It didn't take long after
Karl Rove slithered his way out of indictment to return to form. The same day, in fact. Not long after we learned that the walking national security threat was seemingly in the clear, the indictment-free Rove wasted little time resuming the politics of fear, smear, division and distraction.
Speaking in New Hampshire, Rove
slandered John Kerry and Jack Murtha, two veterans who are now calling for exit strategy for the quagmire in Iraq. "Like too many Democrats it strikes me they are ready to give the green light to go to war," he said, "but when it gets tough, they fall back of that party's old platform of cutting and running. They may be with you for the first few bullets but they won't be there for the last tough battles."
And with those shameful words, a man who had himself avoided combat not only insulted those who had fought, but also those who
actually support the troops, those asking for a sound strategy and endgame for the war being waged by an incompetent administration. The Ann Coulter of electoral politics had returned.
While Coulter
lacks the know-how to engage in an actual debate on any issue, she actually has a partner-in-crime with Rove, her counterpart in electoral politics. Both, through recent statements, have attempted to deliver a subtle message behind their over-the-top rhetoric:
Experience means nothing. Consider what Coulter was saying. By smearing the September 11 widows and the so-called "doctrine of liberal infallibility", she was not only
avoiding debate on the merits of the argument, but also sending a message that having direct experience with an issue is somehow wrong.
Rove did the same thing last week. Think about it, had Kerry or Murtha stood by the president and the war, they would no doubt be touted by the Roves of the world as those who had
been there and were now urging America to stay the course. But they aren't urging America to stay the course, because there
is no course. Instead, they're simply asking for competence where incompetence has so far reigned. So, for speaking out, their experience serving America and on military issues has no value. Only a Coulter Republican would appreciate such an illogical twist.
But, then again, Coulter Republicans appreciate statements like Rove's. Not only because they care more for bumper sticker politics than nuance, but also because they've long harbored a dislike and distrust for intelligence and experience of any kind. They're the people who appreciate
reality television. They're the people who appreciate
watered-down art. They're the people the Michael Smerconishes of the world worship at the alter of "
Middle America".
I've long held an opinion about a sizeable portion of
Bush supporters. I think that, at the end of the day, they're little more than complete screwups. They've screwed up everything they've touched. They see the president, also a complete screwup, and just
love how, no matter what happens, he gets out of the mess. Like a bad '80s movie protagonist, President Bush manages, more often than not, to embarrass the Dean, score the game-winning touchdown and get the girl. These people know that if they did half of what the president has gotten away with, they'd either be dead or in jail.
But one screwup managed to fool 'em all. And they root for that screwup. They identify with that screwup. They
are that screwup.
Rove and Coulter both know this mindset. And both have managed to exploit it for political and personal gain. Coulter tries to convince you that politics is a game and those who take it seriously don't belong. Rove tries to convince you that people with meaningful experience don't matter. While Coulter's rhetoric is, in its way, dangerous, Rove's has far more potential for harm.
Why? Because look at what has happened when this administration has ignored advice from intelligent, experienced sources.
Iraq.
Hurricane Katrina. The
Dubai ports deal. And there are myriad more examples where those came from. Rove would rather leave the government in the hands of the gang who couldn't shoot straight -
literally - than the gang who knew what the hell they were doing.
Sure, Rove's speech was intended, in part, to achieve a short-term victory at the ballot box this fall. Knowing, however, that
the polls aren't and haven't been with him for quite some time, Rove was also interested last week in further marginalizing the importance of intelligence and experience in our society. And who could blame him, considering the side he represents offers little by way of intelligence and experience? And for that, Rove is Coulter's counterpart in electoral politics. Long on talk, short on walk. Or, in parlance that should be familiar to the president, all hat, no cattle.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(504 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
