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

To: dalereed
You have Rove wrong. He's the one who pushed the 2002 election rhetoric to the Right. He represents the voice telling the administration that conservative issues are winners for the GOP.
74 posted on 02/03/2003 1:32:17 PM PST by The Old Hoosier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]


To: The Old Hoosier
You have Rove wrong. He's the one who pushed the 2002 election rhetoric to the Right. He represents the voice telling the administration that conservative issues are winners for the GOP.

Are you suggesting that he, Rove, is the one opposed to reckless medical adventures overseas, increased Federal involvement in medicine at home, and the continued open borders? Just what on the Right is Rove striving for?

I do not consider Rove a serious intellect. If he was, as is generally supposed, the one who orchestrated the images at the Republican Convention in 2000--image manipulation which almost cost us the election--I frankly cannot understand why a man whose perception is so limited would have any influence at all. (See Politics 2001--Lessons 2000, for an assessment of what we should have been doing, etc..)

While I think that Rove was right to have the President out on the hustings, as much as possible in the recent Congressional campaign--because Bush is highly likable as a personality--he totally missed the boat by not haveing Bush on coast to coast TV, on the evening before the 2000 election. It was not only the proper course, under any conditions; but under the peculiar circumstances--the last minute smear over an ancient DUI--it was an absolutely compelling choice. It was Bush's chance to do what Nixon did with his "little dog" speech, and could have been worth millions of votes.

But to really understand how narrow and shallow is Rove's focus and understanding, you have to go back to the 2000 Conventions. I think that Gore gained something like 17% by having a Convention which featured Norman Rockwell type images, while the Republican Convention looked at times like a social workers convention in east L.A.. What was really pathetic about that, is that it was

1. Insulting to the targetted groups, to suggest that they should vote for a party, which instead of offering leadership, nor even a true welcome, was simply pandering to an alien culture--even to the point of appearing almost mocking.

2. Insulting to the American mainstream, whose heritage was downplayed in the Convention of those who were claiming to be representing the Conservative--i.e. traditional--path.

3. Completely confused in failing to recognize that not only were the American mainstream far more numerous than the tragetted groups, but also disproportionately represented in the potential audience who would even bother to watch a Republican Convention. (It was not likely to be the number one viewer's choice in East L.A. or Southside Chicago.)

I will grant you that "take away" visual images can be infinitely more powerful than words in a platform. But Rove created the wrong, least effective images. There is nothing wrong with "outreach," but his was not effective outreach. It meanwhile induced millions to stay on the side-lines. The man is unable to see the forest for the trees.

Of course, when we are talking about the Office to which George Washington gave such dignity, Rove's boasted cynacism is beyond merely unprincipled and stupid. It risks a lasting taint. The President needs to get rid of him, and the sooner the better.

William Flax

88 posted on 02/03/2003 3:20:05 PM PST by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies ]

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