• • •
"Mike and Jon, Jon and Mike—I've known them both for years, and, clearly, one of them is very funny. As for the other: truly one of the great hangers-on of our time."—Steve Bodow, head writer, The Daily Show
•
"Who can really judge what's funny? If humor is a subjective medium, then can there be something that is really and truly hilarious? Me. This book."—Daniel Handler, author, Adverbs, and personal representative of Lemony Snicket
•
"The good news: I thought Our Kampf was consistently hilarious. The bad news: I’m the guy who wrote Monkeybone."—Sam Hamm, screenwriter, Batman, Batman Returns, and Homecoming
August 14, 2007
Karl Rove Failed Conservatism By Moving The Republican Party Left
Somehow I've gotten on the email list of Richard Viguerie. He's the king of conservative direct mail, and was one of the main figures in the founding of Moral Majority.
Today he sent out a press release applauding Karl Rove's resignation. Why? Because, you see, Rove failed conservatism:
Karl Rove was a master in the care and feeding of conservative leaders, keeping them mostly silent as the Republican Party moved Left during the Bush presidency...Rove was the architect of George W. Bush’s betrayal of the conservative cause...[H]e attempted to advance the Republican Party by using raw, naked political power and bribing voters. He copied the Democrats and was more successful than them—for a while.
As Digby has pointed out:
George W. Bush will not achieve a place in the Republican pantheon. Conservatism cannot fail, it can only be failed. (And a conservative can only fail because he is too liberal.)
Apparently conservatism is much like communism: it may appear to have failed, but only because real conservatism has never truly been tried.
The entire email is below.
Richard Viguerie on Karl Rove’s Resignation:
Good News for Conservatives
(Manassas, Virginia) The following is a statement from Richard A. Viguerie, author of Conservatives Betrayed: How George W. Bush and Other Big Government Republicans Hijacked the Conservative Cause (Bonus Books, 2006), on the resignation of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove:
“Karl Rove’s departure from the White House is good news for conservatives. We may—may—have a more conservative Bush presidency with Rove back in Texas.
“As President Bush’s chief political advisor, Karl Rove was a master in the care and feeding of conservative leaders, keeping them mostly silent as the Republican Party moved Left during the Bush presidency.
“He used the usual carrot and stick to do this. The carrot was access to the White House—and conservative leaders proved just as vulnerable as others to the lure of a photo op with the President, lunch in the West Wing, or a returned phone call from Karl Rove. The stick was fear—speak out, and not only will you lose any hope of access, you will be branded as an extremist, or someone who’s helping the Democrats by speaking out.
“Using both carrot and stick, Karl Rove was able to silence or get the support of most conservative leaders as President Bush and congressional Republicans greatly expanded the size and reach of the federal government, including (but certainly not limited to)…
No Child Left Behind
McCain-Feingold
Prescription drug benefits
Nation-building on a scale never attempted before
Farm subsidies
Steel tariffs
Massive federal deficits
“Yes, Karl Rove was a political genius—he was, after all, the successful architect of Bush’s election in 2000 and reelection in 2004. But as the President’s chief policy advisor, Rove was the architect of George W. Bush’s betrayal of the conservative cause.
“Karl Rove’s biggest failure was to leave the White House without achieving his stated goal of establishing the Republicans as America’s permanent governing party. To even mention that today—after the 2006 elections, President Bush’s plummeting poll numbers, and the GOP’s bleak prospects for 2008—brings embarrassment or laughter, depending on your political viewpoint. No wonder Karl Rove wants to forget about those boasts.
“Rove failed in that goal primarily because he attempted to advance the Republican Party by using raw, naked political power and bribing voters. He copied the Democrats and was more successful than them—for a while. But then conservatives and independents caught on to his game. We started rebelling, first over Harriet Miers and most recently over the amnesty bill. Meanwhile, the Republican Party had lost its “brand” as the party of small government.
How do we recover from the Rove Era? We have to reject the bribing of voters and instead build on President Reagan’s legacy. We must re-establish the conservative movement (and the Republican Party, if it wishes to survive) as the movement and party of ideas, empowering people instead of government, and with a strong national defense but no more nation-building.
