Posts Tagged ‘karl rove

21
Oct
08

Simpletons Have Taken Over The Republican Party

Politics have always been selling the most simple ideas about the most complicated issues. Capitalism vs. Socialism. Legalization of abortion vs. Criminalization of abortion. Gay marriage vs. Marriage between a man and a woman. War vs. Peace. Welfare vs. Politics of Personal Responsibility. It seems so easy to decide which side of the coin to set up shop until you dig deeper into the issue – especially social ones.

Many of Americans, however, have no interest in understanding the nuances and complexities of the issues facing this country and its citizens. They exist in the shallow end of the pool, searching for answers that bolster their viewpoints rather than seeking information that may broaden their comprehension. They exist in all voter demographics, but it is the more ugly and intolerant of these simpletons that currently serve as the foundation for the Republican Party. It is on these people that Republicans have been betting elections on for years.

In recent weeks there has been loud murmuring of the “narrowing” of the Republican Party. Colin Powell’s endorsement of Obama reflected this development in Right Wing politics – the sacrifice of the intellectualist in favor of the zealot. Many Republicans once supportive of debate, discussion, consideration now find themselves the minority in their party – a stranger in their own home.

In 2004, the Republicans successfully added bans against homosexual marriage to ballots across the country, bringing out evangelicals in droves and delivering a solid victory to the Right. This tactic, largely attributed to Karl Rove, gave Republicans a taste of the power they could attain if only they would debase the election with a simple and divisive issue. Once the simple-minded were good and scared into believing their very way of life was threatened if they didn’t show up to the polls, the Republicans reaped the reward of scare-tactics and dividing a nation. George W. Bush had promised to be “The Great Uniter” but preferred power at any cost and thus ceded his lofty moral ambitions to the salacious intentions of Rove, who believed in a “Permanent Republican Majority”, the very antithesis of democracy.

It seemed for a while the lunatics had taken over the asylum and run away with our grand country, suffocating our national opitimism with their arrogance, isolationism and thirst for power. Americans watched as their government lied them into an unnecessary war, left thousands to die after a hurricane on our own soil, murdered a defining tenant of liberty: habeas corpus, used semantics to skirt Geneva Conventions regarding prisoners of war, committed the ultimate sovereign American hypocrisy of torture, illegally spied on its own citizens, outed one of its own CIA agents, neglected military efforts in Afghanistan, made our country sink lower and lower in developed-world health care standards, sent jobs overseas, established free trade agreements with countries who have no regard for the environment or the laborer or quality of product, redistributed the vast majority of the wealth in this country to the upper economic echelons and, little by little, brought our economy to the verge of collapse.

And Americans, left hopeless and dejected and crushed by years of detestable executive government are now standing up and saying, “No longer.” They are turning their hopes to a fallible, yet thoughtful man whom they will elect as president in two weeks. This turn of events, you can imagine, is causing tremors in the Republican Party, as they witness the death of their “Permanent Majority” aspirations.

In this moment of political crisis, the frenzied Right Wing fringes of have seized command of the ship, ignoring rational voices futilely trying to warn them off the path which leads to a destination of utter annihilation. A line has been drawn in the sand and many, including Colin Powell, Chuck Hagel, Michael Smerconish, want no part of this incensed and ugly Republicanism. Others  – Christopher Buckley, Peggy Noonan, David Brooks, Kathleen Parker and more – have appointed themselves lighthouses amidst the storm, only to be rebuked by the anger and dejection of the Republican Simpleton.

The thoughtless Simpletons have their captains: Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coutler, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, Tom Delay, Newt Gingrich, Laura Ingraham, Michael Savage, Karl Rove. And they’ve elected their hero, no not McCain – he’s almost a victim of  Stockholm Syndrome this maelstroom, giving way to the  tactics of fear: attack, lie, then attack some more. No, their new hero is Sarah Palin.

