Rove is a No-Show

Remove all ads!

One of the few (and they are very rare) times that I agree with Ragusa.

 

yep, sometimes he hits it right on the nose.

 

martaug,
to make myself clear: I think they should absolutely kick Rove in the balls because the man is obviously a crook, and an impertinent one for that. You don't earn yourself the nick 'turd blossom' (to wit: among his friends) for nothing. Rove is with a great likeliness a criminal involved in offences like election fraud, perversion of justice (think of Don Siegelman) and the like and has been mixing his duties as a federal employee in the Whitehouse with party activities (think of his 'lost' e-mails). No matter what 'good' he does for the GOP, he damages America in the process.

Congress should absolutely enforce oversight on the administration. Like roaches the Bushies thrive in secrecy (dark and humid places, their natural habitat, if you so want). Bush's crew is corrupt. They break the law (what else do they need their series of retroactive immunities for). They overreach on their constitutional powers (how else explain their serial defeats at the supreme court). The committees should, must investigate that. They should resolutely deal with that 'executive privilege' nonsense and punish Rove for his impudence. I don't see any of that happening anytime soon.

What pisses me off, is that congress is abandoning their constitutional duty out of expediency considerations. It's dereliction of duty, and I find it sickening to watch.

 

ragusa, you are upset with politicians behaving like . . . . . . politicians?!
Until we change the system so that we don't have a defacto aristrocracy by imposing 2 term limits on ALL politicians it will never change. Look at how long most have been in office, after 1 or 2 terms they no longer serve their constituency but their own interests.

Rove, IMHO, hasn't done anything that hasn't been done before he is just more arrogant about doing it out in the open.

 

martaug,
so you'll be as indifferent if Rove was a Democrat doing the same for Bill Clinton? After all, everybody does it! What's the fuss? Cut that silly exculpatory relativism. You probably don't believe that nonsense yourself. It was wrong when his predecessors did it and it is as wrong when he does it.

What Rove has been doing is to indeed do the things other people in the US have done before him. He does all of them. Systematically. And a few bonus Rovian twists. In all states. That is what makes the difference. He doesn't bother leaving scorched earth as long as he only gets his 50,1%. That is what makes his conduct so damaging and lets the efforts of lesser crooks of his ilk, be they R's or D's, pale in scale. That distinguishes him in the same way a made man is distinct from an ordinary thief. Of course, Rove is not alone in this, but he is, as one of the GOP's primary strategists, probably the most important current proponent of all that stinks about GOP policy (and that is sharply distinct from US policy) during Bush's reign. For the unprecedented politicisation of the executive branch for instance, Rove and helpers like Gonzales are directly responsible.

What I dislike is not that the people in congress behave like politicians but that congress mirrors in its dysfunctionality the Bush administration. These people are asleep at the wheel. There are politicians who do have integrity and while behaving like politicians they do their job, but they are being thwarted by their colleagues who primarily have the next election in mind - for good if unprincipled reason probably. I think it is a severe mistake of people like for example Rahm Emanuel to take the strategy to give Bush a free hand, to give the GOP less area for attack. IMO in doing that they're doing their country a disservice.

 

ummm, actually clinton had people doing basically the same for him & the fuss came to the same outcome. I, like a fairly large number of others, just absolutely hate the clintons with a passion. I agree with more of the principals of the republicans than the democrats but do i expect most of them to behave differently when elected, honestly no. They all talk a good game but seem to lose there way when elected.

 

So get Rove in jail or at least fined/censored enough for it to matter, and do it for McCain/Obama/HRC's people if/when they try the same tricks. Seems simple enough, doesn't it? Anything less means that Congress, whoever is in charge of it at the time, is simply rolling over for the White House.

 

martaug,
honestly, I think that when you suggest that Rove isn't any different than Clinton's electioneers, you fool yourself a great deal about the extent of his actual misconduct.

 

Rove was found in contempt today by the Senate Judiciary Committee. We'll see if they actually follow through much further than that, though. Somehow I doubt it.

 

Being too busy to go to Congress Rove found time to give an interview on FOX and called the demand from Congress to question him ludicrous, and based on no grounds at all. Poor Karl. On FOX he said:

In that he makes clear that he has no legal basis for refusing to appear before Congress. Rove is fully leaning on the Whitehouse on this.

Now a federal judge, ruling on the case of another no-show, Harriet Myers, has ruled that presidential aidees do have to appear and that the Whitehouse's claims of immunity are ... well, ludicrous (ludicrous as in 'no legal basis'. Ouch.) That ruling is equally valid for Rove.

For that Bush, uncompromising as he is, has no one to blame but himself. But, of course, they will appeal and stall the matter further. That's the sole point behind stonewalling anyway. The next step would be the crew appearing before congress, piecemeal, and tell them they won't say anything because it's secret, you know, or that Congress lacks the necessary security clearance or some other variant of 'F*** you'. And if they have been taken to court over this, and to appeal, and appear again, they will 'not recall' even in face of documents indicating full knowledge.

EDIT The plan, obviously, is to stall any meaningful inquiry untill after the elections. /EDIT

 

It's one of those times where I hope I'm wrong. But seriously, upholding your constitutional prerogatives is such a bother.