I am not one of the people who feels Karl Rove is a political genius. I think he’s a talented political operative with a good dose of luck on his side. That said, does anyone believe the flag amendment and his attack on the Democrats just happened out of coincidence? Rove’s legacy will be tied to George W. Bush and right now he sees his great triumph, Bush’s re-election, currently stuck in the second term blahs. The few legislative achievements he’s got are paybacks to his supporters, but not the sort of transformative work Presidents want written in their obituaries.
The Republican party stands for nothing if they aren’t demonizing the Democratic party as anti-American. They did it when Bill Clinton was President, and they’ve done it since the moment George Bush obtained the White House. That is what they’re doing now. They’ve got nothing more than passing legislation that does nothing to actually help America, preferring instead to gin up the slack jawed folks who are their most ardent supporters with a neverending river of bigotry, hate, and bile. To date the left has become their enablers, preferring to play to some form of mythical “moderation” while these idiots defecate on our national foundations. Many Democrats (including myself in the past) have preferred the path of least resistance, trying to appeal to the mythical center while at the same time ignoring our core values.
We have to stop this now. In order to preserve this nation, we must stop giving in to the Republicans and their hatred of America’s diversity of race, thought, ideology, and values. In the early part of the 20th century, those who championed racist hatred were in the majority. For many, the “right” thing politically would have been to walk in lockstep with the klan and their ilk. But they were wrong, and the people who supported them were wrong. We have to stand up for the right things, even if you’re in the minority, even if you’re not doing the politically expedient thing, because standing up for what’s right is the moral thing to do.
To the Hillary Clintons, Harry Reids, John Edwardses, Joe Bidens, and other leaders of our side - it is time to draw a line in the sand. It is time, at long last, to cease with the smiles and the well-wishes and to make clear that the time to declare open political warfare on these people is long past due.
On a related note, it’s interesting to see how the DINO bloggers are reacting to this.
Roger L. Simon — No posts.
Jeff Jarvis — No posts.
Glenn Reynolds (remember he worked for Al Gore in 88 and Clinton in 92 and has major cred as the neutral blogger) — Whole heartedly approves. (Ob fluffer and wanker note here)
Michael Totten — I am surprised to say that he decries Rove on this.
What about other DINO bloggers?
In a screed denouncing the alleged attacks by Republicans, our commentator manages to paint the “Republicans and their hatred of America’s diversity of race, thought, ideology and values”. Nothing like painting with a broad brush, or … freaking lying. I suppose it makes you feel better about your enlightened self to just accept your assumptions as fact, rather than have any type of rational discussion with people that do not share your political leanings.
Also, I find it interesting that you bring up the civil rights movement, when the political minority found their strength and voice and stood up to the majority. What was most interesting is the fact that it was those racist Republicans who did this, and the ever so correct Democrats were the ones attempting to sink the civil rights legislation. However, I know it makes you feel better to just call those that do not agree with you racists. It is much easier to dismiss others, rather than engage them.
Um… Okay. I hate to ask JD, but is there any chance at all that you were perhaps reading this post via BabelFish? Do they even have English-to-Crackpot translation yet?
In the finest net-kook tradition you seem to have read what you wanted to see and not what was there. Oliver isn’t exactly the first to point out the racially distorted membership of the current Republican party.
You do have a point in that it’s cheap to paint all Republicans as bigots and cranks. Cheap is not the same thing as inaccurate however. If “moderate” Republicans are insulted by the labels, maybe they should take steps to correct the behavior of their party.
Then there’s your second paragraph in which you manage entirely to miss the point. Yes, the Republicans were the party of civil rights. The fact that they have lost thier way just makes things even more sad.
The party of Lincoln has abandoned its’ core American values, leaving those who don’t fit into the majority to seek shelter with the party of the Clintons, Kerrys, and Liebermans.
God help us all.
pliny - Just because “Oliver isn’t exactly the first to point out the racially distorted membership of the current Republican party” does not make it right. And, that was a cute trick going from “hating diversity of race, thought & ideology” to their distorted membership. The simple fact is that although the Big O and apparently yourself wish all of the Republican party to be these evil racists, just by stating it over and over and over and over does not make it so.
–The Republican party stands for nothing if they aren t demonizing the Democratic party as anti-American.