Palin is the new, perfect mascot of the Neo-Conservative, the epitome of this rash of intolerant, hateful and unthinking Simpleton Republicans. They see everything in black and white: Obama’s association with Bill Ayers, Palin’s “executive” experience, Powell’s endorsement of Obama, drilling = energy independence, taxes, foreign relations, the war on Iraq, the SURGE, anti-Americanism.

These are the simpletons that think our country perfect and in no need of improvement, these are the people who think our country is on a hill – above all others – who coined the term “freedom fries” and have no appreciation for our foreign brethren, their own pride and traditions and culture and opinion. These are the people who think any criticism of the US a blasphemy and equate the number of flags flown to the strength of character. These are the conservatives who believe a lie even more after the truth is told to them.

These are the conservatives who are one-issue voters and would criminalize abortion while supporting legislation that would increase poverty, leading to increased abortions. These are the Michelle Bachmanns who would dare judge another person’s anti-Americanism, whatever that means. These are the Republicans who would care if Obama were or Muslim or not and would yell “terrorist” and “kill  him”. These are the Fox News believers who would banish any other source of information that might challenge their way of thinking. These are the base that made it impossible for McCain to choose a more suitable running mate such as Tom Ridge or Joe Lieberman.

These are simpletons who do not appreciate intellectual curiosity and education and information. They do not understand intricacy and nuance and complexity. They do not know of the depth of arguments and issues – federal taxation and necessary marriage of American capitalism with socialism. They do not want the government teaching their children evolution and sexual education but would have the government legislate the private lives of those that may live differently. These are the Jacks of “Lord of the Flies” and Samuel Parrisses in “The Crucible” and Joe McCarthy’s and witch hunters who would turn fascist if given any length of legitimacy and dominance. They do not seek truth nor justice nor reason, but struggle to create an ugly, one-sided caricature of their view of the United States of America.

These simpletons have the minds of children, which is why they gravitate so steadily toward a woman who speaks with the tone of a fifth-grade teacher, or school principal at best. They suckle on the lies of the Republicans, calling Obama a Marxist, that he would raise everyone’s taxes, they he palls around with terrorists, that he is the equivalent of Paris Hilton or Britney Spears, that he must answer for the words of Jeremiah Wright, that he is unamerican and different than you and me, that he has different values and shady intentions. This is mother’s milk for the simpletons, leading Fox News to shovel it by the ton.

So many legitimate, centrist Republicans tell me not to associate them with these simpletons. And I don’t. I appreciate my more understanding, learned, reasonable Republican friends.

But in an election such as this, a vote for the Republican Party at the presidential level is a vote for the Simpleton. For the ugly scourge that threatens liberty and discourse and progress. For the person who thinks to be an American is to be a white Christian. For the person who has no capacity of self-analysis, empathy for others, consideration for differing views.

The Republican Party is not what it once was. The Grand Old Party. It has narrowed into a shriveled shadow of its former days, a haven for hate and intolerance. And I am thankful and glad not to consider myself one of its members.

UPDATE 10.22.08: The New Republic echoed my sentiments today (though more diplomatically) in Alvaro Vargas Llosa’s “Cracked Up” – here are a few excerpts:

A rebellion is beginning to take place among American conservatives, many of them influential commentators who are denouncing the takeover of the Republican Party by a mixture of anti-intellectual populists and political extremists.

These fundamental deviations from conservatism crystallized in the Bush administration. The result was the biggest growth in government since the presidency of Lyndon Johnson, a loss of international prestige and, in purely political terms, the alienation of millions of people who could have been attracted to the Republican Party had its libertarian roots been preserved in dealing with social issues. Thus, the party that styles itself the champion of individual liberty has come to be seen by many in the United States and around the world as a special-interest group driven by factions and devoid of principle.

That many conservatives have finally decided to speak out is encouraging. That they are being vilified is even more encouraging–it means that they may just have a point. After the elections, conservatives will have to do some serious soul-searching and ask themselves a few simple questions: How was it that they let their movement and their party be hijacked by people who were hellbent on disfiguring the face of American conservatism? How was it that the self-styled party of individual liberty became, in the eyes of many, the party of big government, intolerance and jingoism?

