Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Karl Rove - counting votes while bombs drop
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | 5/12/03 | JAMES C. MOORE

Posted on 05/12/2003 7:07:42 AM PDT by optimistically_conservative

Karl Rove led the nation to war to improve the political prospects of George W. Bush. I know how surreal that sounds. But I also know it is true.

As the president's chief political adviser, Rove is involved in every decision coming out of the Oval Office. In fact, he flat out makes some of them. He is co-president of the United States, just as he was co-candidate for that office and co-governor of Texas. His relationship with the president is the most profound and complex of all of the White House advisers. And his role creates questions not addressed by our Constitution.

Rove is probably the most powerful unelected person in American history. The cause of the war in Iraq was not just about Saddam Hussein or weapons of mass destruction or al-Qaida links to Iraq. Those may have been the stated causes, but every good lie should have a germ of truth. No, this was mostly a product of Rove's usual prescience. He looked around and saw that the economy was anemic and people were complaining about the president's inability to find Osama bin Laden. In another corner, the neoconservatives in the Cabinet were itching to launch ships and planes to the Middle East and take control of Iraq. Rove converged the dynamics of the times. He convinced the president to connect Saddam to Bin Laden, even if the CIA could not.

This misdirection worked. A Pew survey taken during the war showed 61 percent of Americans believe that Saddam and Bin Laden were confederates in the 9/11 attacks.

And now, Rove needs the conflict to continue so his client -- the president -- can retain wartime stature during next year's election. Listen to the semantics from Bush's recent trip to the aircraft carrier Lincoln. When he referred to the "battle of Iraq," Bush implied that we only won a single fight in a bigger war that was not yet over. I first encountered Rove more than 20 years ago in Texas. I reported on him and the future president as a TV correspondent there, traveling with them extensively during their race to the governor's mansion in Austin. Once there, Rove was involved in every important decision the governor made and, according to Bush staffers, vetted each critical choice for political implications.

Nothing is different today in the White House. The same old reliable sources from his days in Texas are in Washington with him. And they say Rove is intimately involved in the Cabinet and that he sat in on all the big meetings leading up to the Iraq war and signed off on all major decisions.

Rove fancies himself an expert in both policy and politics because he sees no distinction between the two. This matters for a number of reasons. There is always a time during any president's administration when what is best for the future of the country diverges from what best serves that president's political future. If Rove is standing with Bush at that moment, he will push the president in the direction of re-election rather than the country's best interests.

The United States is best served when political calculations are not a part of the White House's most important decisions. Rove's calculus is always a formula for winning the next election. He was less concerned about the bombing of Iraqi civilians or the bullets flying at our own troops, according to people who have worked for him for years, than he was about what these acts would do to the results of the electoral college, or how they influence voters in swing states like Florida.

There needs to be something sacred about our presidents' decisions to send our children into combat. The Karl Roves of the world ought to not even be in the room, much less asked for advice.

Rove has influenced dealings with Iraq and North Korea, according to Bush administration sources. For instance, when the United States was notified, through formal diplomatic channels, that North Korea had nuclear technology, Congress was in the midst of discussing the Iraqi war resolution. Rove counseled the president to keep that information from Congress for 12 days, until the debate was finished, so it would not affect the vote. He was also reported to be present at a war strategy meeting concerning whether to attack Syria after Iraq. Rove said the timing was not right. Yet. Having the political adviser involved in that decision is wrong.

War, after all, is not a campaign event.

James C. Moore is co-author of "Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential."


TOPICS: Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: cynicism; gwb2004; iraqifreedom; karlrove; tinfoil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last
If all of Clinton's "wag the dog" escapades were not enough to convince the voting public not to re-elect him or provide the political stamina for his removal in the Senate trail, I don't see how anyone is going to believe that after being attacked on 9/11 the toppling of the Taliban, scattering of Al Queada and removal of Hussein was choreographed for political reasons.
1 posted on 05/12/2003 7:07:42 AM PDT by optimistically_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
This man needs to hospitalized immediately! I simply cannot bash a man so deep into paranoia.
2 posted on 05/12/2003 7:12:26 AM PDT by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

3 posted on 05/12/2003 7:18:01 AM PDT by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
Another "Clinton is a puppet" whine.
4 posted on 05/12/2003 7:24:07 AM PDT by theDentist (So. This is Virginia.... where are all the virgins?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
From "It's a war about oil"...

