quote:

August 13, 2007 On Karl Rove By Peter Wehner Before taking my job as director of the Office of the Office of Strategic Initiatives - I had until then been deputy director for Presidential speechwriting -- I asked others who knew Karl Rove about him; after all, I didn't know Karl all that well and I was about to work directly for him. And so I spoke to Josh Bolten, then deputy chief of staff, who had recommended me for the OSI job. And Josh had a very short summary of Karl: "He's brilliant, he's a genius, and he's a deeply wonderful human being." I suspected the first two things said about Karl were true - but having not worked with him, I could not possibly have known about the third. Now I do. Karl is sui generis; no other White House aide in modern times has played the indispensable role he has. His political achievements are by now well-known. "The architect" played a key role in all of George W. Bush's election wins, including Bush's defeat of a popular Democratic incumbent, Texas Governor Ann Richards, and then his winning re-election by a record margin. Karl was at the center of events when George W. Bush, running for president the first time, defeated a popular war hero, John McCain, in the primary, and then went on to defeat an incumbent vice president, Al Gore, who had the strongest economy in world history in his favor and was thought to be a brilliant debater (among other things, he was the man who dispatched Ross Perot in a nationally televised debate on NAFTA). And Karl was again the key figure, this time along with Ken Mehlman, in helping President Bush win re-election in a tough environment, when the Iraq war was growing increasingly unpopular. Not only did the President win, he increased his support among women, Hispanics, Jewish voters, Catholics, African Americans, Asian Americans, union households, suburban voters, moderates, independents, big city residents, and small city resident (so much for the myth of the "base-only" strategy). To give you a sense of the trust we all have in Karl: during the 2004 campaign, I was asked by lots of people who I thought would win and why. Rather than elaborate analysis, or a state-by-state breakdown, I had a simple formulation: We have George W. Bush and they John Kerry; we have Karl Rove, and they don't. And that was enough for me. But Karl's extraordinary achievements in politics unfortunately occluded his extraordinary command of policy. Rove's knowledge of the smallest, most mind-numbing details of policy - from economics, to energy, to the environment, to education, to entitlement programs to so much else -- was legendary around the White House and among those, including reporters, who engaged in substantive discussions with him. Anyone who has heard Rove go on at length about using the principle of equidistance to determine seaward lateral boundaries, a principle discussed by the 17th century philosopher Hugo Grotius and since upheld by two Supreme Court decisions, knows what I mean. Karl seemed to know more about a particular issue than the policy experts themselves. And he was a reliable voice and ally, and sounding board, for conservatives. Some day books will be written about what a phenomenon of nature this man is. But some day books should be written about what a really fine man he is. He was the most relentlessly upbeat person in the White House, giving counsel and encouragement to all, and showing great kindness to many of us and our families. And of course what we all learned as well as what a tremendously strong person this policy wonk and former nerd from Utah is. He withstood pressure, unfair pressure, that would have broken lesser men, and he did it with good cheer, extraordinary equanimity, and without ever becoming cynical. It turns out Josh Bolten was right. Peter Wehner, former deputy assistant to the president, is now a senior fellow at The Ethics and Public Policy Center.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby Now the question is... what really prompted this?

Seriously? Rove's role was "Bush's brain" (and occasionally providing opportunities for alliteration), but he is useless as an independent public figure, at least in terms of this presidential administration. The longer Rove stayed on, the more he would damage Bush's presidential legacy. After all, most people already suspect/believe that, in practice, Karl Rove is the president of the United States. The brain. I can't imagine Bush pleased or even ambivalent toward the public perception that he's a puppet and Rove is his ventriloquist. He wants the prestige and respect that he believes inhere to the presidential office.
On the other hand, Rove doesn't want prestige, he wants the power. Accordingly, he has no problem abandoning his official title and will probably continue to advise Bush in an unofficial capacity.
So, everyone gets what they want. Bonus: commentators are already turned this into about Karl Rove's "resignation" and speculate that Bush was taking sub rosa disciplinary action in response to the U.S. Attorneys issue. I'm sure Alberto Gonzalzes wouldn't be willing to go nicely like Rove has. Again, Bush makes some gains in public opinion, Rove can continue to wield his power. Everyone gets what they want.
Christ, the whole thing was probably Rove's idea. And damn if it wasn't smart, as always.

quote:

Originally posted by daffodil Seriously? Rove's role was "Bush's brain" (and occasionally providing opportunities for alliteration), but he is useless as an independent public figure, at least in terms of this presidential administration. The longer Rove stayed on, the more he would damage Bush's presidential legacy. After all, most people already suspect/believe that, in practice, Karl Rove is the president of the United States. The brain. I can't imagine Bush pleased or even ambivalent toward the public perception that he's a puppet and Rove is his ventriloquist. He wants the prestige and respect that he believes inhere to the presidential office. On the other hand, Rove doesn't want prestige, he wants the power. Accordingly, he has no problem abandoning his official title and will probably continue to advise Bush in an unofficial capacity. So, everyone gets what they want. Bonus: commentators are already turned this into about Karl Rove's "resignation" and speculate that Bush was taking sub rosa disciplinary action in response to the U.S. Attorneys issue. I'm sure Alberto Gonzalzes wouldn't be willing to go nicely like Rove has. Again, Bush makes some gains in public opinion, Rove can continue to wield his power. Everyone gets what they want. Christ, the whole thing was probably Rove's idea. And damn if it wasn't smart, as always.

I'm not sure if Bush wants prestige. I'm sure I could easily see your cute explanation in the history books; it sounds lovely.

But they waited until the 13th hour to arrange change.

That's why I posed the question.

quote:

Originally posted by Dervish I'll always remember him as..... MC ROVE!

___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo

well thats just dandy. now if only he could use his amazing powers for the forces of good

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo

Hmmm, I like this op-ed better:

quote:

Here's the thing. Someday, Karl Rove will die. When that day comes, we will all have to pretend he was something other than a piss-headed man hated by everyone but those he found useful, and as matter of convention we will have to treat him with momentary respect. So let's write his epitaph now, while being mean to him is still perfectly allowable and much more sporting. Karl Rove was not a "great political mind". His sole contribution to the nation was getting the worst president in history elected on a campaign of unabashed bullcrap, then proceeding to help guide that president into foreign and domestic policy failures at every opportunity. If that's what passes for Republican brilliance, then it explains... well, pretty much everything, actually. Point taken. Rove's oft-touted "genius" is nothing more than single-minded amorality. In campaigns and in the administration, he was and is unapologetically amoral in service to his own cause or that of his client: his "genius" is that he has consistently been willing to go farther, be meaner, and invent more astonishing lies than would be done by anyone in politics with a thin remaining threads of a conscience. From smearing John McCain's children with race-baiting taunts to attacking the careers and wives of critics to helping corrupt the most basic and foundational premises of the the United States Department of Justice, nothing has ever been considered "out of bounds". If a malevolent action is not taken -- such as ratcheting up the already venomous Republican rhetoric against immigrants -- it is done only in service to calculated poll numbers, never as a nod to basic morality or patriotism or human decency. Under Rove, White House policies have revolved around manufacturing false frames for the press, and punishing reporters who stray too far from those frames. Terrorism, war, social security, the economy, government oversight: the defining characteristic of each administration campaign was an almost (but not quite) comical divorce of the asserted statements and the actual facts. Rove's "genius" was that he could plan and launch a campaign announcing that the sky was green, and the mechanisms of the entire executive branch, from press flunkies to cabinet secretaries to low-level political appointees, would spring into action as coordinated effort to assert the fiction as fact. Government reports would be rewritten to reflect the assertion, and government scientists and experts who objected could either pipe down or get out. Faxes would go out to the media, and Fox News would start calling the sky green. Fred Barnes would pen columns devoted to its brilliant emerald hue. Rush Limbaugh would assert it as transparently obvious, and rail against the seventy percent of America that dared look out their window. The President would travel from town to town, meeting with hand-chosen groups of Americans willing to sign statements that they did, in fact, believe in the new Healthy Green Skies initiative. And if you, American citizen, were left out of the fun, who the hell cares? You are not part of the fifty-one percent of Americans that matter in the complex spreadsheet that masqueraded as the only consistent White House apparatus of national policy, these last six years. Half the country matters: the other half is obstacle. Rove's "genius" has been that he has, in campaigns and government, been entirely unencumbered by morality or shame. Rove's "genius" has been a complete inability to even distinguish between campaigning and government. Rove's only contribution to politics has been to bemusedly mock the very notion of a government existing to serve the people, instead harnessing it at every opportunity to act in mere service of politics for politics' sake. He at no point has shown interest in guiding his president in service to his nation: his strategies of constant national division, most often appearing as meanspirited campaigns of prejudice and fearmongering, were constant reminders that this White House had absolutely no intention of governing all the people, and the politicization of even the most essential tasks of government made sure that they did not do so even as accident. A great political mind? Hardly. He could carve up constituencies with the best of them, and divide the country as easily as columns on a spreadsheet -- and with no more thought -- but Karl Rove was no more a political genius than Jeffrey Dahmer was a brilliant culinary artist. Being the most unapologetically unethical person in the room does not make you avant-garde. Time and time again, though, it's been proven to make you famous. Having said all that, this is hardly a fitting epitaph, because it's not like Rove's going to be going anywhere. Let's see, can we fathom any possible reason why a lifelong political operative would leave a lame-duck White House for a private career in the very months when the next presidential election cycle is finally starting to simmer? Hmm. That's a tough one. Yes, it must be because he wants to spend more time with his family. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/15/16204/1962