Advertisements
25
Sep
08

Wesley Clark Replaces John Edwards In Debate With Karl Rove

In the last few weeks, I had completely forgotten about the debate scheduled between John Edwards and Karl Rove in the University of Buffalo’s Distinguished Speaker Series.

The debate was scheduled for tomorrow and, according to UofB, General Wesley Clark has replaced John Edwards. Smart move.

I wonder how many people they had to ask to face Karl Rove before Clark said yes. I do think Clark will handle Rove better than Edwards even though he will not have a grasp on statistics as much as Edwards. Rove, however, tends to respect men with military experience and quite possibly could be more deferential than he would have to a former trial lawyer who cuckolded his wife.

There is still no word as to the broadcasting of the debate and now that Clark is Rove’s opponent, I don’t know how much I’ll want to watch it anyway.

Still, the whole thing makes me want to start a betting pool predicting when Edwards will crawl out of his cave and try to piece together the tattered remains of his reputation. Hopefully never.

07
Aug
08

Texas Dems Say Karl Rove is on the Run

The fact that Political Mpressions has included Karl Rove topics two days in a row makes me want to take a long shower whilst quietly weeping and eating chocolate. But what must be done must be done.

I received an email from yellowdog@txdemocrats.org petitioning me to sign a petition, that will be delivered to Rove’s office at Fox unNews, which states,

Dear Karl Rove,

We, the undersigned Texas voters, object to your refusal to answer the Congressional subpoena issued by the House Judiciary Committee.

No one, including you, is above the laws of the land. You owe the American people answers about the outrageous political firings at the Department of Justice.

We call on you to stop dodging the Congressional subpoena. We’ve had enough political tricks. It’s time for the truth to come out and for you to stand up and testify before Congress.

In Texas style, the petition includes this little wanted poster:

Of course, I signed the petition. Anything to get that ratbastard to answer a smidgen of questions of his lifetime of politically inappropriate, vengeful and potentially criminal behavior is more than welcome for this informed voter. I don’t have a particular amount of faith in petitions, but at least attaching my name to some sort of movement to corral this truth-challenged, ethically inept and dishonorable schyster makes me not entirely powerless.

11
Jul
08

Did Obama Just Lose My Vote?

This is serious. I’ve been saying for quite a while that Obama has not yet earned my vote and I am quite happy voting for Nader to help strengthen efforts toward a multi-party system. However, I voted for Obama in the primary here in Texas and was excited to vote for the first viable African-American candidate in the U.S.

Also, this is the most important election in years, if for no other reason than the necessity to populate the Supreme Court with judges who will protect civil liberties unlike those Bush has appointed or McCain would appoint.

While I have continuously lambasted the lack of character Hillary Clinton and her husband have shown during the primary season, I would not say I have been sipping “Obama Kool-Aid.” I understand that his “Change We Can Believe In” slogan is only as effective as his ability – to put it simply – to get things done. And politicians have to work together to accomplish progress. (Unless you’re President Bush, in which case you use the 9/11 attacks and existence of terrorism to scare Americans and politicians alike into marching behind your efforts to make the U.S. more of an authoritarian regime than ever before. Ugh, the thought makes it difficult to keep my coffee and chocolate granola cereal down.)

Obama is a politician first. With a degree in Government, I never lose sight of this. While Democrats fall in love (and Republicans fall in line) we must not forget that politicians must operate within the existing confines of the Washington Dance. This will inevitably lead to widespread disapointment with Obama, when he’s president, because he simply cannot please everyone and will have to compromise in order to accomplish certain goals. A president must make decisions when no option is the right one. It’s a hard gig – the hardest one in the world; I thoroughly recognize this.

However, much of my free time this week has been spent trolling the internet for a reasonable justification for Obama’s approval of the new FISA Act of 2008. Of course, I already have my fair share of underlying bitterness because the Democrats have performed disgracefully since taking control of the Congress. They are inexplicably banner ankle-grabbers again and again despite Bush’s record disapproval ratings. Yes, they do not want to seem weak on national security, but they are greatly underestimating the American people’s desire to have their civil liberties protected in this era of heightened danger.