... to "We're in an Iraqi quagmire"...

... to "The Baghdad museum was looted"...

... to "It was a war to get re-elected".
5 posted on 05/12/2003 7:29:32 AM PDT by martin_fierro (A v v n c v l v s M a x i m v s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
When the Left chooses mental illness as the appropriate response to Republican foreign policy, you know they are running out of effective propaganda.
6 posted on 05/12/2003 7:31:31 AM PDT by wideawake (Support our troops and their Commander-in-Chief)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
Shilling for his book. Current Amazon.com Sales Rank: 443

7 posted on 05/12/2003 7:50:40 AM PDT by Gee Wally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
"War, after all, is not a campaign event."

Just how wrong can one party be?

8 posted on 05/12/2003 7:51:54 AM PDT by G.Mason (Lessons of life need not be fatal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
Do Democrats always have to have a man-behind-the-throne to explain everything? Isn't that the same mentality that sees Jewish Bankers or Masons behind everything?
9 posted on 05/12/2003 7:53:06 AM PDT by arthurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro
Please include my personal favorite, "the brutal Afghan winter."

Isn't this the guy the commies traded to ANSWER for a bomb thrower, and an undisclosed amount of cash?

10 posted on 05/12/2003 7:53:10 AM PDT by Tacis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro
Spot on. Shall we start a pool to predict the next Democrat mantra? I'll take "Setting up an American/Big Business hegemony/empire" for $10 (an oldie, but dependable).
11 posted on 05/12/2003 7:54:31 AM PDT by Cincinatus (Omnia relinquit servare Republicam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
The AJC editor that selected this article as a "Special to the AJC" is probably the same guy that refuses to sanction or correct Cynthia Tucker's weekly bald-faced "Jaysons".
12 posted on 05/12/2003 8:09:19 AM PDT by an amused spectator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
It's a pure ad hominem attack, with no named sources at all.
13 posted on 05/12/2003 8:17:21 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
But of course, it was perfectly acceptable when Her Heinous was co-president. No unaddressed Constitutional issues then.

I need an anti-hypocrisy neck roll because my head keeps getting snapped back by the left's hypocrisy. Maybe I can borrow Zach Thomas's.

14 posted on 05/12/2003 8:19:13 AM PDT by Dahoser (My neck hurts. Anyone got any ice?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
Those may have been the stated causes, but every good lie should have a germ of truth. No, this was mostly a product of Rove's usual prescience. He looked around and saw that the economy was anemic and people were complaining about the president's inability to find Osama bin Laden.

Rove fancies himself an expert in both policy and politics because he sees no distinction between the two.

The author is a marvel, he can read minds!

15 posted on 05/12/2003 8:33:01 AM PDT by nathanbedford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
I know how surreal that sounds. But I also know it is true.

Prove it, punk. BRING IT. I won't be holding my breath.

By the way, I know you are a latent homosexual, who hates Bush primarily because he is so masculine, unlike yourself. I know how surreal that sounds. But I also know that it is true.

16 posted on 05/12/2003 8:56:06 AM PDT by Paradox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
So this guy claims that Rove is the puppet master?

That’s really gonna be news to the real puppet master – Cheney.

I mean Rumsfeld.

I mean Bush’s father.

I mean Kissinger.

I mean David Rockefeller.

I mean Wolfowitz.

I mean Bill Kristol.

I mean the Council on Foreign Relations.

I mean the oil companies...

17 posted on 05/12/2003 9:01:57 AM PDT by dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
AJC has only slightly more credibility than the NY Times.
18 posted on 05/12/2003 9:04:08 AM PDT by Only1choice____Freedom (FreeperPost /Sarcasm = on /mode = max)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: dead; hchutch
So this guy claims that Rove is the puppet master? That’s really gonna be news to the real puppet master – Cheney.

I mean Rumsfeld.

I mean Bush’s father.

I mean Kissinger.

I mean David Rockefeller.

I mean Wolfowitz.

I mean Bill Kristol.

I mean the Council on Foreign Relations.

I mean the oil companies...

I mean the Bildeburgers.

I mean the Council of 300.

I mean the Greys of Zeta Reticuli.

I mean the Stonecutter's Guild.

I mean the international bankers.

I mean the joooooos......

Sheesh, this guy needs a straitjacket and some serious meds.

20 posted on 05/12/2003 9:14:20 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson