Rove v. Kerry
by sarabeth at 6:00 am on June 5th, 2006 in PoliticsPresidential adviser Karl Rove told an enthusiastic crowd of Broward County Republicans on Friday night that the worst mistake the U.S. could make is to “cut and run” in Iraq.
Without mentioning growing opposition to the war or the record-low popularity in polls of his boss, President Bush, Rove gave a resounding defense of the decision to go to war three years ago, and he blasted Democrats who now consider the war a mistake.
Rove saved his harshest criticism for the man Bush defeated in 2004: Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, who voted for the war in Iraq but now supports a deadline for withdrawing American troops in Iraq.
“His instinct is to cut and run,” Rove said of Kerry. “If America cuts and runs in Iraq, who’s going to tell the families that their loss was in vain?”
How about the folks who decided to have the war that caused the deaths that’ll cause the pain when the families realize – as they eventually must – that the deaths were in vain? Or does Rove really have himself convinced that if they don’t tell the families in the next two and a half years or so, the families will never find out?
I do so hope that this is just Rove cynically posturing about things he does not believe (in the vain and forlorn hope of injecting some semblance of life into Republicans’ re-election prospects this year). Because if he actually believes it, that would be even more frightening. I would much rather have things being run by cynics doing whatever they think it’ll take to manipulate the masses, than by lunatics who actually believe the stuff these guys publicly espouse.
(And is that really the best punch Rove can throw at this point, attacking Kerry?)
Nick in Beantown wrote:
Well, yes. With the midterm elections 5 months off, have we seen any plays out of that camp that don’t look like a dust-off of 2004 strategies?
Posted 05 Jun 2006 at 1:00 pm ¶
sarabeth wrote:
Hmmm…you think we can expect them to run Kerry attack ads too this year?
Posted 05 Jun 2006 at 3:06 pm ¶
megan wrote:
I hate this reasoning, it’s so backwards. “We don’t want to make people feel their loved ones died in vain, so more people’s loved ones should die in vain. Then, when we eventually have to leave anyways because it’s just not feasible that we stay in Iraq until it is stable, there will be so many people whose loved ones have died in vain that they can create distracting support groups or something, and we can skulk away safely.” Yeah…that should work.
Posted 05 Jun 2006 at 6:05 pm ¶
sarabeth wrote:
Two minds with but a single thought. Check out: The Endless Loop, Then And Now.
Posted 05 Jun 2006 at 10:00 pm ¶
Nick in Beantown wrote:
Well, this week it seems they’re hoping the “AHHHHHH! FAGS!!!” angle does the job. If not, they’ll need something/someone else to pillory and despise. Maybe they’ll reach back to 2000 and dig-up some Gore Goodies. Of late, he’s been in the spotlight a bit more than Kerry…
Posted 06 Jun 2006 at 9:45 am ¶