I Cogitate

Recent Posts My Best Blogs Archives Favorite Quotes Links Contact
June 25, 2005

Bedding With Ben Laden

So much has already been said about the below-the-belt tactics of late by Karl Rove but really, why is anyone surprised?

This is a person (he could be a droid but I'm certainly not getting close enough to check) who will stop at nothing. There is no 'bottoming out' for Rove because, in his universe, entertaining such a foolish and incomprehensible question only gets in the way.

His is but one concern: what will work?

Achieving the goal is Rove's only consideration. He doesn't sling mud, he fires excrement.

Ask Kenneth Ingram. Ask Alan Dixon. Ask Mark Kennedy. Ask Mark White. Ask Ann Richards. Ask Rob Mosbacher Jr.
Ask John McCain. Ask John Kerry.

The only thing sacred to Rove is victory. At any and all costs.

Steal an opponent's stationary and issue a faux announcement, link a judge committed to helping youth to pedophilia, discover (glory be, how'd that get there?) a listening device in your own candidate's office,
hint about the sexuality of an opposing candidate, get fired in 1992 for planting a story about the Texas Republican presidential operation being in disarray, label another Republican as unstable and a homosexual and then drag his wife and child into the muck with charges of drug addiction and being a prostitute's daughter, (dis)respectively.

Rove should write for Hollywood.


Team him up with such pliable raw material as George W. Bush, whose withered psyche was in desperate need of any sort of personal success, and stand back as the synergy roars. Each completes the other.

Yes, TIME (Person Of The Week) and other publications and newspapers will feature Rove as a brilliant tactician but none will ask him, let alone President Bush, to justify their tactics vis-a-vis their Christian beliefs. That's a no-no. After all, we are talking about the President of the United States and his chief political advisor. Nowadays, you don't go there if you wish to remain, let alone climb the corporate ladder.

When John McCain challenged George Bush during the South Carolina primary and was pelted with about as unsavory an attack as could be conceived, George (Jesus is in my heart) Bush answered: "It's just politics, John."

And Jesus' crucifixion was just another in the long line.

Rove is just doing what he does best. It matters not to him and certainly not to his boss, President Bush, that planting the wavering GOP flag amid the 3,000+ corpses of 9/11 is desecration, that it is piggybacking on the evil perpetrated by Osama Ben Laden.

Bedding with Ben Laden? Well if that's what it takes to win...


Here is the best 'response' I have read to Rove's latest antics. Credit one of the widows of 9/11, Kristin Breitweiser, for this article:
Kristin Breitweiser
6/23/05
 
Karl Rove's "Understanding of 9/11"

Mr. Rove, the first thing that I would like to address is Afghanistan - the place that anyone with a true “understanding of 9/11” knows is a nation that actually has a connection to the 9/11 attacks. One month after 9/11, we invaded Afghanistan, took down the Taliban, and left without capturing Usama Bin Laden - the alleged perpetrator of the September 11th attacks. In the meantime, Afghanistan has carried out democratic elections, but continues to suffer from extreme violence and unrest. Poppy production (yes, Karl, the drug trade) is at an all time high, thus flooding the world market with heroin. And of course, the oil pipeline (a.k.a. the Caspian Sea pipeline) is better protected by U.S. troops who now have a “legitimate” excuse to be in that part of Afghanistan. Interesting isn't it Karl that the drug “rat line” parallels the oil pipeline. (Yet, with all those troops guarding that same sliver of land, can you please explain how those drugs keep getting through?)
 
Now Karl, a question for you, since you seem to be the nation's self-styled sensei with regard to 9/11: Is Usama Bin Laden still important? Lately, your coterie of friends seems to be giving out mixed messages. Recall that in the early days, Bin Laden was wanted “dead or alive.” Then when Bin Laden slipped through your fingertips in Tora Bora, you downgraded his importance. We were told that Bin Laden was a "desperate man on the run,” and a person that President Bush was not "too worried about". Yet, whenever I saw Bin Laden's videos, he looked much too comfortable to actually be a man on the run. He looked tan, rested, and calm. He certainly didn't look the way I wanted the murderer of almost 3,000 innocent people to look: unkempt, panicked, and cowering in a corner.
 
Karl, I mention Bin Laden because recently Director of the CIA, Porter Goss, has mentioned that he knows exactly where Bin Laden is located but that he cannot capture him for fear of offending sovereign nations. Which frankly, I find ironic because of Iraq--and let's just leave it at that. But, when you say that “moderation and restraint” don't work in fighting terrorists, maybe you should share those comments with Mr. Goss because he doesn't seem to be on the same page as you. Unless of course, Porter is holding out to announce that Bin Laden is in Iran. (Karl, I want Bin Laden brought to justice, but not if it means starting a war with Iran - a country that possesses nuclear weaponry. The idea of nuclear fallout in any quadrant of the world is just not an acceptable means to any ends, be it capturing Bin Laden, oil or drugs. But, Afghanistan and Bin Laden are old news. Iraq is the story of today. And of course, it appears that Iran will be the story of next month. But, I digress.)

More to the point, Karl when you say, “Conservatives saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and prepared for war,” what exactly did you do to prepare for your war? Did your preparations include: sound intelligence to warrant your actions; a reasonable entry and exit strategy coupled with a coherent plan to carry out that strategy; the proper training and equipment for the troops you were sending in to fight your war? Did you follow the advice of experts such as General Shinseki who correctly advised you about the troop levels needed to actually succeed in Iraq? No, you didn't.
For the rest of the article, go here.

top

RSS feed link RSS feed

Recent Posts My Best Blogs Archives Favorite Quotes Links Contact