Congressional members have far more concern with the length of their federal careers than casting the appropriate vote – rendering them impotent in the areas of war profiteering (Diane Feinstein’s husband is a defense contractor and why she still enjoys support in California, I have no idea. BTW, she vote AYE on FISA as well), criminal activity at the executive level (erasing emails, Karl Rove and Harriet Miers refusing to testify, Valerie Plame, fixing EPA reports and much, much more), reforming health care and national energy policy, policing unfair lending practices and allowing the establishment of a credit industry that works against the American people, not for them. It inexplicable that Congress has utterly failed to inhibit Bush’s harmful activities when the majority of Americans do not favor his policies in the slightest. It is frustrating and goddamned ridiculous.

So, Obama is Change personified, right?

Apparently, not so. Yes, I have read his blog on The Huffington Post regarding his FISA vote, which proffered no substantial logic for his approval of the bill. A few gems from the piece are:

Given the choice between voting for an improved yet imperfect bill, and losing important surveillance tools, I’ve chosen to support the current compromise. I do so with the firm intention — once I’m sworn in as president — to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.

Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That’s ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have.

The problem with our agreement on the vast majority of issues is that his vote on the FISA bill illustrates his inherent weakness and willingness to compromise when no comprise is needed simply to prove (which he fails to do with this vote) that he is strong on national security. This “aye” was unnecessary, dangerous, wrong, hurtful and potentially, yes, a deal breaker. Especially when assessing the guts of the bill, along with those who voted against it. On The Huffpo website, David Bromwich provides a very concise, yet in-depth look at the governmental powers granted with this legislation. I strongly recommend reading the blog and the readers’ comments below.

Among the senators who opposed the vote are Biden, Boxer, Dodd, Clinton, Byrd, Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Kerry, Leahy, Reid and Levin.

The bottom line is that political agreements with a candidate are moot if the candidate does not have the political strength or fortitude to operate in accordance with that agreement.

Of course, Obama’s folding on FISA was a political calculation – that’s practically consensus. And I wish he could offer an honest defense of his vote; but, alas, this theater of election season would lead any such candor to damage the candidate.

Obama will be elected president barring any unforeseen, intensely damaging and highly unlikely circumstances. Though the media portrays the presidential race as close – it is a facade. McCain’s chances of succeeding in November, in my opinion, are around 1 in 5. Incumbent parties do not win when the economy is in the tank – mentally or not (and it’s not mental, Phil, when milk, bread, cereal, gas and all other necessities are more and more expensive and the dollar is weaker and weaker). McCain is not galvanizing and voter trust of most election issues points toward Obama. I wish Obama the best and will be hopeful as he takes his oath of office.

Furthermore, I applaud Obama’s willingness to work across the aisle and understand there will be areas in which he will break with Liberals. Support of faith-based community initiatives, for one (and this coming from an agnostic).

The FISA Act, however, is so detrimental to democracy itself, my respect for not just Obama himself, but the very idea of Obama has been irreparably damaged. I would encourage hardcore Obama supporters to keep this particular vote of his in mind when daydreaming of the days to come as he takes on the heavy mantle of President of the United States of America. Perfection at this level does not exist and any romance with a candidate will certainly abate over time.

I would never cast a vote for McFlip-Flop, nor would I ever stay home and waste a voting opportunity. Also, I am a thorough, complete supporter of a multi-party system. While I wanted to vote for Obama – and was excited to vote for him – my decision was not cast in stone. It still is not cemented. However, the odds I would pull the lever in support of him this November are greatly diminished. Truthfully, I am ever more looking in Nader’s direction.

If Obama’s political contributions continue to decline, I encourage him to address his FISA ’08 support with increased seriousness. This is no small issue for those of us who follow politics and government activity.

