Custom Search

Monday, October 30, 2006

Rove's Ruminations Part #2

Not long ago I did a piece on Karl Rove called
Rove's Ruminations, where I gave some history on Karl Rove and opinions from reporters and others that have spoken with him.

Today, Wapo has yet another piece on Rove, whom they seem to have some fixation on, and I found some interesting comments in that article.

A quote from Bolten about sums up my analysis of Karl Rove.

"I believe Karl Rove," Bolten said in an interview in his West Wing office Friday. "Karl Rove, somewhere inside that massive brain of his, has figured out the political landscape more clearly than the entire collection of conventional-wisdom pundits and pollsters in the entire city of Washington."

Wapo also points out the Democrats immense paranoia about Rove.

The flip side of adulation is paranoia. Many Democrats are convinced Rove has some trick up his sleeve -- Osama bin Laden in the freezer, perhaps, ready for release just before Election Day -- that will save the Republicans from electoral disaster this fall.

Rove's specific words on Iraq and the war we are fighting there are especially keen and simple.

Rove sarcastically questioned Rep. John P. Murtha's plan for pulling troops out of Iraq and creating a rapid-response force to deal with contingencies in the Middle East, possibly at the American base in Okinawa. "I am from Texas -- I am a simple boy," Rove joked, before noting that Okinawa is close to 5,000 miles from Baghdad.

"It is foolishness to suggest that this is a real plan for America," Rove said. "The real plan is this: Fight, beat 'em, win."

Well said.

When researching Rove and there is a ton of sites with his name in them, I ran across something very telling about the liberals and the Democratic party. As they publicly stood by the President, supposedly showing loyalty after 9/11, , a liberal organization was busy submitting a petition to use restraint in responding to those responsible for 9/11.

3,000 of our American citizens dead and buried under the rubble of the World Trade Center and the liberals felt we should not respond with every fiber of our being, using every resource available. THIS is who thinks they can handle our national security.

In a June 22, 2005 speech to the New York Conservative Party Rove argued that the starkest illustration of the differences between conservative and liberal values was in the response to the September 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers," he said.

"In the wake of 9/11, conservatives believed it was time to unleash the might and power of the United States military against the Taliban; in the wake of 9/11, liberals believed it was time toÂ… submit a petition. I am not joking. Submitting a petition is precisely what did. It was a petition imploring the powers that be to 'use moderation and restraint in responding to theÂ… terrorist attacks against the United States'," he said.

The Democratic party is not competent enough to handle National Security and although people may think they are simply voting in a local election, what they need to remember is that if they vote for a Democratic candidate, they could be handing them the power to hinder the Presidents ability to keep US, the American people, safe. I have shown here, time and time again the weak stance the Democratic party has taken on our national security, they have voted against 90% or more of the bills placed in front of them dealing with our security.

As I showed you in my piece "Agenda for the Common Good: Be Damned, they state clearly that they wish to raise taxes, rollback all the tax cuts that have helped our economy, cut funding for our troops which will put them in more danger than they are already in and make the President into a lame duck president.... which is a quote from Nancy Pelosi's mouth.

At a time of war, in Iraq and in Afghanistan, how safe will our soldiers be with a speaker of the house doing everything in her power to make the president, the commander in chief, a lame duck? How does this make us safer? How does this protect our soldiers?

Get out and vote and vote Republican. Whether you agree with each and every decision they have made, there is no doubt that they are the party that has OUR national security as their first priority.