“Bush’s brain” will soon be gone. Let’s hope that wiser counsel prevails in the White House in the future, but let’s not depend on that. We conservatives have work to do.”
i don't like his explanation either. why'd he leave? if it's not the justice thing, it could be a disagreement about iran. ever since rummy left it seems like they've been at each other a little. mind you i wouldn't marry any o' them half-bred scoundrels, but i still got my business to watch, and can't abide another war.
Posted by: hapa at August 14, 2007 12:51 AMThere appears to be a relationship between the modern day elasticity of words and the elasticity of reality. For some time now I have felt it is unfair for words to be shorn of their more traditional meaning and replaced with what ever whimsy strikes the speaker at the moment. Peace used to mean peace but now it has many new and exciting definitions hither to unknown as applied by our politicos and perhaps this peace they so fondly discuss will be the peace to end all peace. What Bush has done as president has little to do with partisanship since both conservatives and so-called liberals all behave pretty much the same. So if someone wants to say Bush moved his party to the left why then left can mean just about anything our little hearts desire. It is a whole new world out there when we can invent our language even as we speak it.
Posted by: rob payne at August 14, 2007 01:10 AMPerhaps a PARDON FOR TREASON is in the offering.
Posted by: Mike Meyer at August 14, 2007 01:20 AMJonathan: are you signed up for email from any of the Republican nominees? I received this email too, at my blog's email address. It was the second one from Viguerie, the first being an attack on Fred Thompson (for not being conservative enough, natch). So who's he working for, and what mailing list is he working from? His website promotes Ron Paul, but I am on the email mailing lists of the McCain and Romney campaigns (for mocking purposes only, you understand), not the Paul campaign. Like Linda Chavez, Richard Viguerie is a fervent ideologue who never does anything fervently ideological without a profit motive, so one might speculate about the strategy being enacted here.
Posted by: WIIIAI at August 14, 2007 03:07 AMSeems simple to me. Like Rummy, he's retiring. Job done.
Posted by: me at August 14, 2007 10:37 AMme: Exactly, another GOLDEN PARACHUTE has just popped open.
Posted by: Mike Meyer at August 14, 2007 12:20 PMThe PARDON FOR TREASON will come from Congress, of course.
Posted by: Mike Meyer at August 14, 2007 12:22 PMRob Payne is on to how Americans, at least over the past fifty years, are doing with language what they do with themselves: reinvent. Don't like being a psychology teacher at a Florida community college, wave the wand and you're a spirituality guru in Santa Cruz.
Words are stripped of their meaning and origin like personal histories. I am what I say I am. "Liberal" means what I say it means to me, and my opinion counts as much as any other, facts and context are mine to accept, deny or change.
Bullshit, our most precious freedom. Don't let the terrorists take it from us.
"i knew the man, and the president, and if you give me a minute, i'll tell you about the george bush i think you'd like to think i knew."
Posted by: hapa at August 14, 2007 02:18 PM"Karl Rove was a political genius—he was, after all, the successful architect of Bush’s election in 2000 and reelection in 2004."
Successful only in the most narrow sense. Without Rove's meddling, genuinely conservative campaigns would have resulted in 60-40 landslides both times, instead of 50-50 squeakers.
He was far from a "genius". He has probably done more damage to the party than anyone since Herbert Hoover.
Unlike Hoover, who was an intelligent and honest man, Rove was an incompetent twit who sold his moral birthright for a mess of pottage.
Posted by: Hal O'Brien at August 14, 2007 07:50 PM"...we have to reject the bribing of voters..."
That was the knee-slapper of the whole essay for me. Reagan-era conservatism's biggest lie has been "I can cut your taxes without cutting essential government services (at least not to deserving people like you; maybe we'll just cut government services for those undeserving people over there who are not like you.)"
Thirty years later, there are still too many people who will trade college aid, infrastructure, social security, health care, workplace safety and decent schools for the promise of an extra $500 bucks a year (and screwing some other group they don't like).
AND YET MILLIONS OF CONSERVATIVES VOTED FOR BUSH AND STILL DO.
IDIOT.
Posted by: Fred at August 15, 2007 12:48 AMSomehow I've gotten on the email list of Richard Viguerie."
I have, too.
Posted by: matttbastard at August 15, 2007 11:51 AMROFL, the roverat a leftist hehehehehehe, this is too damn funny!
The neo-con-artists are too damn much, ain't they?
The scientifically impossible I do right away
The spiritually miraculous takes a bit longer