If Democrats would just stop giving Republicans Ammunition (Howard “DeLay GUILTY!! Osama, who knows?” Dean,
Harry “Loser/Liar” Reed,
Michael “They are the Minutemen” Moore,
Dick “Nazi Gulag” Durbin,
Oliver “American Taliban” Willis), then maybe Republicans would be forced to change their playbook.
JD, why is it so hard for Republicans to vote for black people? There’s not one state legislator in the Republican party. Explain.
Conversations like these always remind me of something that David Cross said a while back (I’m paraphrasing): No, all Republicans aren’t cranks and bigots and racists and fundamental Christians. They just choose to elect the cranks, bigots, racists and fundamental Christians to lead their party.
I find it hard to believe that anyone has a hard time seeing the racial divide between the political parties in this country. Even if you go simply on economic terms, the Republicans choose to support the affluent Americans and the corporate intrests, choosing to let the low income Americans suffer. While not 100% racist there, it’s certainly bigotted.
We do need to stand up, and I agree with Oliver’s call to the Democratic leadership. We need to go on the offensive!
Karl Rove said that liberals are motivated by a desire to get our troops killed. Liberals want our troops to die. And yet poor, sad individuals like Farris argue that liberals bring this kind of deranged slander on ourselves. Through the looking glass indeed. Dugsy, I do think that dividing the country with polarizing rhetoric is certainly Karl Rove’s overall strategy, even if his remarks weren’t premeditated.
Sorry TomY, but that’s some bad analysis. Rove’s point was that Liberals are motivated by their hatred of this Adminstration. And if “speaking truth to power” ends up hurting our troops? Well, in Lib’s eyes, that’s just collateral damage.
THAT’s what Rove was talking about: Liberal putting their political desires ahead of what’s best for the country. Disagree with that all you want (and I suspect you will, since Liberals think their politcal desires in/and of themselves are what’s best for the country), but it’s certainly an argument that’s “in bounds”.
Doubt what Rove said is correct. Here’s leading liberal organization MoveOn after 9/11:
“We, the undersigned, citizens and residents of the United States of America and of countries around the world, appeal to the President of The United States, George W. Bush; to the NATO Secretary General, Lord Robertson; to the President of the European Commission, Romano Prodi; and to all leaders internationally to use moderation and restraint in responding to the recent terrorist attacks against the United States. We implore the powers that be to use, wherever possible, international judicial institutions and international human rights law to bring to justice those responsible for the attacks, rather than the instruments of war, violence or destruction.”
Rove was absolutely right.
Dugger
“does anyone believe the flag amendment and his attack on the Democrats just happened out of coincidence?”
This eerily similar to the fluoridation conversation between Gp. Capt. Lionel Mandrake and Gen. Jack D. Ripper.
Dugger
Poor Karl. All that inflammatory language and not so much as a ‘bump’ in the polls. Karl has had a real string of failures recently… and now he pulls out his ace in the hole and gets …. nothing.
“but that s some bad analysis”
Read it again.
“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.”
Wow, Farris, your poll showing that American’s have a hard time believing that gitmo detainee’s has really changed my mind.
Before, I liked to believe that American’s were aware that many of the detainee’s were sold by rival tribes to the Americans. Now I know they are ignorant of the facts, meaning that we as Democrats need to push harder against your fascist tactics of dehumanization of prisoners that MAY or MAY NOT be terrorists.
It would be a horrible day for America if the goings on at Gitmo were made transparent, huh?
Farris.. I used ‘bump in the polls’ a little loosely. Its just a figure of speech. A general measure of support for the comment … chill out. As a red-stater I have seen NO support or agreement for Rove’s comments in my area ( even among GOP family and friends ). And What’s all this talk of mass-media penetration and saturation…. I think you classify as ‘Institutionalized’. We’re simple folk here…try and keep it real. Relax. P.S… your poll link is as unrelated to the discussion as Saddam Hussein is to 9/11. Perhaps those are the tenous links that hold your ideology together.
evergreen, what polling are you looking at?
Rove made his comments Wednesday night and they didn’t reach mass-media penetration, much less saturation, till last night. Please explain to me how a reliable poll showing anything usefull could have been taken in that time period.
Unless, of course, you’re talking about this poll. In that case: Mission Accomplished!
You never cease to amaze me, Dugger.
How do you spin “Liberals want our soldiers to come home in bodybags” out of the MoveOn.org declaration? And then to say absolute?
