Wednesday, July 13, 2005

Damn Straight! HIRE Karl Rove!

Remember, Wednesday is RANT Day here at A Better Nation....



FIRE Karl Rove? Who are we kidding?

Wish we could do it ourselves, but we elected "elected officials" who hire these guys and think they're gold. Feel like firing Rove yourself? Sure you do, the smarmster. I'm sure a lot of us feel that way, but hey, how about we HIRE Karl Rove, instead?

OK, so let's set this 'line-in-the-sand' ground war (more like a silly skirmish in the sand) straight, right here and now, re: the current calls to fire Karl Rove.

For starters:

Bush Rule Number One: Never Fire Anyone.

And the closer that person is to the president's ear, the more this rule applies, even if the handcuffs are coming down the hallways of the West Wing.

Loyalty ABOVE ALL is what the Bush administration is about. And that apparent loyalty, Up AND Down the chain of command, is the cement that makes Bush and his rollicking band of smarmy shysters seem so solid.

The Democrats and others who want Rove fired "to be fair" (to "get Bush to keep his word") are thinking inside the box, way inside the box, and those days are gone, at least for now and maybe another steely, fortified administration to come.

So let's not be naive, and let's not fool ourselves thinking we should be asking Bush to fire Karl Rove. We'll look like fools because Rove will outlast our pathetic demands, smiling like the Cheshire Cat. I think the calls by Kerry and Move On and others set the Democrats up again to be the pansies.

Don't settle for getting a guy summarily fired when you have a chance to hang him out to dry.

We don't need to be seen pleading with Bush to FIRE Rove. We need to HIRE Rove - or the closest Rove equivalent we can find. So where is he? Sign him up! Get the most powerful and prescient Wizards of Wonkery lined up on your side.

And as for that Rovian Wizard, better to press charges and have him ceremoniously arrested IN the White House while on the job playing Machiavelli's precious and precocious Prince.



And a follow-up:

The Republicans, I believe, have got their rules and their marching orders straight. Do the Dems? What's our Rule Numero Uno?

It seems the Democrats number one rule these days is to complain.

We'd better make it our number one rule to WIN.

As Woody Guthrie said, "Take it easy, but TAKE IT!"

So to this, we've gotta say:

Fight "fair" (by law), but FIGHT.




Nevertheless, yes, this sweltering hump day, we might be seeing a few cracks in the dam, and so, dear readers and fellow rantlings, I say...

Cheers ALL!

Lawrence

6 Comments:

At 7/13/2005 10:20 AM, Anonymous Rhesus Pieces said...

Ok. I'll do it. If the Democrats want to win, hire me. I'll put them in power. I'll establish directions, goals, and build a credibility they haven't seen since FDR!

-Rhesus "I'm-In-Charge" Pieces

 
At 7/13/2005 10:25 AM, Anonymous Jack said...

I don't think anyone honestly believes that Bush would fire Rove. I think the point is more to be a thorn in his side and to force him into being open about his position. Shrub will stand beside KR(ap) no matter what. He'll do it in his weasel-ly, forked-tongue way if he can get away with it. If people force the issue and he has to explicitly endorse the little pig, then any slop that's thrown at Rove will rub off on him. Make him demonstrate that he's more loyal to his traitorous friends than he is to his supposed "principles" - that's the whole point.

Not so naive as you think,

Jack

 
At 7/13/2005 10:29 AM, Blogger Lawrence said...

To Rhesus: Yes, I can see you're just the man for the job! And as with Mr. Rove, you might cut a fine figure wearing prison garb.

To Jack: Agree with you entirely -- just always looking for the unconventional twist on the
common take.

Nothing naive about Sir Jacques!

 
At 7/14/2005 7:36 AM, Anonymous Shirley Meckley said...

Amen, Lawrence! Except that I don't want to find someone like Karl Rove for the Democrats - he is a crook through & through!

We want someone smart and politically savvy but not a crook which the Republicans always seem to hire/promote/elect!

Shirley

 
At 7/14/2005 8:57 PM, Anonymous Jay Doubleday said...

Your thinking, if adopted by the press and Congress after Watergate, would have prevented driving Nixon from the White House. It is not a question of asking the President to be “fair”. It is a question of undermining Bush by convincing some of the less committed people in the country, including the working press, that Bush is undermining national security by excusing the outing of an undercover CIA agent, an action that his father condemned in extreme terms. Even young George promised to fire anyone who had outed an undercover agent. The Congress needs to know that people are disturbed by the knowledge that Rove identified Plame to a reporter, regardless of his motives. Whether he can be convicted in a court is not decisive; his action showed poor judgment and a disregard for the welfare of an intelligence agents and other agents with which she had been involved, all for political purposes. This is bad news politically, regardless of the legal outcome.

I heard a reporter say on Free Speech TV that the judges that heard the cases of Miller and Cooper indicated in their comments/opinions that information discovered by Fitzgerald, but revealed only to the judges, made it very important to have the testimony of the two reporters. This suggests that there are facts that we do not know that could make the Fitzgerald report interesting at least, explosive at best.

Meanwhile, it is important to keep the issue alive and in the forefront of media attention as well as to back those members of Congress who are trying to use the issue politically. If Rove were forced to resign, or even admit culpability, it would be a significant political defeat for Bush and the Republican Party.

Of course, this issue is insignificant as compared to the Iraq War. But not doing anything about Rove will not, in itself, change policy on the War. Work on both is feasible and desirable.

Jay

 
At 7/14/2005 9:05 PM, Blogger Lawrence said...

Jay I absolutely agree with you, but I'm interested in offering
unconventional, challenging angles - and in this case showing the Dems
how we often look to the lay public these days - like a bunch of
whiners, truly ineffectual weenies.

Sure, we've got to light a fire under Bush and Rove, but it seems we've also got to light a fire under the Democrats. I say it's unfortunate that Tom Daschle's soft manner lives on in Harry Reid and even the somewhat edgier Pelosi.
We've got to hit "the enemy" harder (yes Dems! say it!), and to learn to do that we've got to learn to hit the issues and ourselves harder, as if internal exercises to strengthen
the push for progressive POWER.

But yes, Jay, you are right: I agree, the more pressure on Bush and Co. the better. But to be "on message": how high profile Dems put the pressure on is very significant to how the public sees Dems overall, as powerful and decisive winners or sore loser whiners.

I'm a "Dean Democrat" who wants no war and no pussyfooting.

But yes, Jay, right again: any chink in Rove's teflon armor would be a blow to the neocons. As you say, work on all fronts is feasible and
desireable.

In the meantime, though, I'm still on the hunt for the unconventional angle on what's up and what's down.

Jay, thanks for commenting so eloquently and thoughtfully.

Lawrence

 

Post a Comment

<< Home