This weekend, I plan on purchasing Obama’s two books and will begin reading them with a large grain of salt. Perhaps this will allow me some insight behind this recent mind-boggling decision of his.

As of this point, Obama is not Hope and he is not Change We Can Believe In. He is merely Better Than Bush, but isn’t everybody else?

08
Jul
08

Freaky Friday: John Edwards & Karl Rove to Debate

Did anyone catch this last Friday? The Buffalo News has learned that the University of Buffalo intends to include in its Distinguished Speaker Series a debate between John Edwards and Karl Rove on September 26. John Edwards and Karl Rove. Naturally, my mind immediately searches for the nearest comparison to such an unpredictable and unlikely competition of the minds (I use that term loosely).

The fastest duo to surface is, of course, Dopey vs. Beelzebub. But that’s too easy. I’m looking for something more nuanced. More apropos. Barbie vs. Cobra Commander? No…. Nemo vs. Ursula? No…. Luke Sykwalker vs. Jabba the Hutt? No! Not even close. John Edwards has no Force.

Gumby vs. Squealer from Animal Farm. That’s it.

Yes, I remember that John Edwards is a former trial attorney, but the images of him getting smoked by Dick Cheney in 2004 are seared into my brain. And while Karl Rove may have the morality of a dung beetle, his ability to misrepresent facts with a straight face is supernatural and would require Edwards to acquire an encyclopedic knowledge of politically-related statistics and their sources to properly refute Rove’s machinations. My not-so-amateur prediction is that John ain’t got the stuff. And I’m being kind.

If the debate is televised, I will certainly perform the masochistic duty of viewing the event – with a fist firmly planted between my teeth. Naturally, I try to avoid having Rove’s visage offend my home from the television and relegate my involvement with him by reading his erroneous comments online. Blech.

In the meantime, I’m going to entertain myself with paint.net and make fun graphics with hopeful themes.

john edwards curshes rove\'s ehad

john edwards crushes rove

I made Rove’s eyes red, but they may be too small to tell.
And did you see the headline on The Huffington Post this morning that Rep. Henry Waxman is considering legislation that would prevent a White House employee from being paid by taxpayer money to work on political affairs? He might wait until Obama is elected to launch this legislative attempt.
I’m encouraged by the possibility that Obama will roll back a number of powers Bush and Cheney concentrated at the executive level. McCain, of course, would not. Checks and balances are so silly, aren’t they?!
And one last tidbit of morning news – let’s give Howard Wolfson a big round of applause and wish him good luck as he joins Fox News. In a way I get it – he wants to bring a democratic voice to the network. But I also think he’s selling his soul to do it. Although, he seemed comfortable bending the truth when he worked for Hillary, so maybe he’ll fit right in.
06
May
08

Hillary Trying To Win By Channeling Her Inner-Bush

Has anyone else noticed it? Hillary is morphing more and more into George W. Bush as this Democratic Primary comes to a close. In more ways than one, she’s turning into the very man she relishes replacing and “cleaning up” after. Of all the grotesque political displays aimed purely at winning an election rather than presenting a cogent argument for votes, this one must truly top them all.

Let’s count the ways Hillary R. Clinton is turning into Hillary W-wannabe Clinton:

  1. She’s in touch with her inner illogical macho guy by using words like “obliterate” in reference to Iran and then refuses to admit her mistake. Wow, that will really help America’s reputation regain its humble dignity abroad.
  2. She makes false campaign promises, specifically that the gas tax holiday would benefit Americans. The gas tax holiday would cost thousands of jobs, cost Washington state alone $126 million in federal funding that has already been spent for highways, cost “potentially 300,000 jobs” , and require a non-existent law forcing the oil companies to replace the tax with their profits. Remember during the campaign in 2000 when he said he didn’t think the U.S. should be the world’s police? Gotta love those pre-election, meaningless proposals.
  3. When almost all experts decry the gas tax holiday, Hillary says she isn’t going to “put her lot in with economists.” Refusing to listen to knowledgeable, experienced experts in are area in which your authority is questionable… hmmm, sound familiar?
  4. The upper-class, former first lady found in Pennsylvania that pretending to be a gun-totin‘ factory worker will bring in those white working-class votes by the thousands! You know, it just reminds me of someone. Hmmm, who can it be? Oh yeah! The last presidential victor who duped voters into forgetting he was born into an upper class family and had everyone convinced he was a good ol’ boy, everyman’s guy from Texas who’d like to have a beer with ya if I hadn’t dun givin’ up drinkin when I found Christ again.
  5. Her aides use the Right Wing media as political hit men. Paging Karl Rove.
  6. She backtracks, in this case, on the Michigan primary. You can listen to the audio here, in which Clinton says in October, “It is clear this election is not going to count for anything.” Then, in January, Clinton says, “But I hope to be president of all 50 states and U.S. territories, and that we have all 50 states represented and counted at the Democratic convention.” Bush’s backtracking is legendary, from refusing to fire members of his staff who were involved in the Valerie Plame case to the various reasons for invading Iraq to the environment.
  7. Probably the most significant likeness to George W. is Hillary Clinton’s disregard for the popular vote. Hillary’s camp has repeatedly made clear that it is focused on requiring delegates, rather than voters, which indicates Hillary would be satisfied if superdelegates handed her the election over the will of the voters. It is well known that George W. lost the popular vote in 2000 to Al Gore by 543,895 votes.

And you know what? This strategy is working. For all the democrats passionate about replacing this administration, many sure do seem to be rewarding behavior that is increasingly similar to those currently in power. In fact, Obama is far more dislike Bush and yet, he is struggling to convince working class Americans – those who suffer the most under the Bush/Cheney reign – of this. While I’ve never been one to claim that the American electorate always make the best decisions, these votes of late for Hillary seem to defy political common sense and are instead self-defeating.

I almost need no other reason than Coulter and Limbaugh and Rove support Hillary over Obama AND her recent behavior has Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan simply gushing, to rest assured that my vote for Obama in the primary was the right one.

Until Obama regains that “fire-in-the-belly” voters favor in their candidates, he’ll struggle against Hillary’s successful strategy of characterizing herself in the same vein of the most unpopular president in modern U.S. history.  Boggles the mind, I tell you.

05
May
08

Top Ten Anti-McCain Slogans

I haven’t decided who will get my vote in November, but one thing’s fer sure: it ain’t McCain. So, since there are no pro-candidate bumper-stickers I can put on my car, I’ve considered giving the anti-McCain movement a boost on my rockin’ Mercury Tracer. Stampandshout.com only has a few anti-McCain bumper-stickers:

anti mccain bumpersticker 1

and

anti mccain bumpersticker 2

and

anti mccain bumpersticker 3

With such a short supply, I’ve decided to come up with my own Top Ten List of Anti-McCain Slogans and potential bumper-stickers (probably too long, though). Here goes:

10. Vote for McCain? I’d rather be waterboarded.

9. McCain: Because Romney wasn’t flip-flopper enough.

8. McCain: Don’t worry, Falwell left specific instructions.

7. John & Cindy McCain: Let’s bring S&M to The White House.

6. I’m voting for McCain because I don’t want poor people to be happy.

5. Vote for McCain? depend on it!

4. McCain McTotally Sucks.

3. Jesus hates Hagee cause he’s fat. (oops, that doesn’t have anything to do with McCain!)

2. Why McCain? Because Republicans haven’t fucked it up enough!

1. Karl Rove’s the pitcher. McCain’s the catcher.

Bonus: Yeah. Let’s elect the guy who came in second to BUSH.

UDPATE: I recently posted some more Anti-McCain Funnies, Anti-McCain Slogans II, Anti-McCain Slogans III (Including McCain’s Fantasy Cabinet).




Scarlet Letter of Atheism

a

Bloggers' Rights at EFF

Blog Stats

  • 96,149 hits
WordPress Political Blogger

Top Clicks

  • None
Advertisements