There’s nothing in that declaration that demands terrorists get “treatment”, there’s nothing in there that demands we ascede to their demands. Its a request to use our massive amount of worldwide political power to try and organize the world behind a singular anti-terrorism mentality instead of a go-it alone approach.
I’m so glad you think we’re safer when all of the world hates us.
And conservatives wanted to exterminate all the Arabs. Have you visited the leading conservative websites Little Green Footballs or freerepublic.com lately? Read any Ann Coulter columns? If your standard for proof is just a statement by one organization, then the right has much more craziness to answer for since 9-11.
“Rove was right,” Dugger?
Where’s the part in the MoveOn quote about “therapy and understanding”? Where’s the part about our motives to harm American soldiers?
If Rove had stopped with “Conservatives got ready for war, the liberals wanted to make arrests” his remarks would have been entirely uncontroversial.
P.S. You made a Strangelove reference? I’m going back to bed.
Where is the FAQ on how to make paragraphs and links …etc…or am i just an idiot?
Responding to Oliver…
Oliver wrote a passionate piece today on what I will call the War for America. In part he said: The Republican party stands for nothing if they aren t demonizing the Democratic party as anti-American. They did it when Bill Clinton…
Take a Stand?
Reacting to the Rove remarks, Oliver Willis says it’s time for the Democratic Party to stand:
The Republican party stands for nothing if they aren t demonizing the Democratic party as anti-American. They did it when Bill Clinton was President, and they
Binky,
Where was it I said liberals want our soldiers to come home in body bags. You may be a wee bit confused.
And Quaker, where was it Rove said you liberals wanted to harm American soldiers. Are we exaggerating our angry, sorrowful feelings here.
Again, Durbin accuses our troops of acting like history’s worst mass murderers. Rove says liberals acted like “liberals” (international law, restraint etc) . Rove right; Durbin grotesquley, insultingly wrong.
Read the MoveOn quote. Read Mikey Moore (the guy who sat next to party God Jimmuh Carter at the convention). Remember the human shields, guys - all those conservatives in Baghdad? I’m sorry for you, but the truth is that THE SHOE FITS.
Dugger
“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.
Putting our troops in greater danger = motive of liberals
Anyone who defends Rove’s statements is defending that proposition.
I could easily argue that Durbin s words put our troops in greater danger - perhaps not a lot, but more.
But at the same time, you argue that the words of DeLay and Cornyn don’t put judges in greater danger.
Hunh.
TomY’s simple formula nails the Rove hate speech.
I’ve been inspired by the right-wing’s Rove-inspired hatefest (”Rove is right, you know”) to start my own blog. My first post is on the changing definition of the term “liberal” as employed by righties.
Of course, its only a shadow of O Dub’s blog but if you yearn for more after reading the “Blog of Record.” Take a peek.
Durbin said no such thing, but we’ve had that argument before, and its more like the Republican driven press’s rewording of his speech is more dangerous than the speech itself:
“If I had read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime - Pol Pot or others - that had no concern for human beings,” Durbin said in the floor speech. “Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.”
You want it to be a direct comparison, however you and every other screaching chatter monkey wants to exagerate this speech to the n-th degree. The FBI report DID read like something out of the annals of history, something our country would have been disgusted with in the past.
Its your twisting of those words, your constant troop=Nazis == Durbin linkage in the press that creates harm to our soldiers.
Don’t you think you should stop hating our troops now?
TomY,
I could easily argue that Durbin’s words put our troops in greater danger - perhaps not a lot, but more. After all, here is a major US Senator ,a huge powerful entity, saying our military is in effect behaving like Nazis and commies towards ‘their” fellow warrior/prisoners. Don’t think that won’t be used to motivate the holy warriors.
Dugger
Dugger,
If Durbin’s words were so dangerous, why are the Republicans mass mailing them out to everybody?
Because its about political gamesmanship.
Mac, Quaker
I didn’t really say they were “so dangerous”. I said I could argue they were somewhat dangerous. My belief is that the bad guys hate us no matter what. No matter what Durbin says, no matter what Bush says, no matter how sensitive we are to the Koran etc. They want to destroy our us and our culture. Because of that I’m inclined to not be very understanding regarding their sensitivies. We have the luxury of arguing all of fine points in cyberspace without repercussion, a luxury our leaders and our soldiers don’t have.
Dugger