The verb “to rove” has a lot to do with Karl Rove and with
what he is trying — successfully — to do
for to the Republican Party.
A short history of Carl Rove is provided here. I won’t repeat it beyond saying that he is screwing what’s left of the Republican Party and trying to turn it into the Republican-Lite Party with as few conservatives as possible and none without his blessing. Big tent? Like the circus? Maybe, but first we should get rid of the clowns and send in strong, intelligent and articulate elephants and capable donkey tamers instead. That was part of the thrust of my February 7th article entitled What’s Wrong with the Tea Party?
As noted elsewhere,
Yesterday, the New York Times reported that the “biggest donors in the Republican Party” have joined forces with Karl Rove and Steven J. Law, president of American Crossroads, to create the Conservative Victory Project. The Times reports that this new group will dedicate itself to “recruit seasoned candidates and protect Senate incumbents from challenges by far-right conservatives and Tea Party enthusiasts who Republican leaders worry could complicate the party’s effort to win control of the Senate.” The group points to candidates like Christine O’Donnell in Delaware and Richard Mourdock in Indiana as examples of Tea Party primary picks going sideways in major Senatorial battles.
But it is American Crossroads and its ilk that have run the GOP into the ground. Spending millions of dollars on useless 30,000-ft. advertising campaigns during the last election cycle, training candidates to soften conservatism in order to appeal to “moderates,” blowing up the federal budget under George W. Bush as a bipartisan tactic – all of those strategies led the party to a disastrous defeat in 2012. The Tea Party, which may nominate losers from time to time, also brought the Republicans their historic 2010 Congressional victory. If Tea Party candidates lose, it’s because they weren’t good candidates; if GOP establishment candidates lose, it’s because they weren’t good conservatives. The choice for actual conservatives should be easy.
According to Conservative Read,
Rove is no conservative.
If you give him credit for believing in the policies and nominations he helped Bush make and defend, then Rove was wrong on the constitutionally appropriate role of the federal government, wrong on foreign policy, wrong on immigration and wrong on a crucial nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. In 2000, George W. Bush ran for president not as a conservative, but as a “compassionate conservative.” This was presumably because unadulterated conservatives are not compassionate.
But to take the term “compassionate conservative” seriously, one must assume that a person in political office deserves credit for showing compassion when he employs the coercive power of the state to take money from one person and give it to another. (Emphasis added.)
Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes coined a more candid, if oxymoronic, description of the Bush-Rove approach to government. In a 2003 commentary in The Wall Street Journal, Barnes said Bush was “a big government conservative.” Big government conservatives, Barnes explained, “simply believe in using what would normally be seen as liberal means — activist government — for conservative ends. And they’re willing to spend more and increase the size of government in the process.”
In fact, conservatives believe the proper end of all federal elected officials is to preserve the limits on government that are spelled out in our Constitution and that protect the God-given rights of individuals against an overreaching state. (Emphasis added.)
See also No More Karl Rove Candidates.
Reading a February 13th National Review article, it seems obvious that Mr. Rove does not advance the “Buckley Rule” of supporting “the rightwardmost viable candidate.”
We all understand that it is Karl Rove’s mission to promote the Republican party. It was the mission of Bill Buckley to promote the conservative cause. There should be no confusion between the two.
We seem to have lost what has become a disgraceful modern culture.
Just saying “good riddance” won’t work. We need to find ways to change that culture. Promoting what’s left of the Republican-Lite Party will not do that. Fielding and supporting “the rightwardmost viable candidates” — rather than disparaging them and their kind — may help to change the culture and at this point we have little to lose. Simply having taken a Republican label is not a sufficient reason to support a Republican-Lite candidate. We neither need nor want Mr. Rove and should no more go a roving with him.
Here are some lyrics. There are many versions, some more bawdy than others, but this sums up the plot nicely.
In Amsterdam there lived a maid,
Mark well what I do say,
In Amsterdam there lived a maid
And she was mistress of her trade.
One night I crept from my abode
To meet this fair maid down the road.
I met this fair maid after dark
An’ took her to her favorite park
I put me arm around her waist
Sez she, “Young man yer in great haste!”
I put me hand upon her knee,
Sez she, “Young man, yer rather free!”
I put my hand upon her thigh,
Sez she, “Young man, yer awful high!”
I towed her to the Maiden’s Breast,
From south the wind veered wes’sou’west.
An’ the eyes in her head turned east an’ west,
And her thoughts wuz as deep as an ol’ sea-chest.
We had a drink — of grub a snatch
We sent two bottles down the hatch
Her dainty arms were white as milk,
Her lovely hair was soft as silk.
Her heart was poundin’ like a drum
Her lips wuz red as any plum.
We laid down on a grassy patch,
An’ I felt like such a ruddy ass.
She pushed me over on my back,
She laughed so hard her lips did crack.
She swore that she’d be true to me,
But spent me pay-day fast and free.
In three weeks time I wuz badly bent
Then off to sea I sadly went.
In a bloodboat Yank bound round Cape Horn,
Me boots an’ clothes wuz all in pawn.
Bound round Cape Stiff through ice and snow
An’ up the coast of Callyo.
An’ then back to the Liverpool Docks,
Saltpetre stowed in our boots an’ socks.
Now when I got back home from sea,
A soldier had her on his knee.
Mr. Rove has been emulating the seductress who, mistress of her trade, gets rewarded while the Republican Party assumes the position of the wayward sailor who only gets screwed. His seduction having succeeded, Mistress Karl moves on to continue granting his favors to more “Reach across the isle” Republicans-Lite candidates and pushing to get them elected or (more likely) re-elected to yield to the next Democrat President and to do as the new massa of the Democrat Plantation directs; its the cool bipartisan way. Even the “legitimate media” may approve. That can provide no solace to conservatives.
A mutually beneficial and lasting relationship? No way, Jose, and that’s what we need.
Here’s a link to a PJTV Next Generation TV video with LTC Allen West (ret.). During his first appearances at Next Generation, Colonel West sounded unlike himself and looked as though he didn’t quite know what to do beyond getting through a memorized speech. He has loosened up a lot. He now sounds and looks almost like the old Allen West, and I hope that he becomes our President before it’s too late. I wish I could embed the video here, but it’s not yet available on YouTube.
UPDATE: According to Victor Davis Hanson, writing at National Review today,
By any historical marker, the future of Americans has never been brighter. The United States has it all: undreamed-of new finds of natural gas and oil, the world’s preeminent food production, continual technological wizardry, strong demographic growth, a superb military, and constitutional stability.
Yet we don’t talk confidently about capitalizing and expanding on our natural and inherited wealth. Instead, Americans bicker over entitlement spoils as the nation continues to pile up trillion-dollar-plus deficits. Enforced equality, rather than liberty, is the new national creed. The medicine of cutting back on government goodies seems far worse than the disease of borrowing trillions from the unborn to pay for them.
In August 1945, Hiroshima was in shambles, while Detroit was among the most innovative and wealthiest cities in the world. Contemporary Hiroshima now resembles a prosperous Detroit of 1945; parts of Detroit look like they were bombed decades ago.
History has shown that a government’s redistribution of shrinking wealth, in preference to a private sector’s creation of new sources of it, can prove more destructive than even the most deadly enemy.
Does anyone think, seriously, that President Obama or Karl Rove’s minions can or will fix these problems?