
e) Pointing out that the torture currently being inflicted in the GOP’s concentration camp at Guantanimo was pretty much like the torture dished out in totalitarian regimes.

6) Rove also said "liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers," What would have been the drawbacks of that approach?
a) Osama Bin Laden and his gang might have been indicted, captured, tried and punished due to the cooperation of nearly every law enforcement organization on the planet.
b) Al Qaeda might have been disgraced and destroyed.
c) Americans might have understood who had attacked us and why they had done so.
d) Mental illness of the sort publicly exhibited by Karl Rove and his audience might get treated through therapy.
e) All of the above.

[CaptainHook]

ask yourself, do the comments of the moveon.org's, the Al Franken's, The Michael Moore's, The Jeanine Garafalo's,....are they supportive of the terrorists measures or the measures of the war on terror

[Nbadan]

ask yourself, do the comments of the moveon.org's, the Al Franken's, The Michael Moore's, The Jeanine Garafalo's,....are they supportive of the terrorists measures or the measures of the war on terror

The real point is can you provide some concrete examples instead of just spouting off liberal criticisms by right-wing pundits such as Hannity and Limbaugh?

[SWC Bonfire]

This is the same crap that has been said about the Democrats. It doesn't miraculously cease being crap now because Democrats are saying it about Republicans.

The dems got the crap kicked out of them. Instead of coming up with a concrete, sound platform based on issues to get back, they stole a page from Karl Rove's playbook.

They no longer have the right to criticize Karl Rove; they've become Karl Rove.

[Nbadan]

It's not about being like Karl Rove or openly deceiving people as Republicans are so apt at doing, its about portraying strength and conviction in the things Progressives really believe in...


This is ultimately about simple leadership archetypes. (The "gender studies set" will know what I'm talking about --- king, warrior, lover blah, blah, blah.) And we are failing to embody them on a very basic level. Asking for an apology is better than nothing. {But} hitting back in simple ways that convey strength and conviction is even better. ...

Republicans are very successful at connecting with the primal instinctive feelings voters have about people in charge. We aren't. It is their greatest weapon against us and it has nothing to do with policy or positioning or demographics. It has to do with the fact that a lot of people make their decisions about leadership on the basis of who looks the strongest. It's primitive shit. And the Republicans strip it down even more simply than it has to be. There is some room for experimenting with this in innovative ways if we would just accept that it exists and work within it.

It's very hard for me to believe that a party led by limp, myopic chickenhawks and closet cases is getting away with this, but they are. And they have for a long time. We are fools if we let it continue.

In Vietnam--when his crewman fell into the enemy-infested river--Kerry didn't hesitate. He plunged right in and rescued him.

When Chimp's moment of truth came--in that Florida grade school classroom--he froze. Rather than order planes into the air, fly back to Washington to take command, or any number of other steps that would show leadership, he fled. What a coward!

This aspect of leadership is about strength and COURAGE -- being willing to put oneself at risk to protect those whom you're responsible for. Men and women both can have it (and granted, stark cases like these don't pop up in every politician's life.) But I'll never understand why the 2004 campaign didn't do more with the contrast between these two incidents.

[SWC Bonfire]

:rolleyes

[Ocotillo]

Republicans saw the savagery of the first World Trade Center attack in 1993 and prepared a smear campaign against the president.........of America regarding Whitewater, Paula Jones, travelgate, Vince Foster, and so on and so on, anything except a peep about terrorists.

[Nbadan]

How Republicans prepare for war:

1. Deploy 101st Fighting Keyboarders
2. Cut taxes for the $300,000-and-up income bracket
3. Tell citizens to continue shopping
4. Cut taxes on capital gains
5. Begin “fixing” intelligence and facts
6. Undermine Secretary of State with humiliating U.N. presentation
7. Repeal estate tax
8. Alienate remaining international allies
9. Distribute magnetic “support the troops” ribbons
10. Prepare U.S.S. Lincoln for critical photo op
11. Dispatch preparatory rose-petal-cleanup detail for Baghdad, Mosul, Basra, Najaf, Fallujah, etc.

and finally, most important:

12. Blame failure on liberals

[George Gervin's Afro]

Another oldie but goody.