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by daffodil Seriously? Rove's role was "Bush's brain" (and occasionally providing opportunities for alliteration), but he is useless as an independent public figure, at least in terms of this presidential administration. The longer Rove stayed on, the more he would damage Bush's presidential legacy. After all, most people already suspect/believe that, in practice, Karl Rove is the president of the United States. The brain. I can't imagine Bush pleased or even ambivalent toward the public perception that he's a puppet and Rove is his ventriloquist. He wants the prestige and respect that he believes inhere to the presidential office. On the other hand, Rove doesn't want prestige, he wants the power. Accordingly, he has no problem abandoning his official title and will probably continue to advise Bush in an unofficial capacity. So, everyone gets what they want. Bonus: commentators are already turned this into about Karl Rove's "resignation" and speculate that Bush was taking sub rosa disciplinary action in response to the U.S. Attorneys issue. I'm sure Alberto Gonzalzes wouldn't be willing to go nicely like Rove has. Again, Bush makes some gains in public opinion, Rove can continue to wield his power. Everyone gets what they want. Christ, the whole thing was probably Rove's idea. And damn if it wasn't smart, as always.

I think you have some valid points, but the US attorneys scandal was not the primary issue that may be getting Rove into trouble. Rather, it's the RNC email scandal and his myriad of possible violations of the Hatch Act. Yesterday's WaPost lays out Rove's reach:

quote:

In the past few months, revelations about a few dozen political briefings that Rove's team conducted at federal agencies and several election-related slides from those briefings have touched off investigations into whether the White House improperly politicized federal workers or misused government assets to win elections. Investigators, however, said the scale of Rove's effort is far broader than previously revealed; they say that Rove's team gave more than 100 such briefings during the seven years of the Bush administration. The political sessions touched nearly all of the Cabinet departments and a handful of smaller agencies that often had major roles in providing grants, such as the White House office of drug policy and the State Department's Agency for International Development. The U.S. Office of Special Counsel and the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee are investigating whether any of the meetings violated the Hatch Act, which prohibits government employees from using federal resources for election activities. They also want to know whether any Bush appointees pressured government for favorable actions such as grants to help GOP electoral chances. "What we are seeing is the tip of a whole effort to make the federal government a subsidiary of the Republican Party. It was all politics, all the time," Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the oversight committee, said last week. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...7081801182.html

What's important to realize is who the players are of these Hatch Act violations and where they are now:

quote:

See, for the most part, we're talking about civil Hatch Act violations. And the punishment for civil Hatch Act violations? To be fired from your job. Shall we review the names of those most involved in leading this process? * Karl Rove * Sara Taylor * Scott Jennings * Barry Jackson * Ken Mehlman * Susan Ralston Rove, Taylor, Mehlman, and Ralston are gone, and Jackson is rumored to be leaving. Add in Monica Goodling, who only admitted to her massive Hatch Act violations after she resigned. So how are you going to hold the White House responsible for its massive Hatch Act violations, if the people involved have already mooted the only punishment available? http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/th...ove-resign.html

Hmmm......

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby I'm not sure if Bush wants prestige. I'm sure I could easily see your cute explanation in the history books; it sounds lovely.

Really? I can't imagine anyone running for president in this day and age if he or she weren't interested in prestige. It was a big deal even 40 years ago when the U.S. couldn't get out of Vietnam because no president was willing to go down in history books as the president who lost the Vietnam War.
Things don't have to be complicated -- the power of the ego should never be underestimated.

quote:

But they waited until the 13th hour to arrange change. That's why I posed the question.

People remember the beginnings and ends of things. Bush still has a year to show that he can be a brilliant leader without Karl Rove.

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 I think you have some valid points, but the US attorneys scandal was not the primary issue that may be getting Rove into trouble. Rather, it's the RNC email scandal and his myriad of possible violations of the Hatch Act.

Yes. But I'm a law student now, so it's the primary issue for me

let's just all remember, after all of this, Karl Rove truly was a saint.

never went out of his way to help those with lots and lots of money|

___________________
'That's like telling a Kodiak bear to stop fcking older men.'