Karl Rove is a liar and a scoundrel. The other night Rove lied about the liberal reaction to the Sept. 11 attacks and again exploited patriotism for narrow partisan advantage in a time of war. He seeks to divert public opinion from the failures of the Bush administration by suppressing dissent, stigmatizing “liberals” and returning to the same old tactics that the Republican far right has used ever since the McCarthy era. His unhinged rhetoric is a sign of deep worry within the White House, of course, as polls continue to show deepening public alienation from the president and growing skepticism about the war in Iraq. Most Americans now understand that they have been deceived about the war from the beginning, and most doubt the Bush administration’s strategy for extricating our troops.
I haven't found any elements of Rove's remarks that were untrue. He made a valid comparison between liberalism and conservatism, not democrats and republicans. That his speech at a fund raiser ticks off so many on the far left defies reason, especially in light of democrat politicians' reactions to the bogus and inflammatory comparisons made by Senator Durbin on the floor of the Senate, and the shrill partisan rantings of Hillary Clinton at democrat fund raisers.
Rove spoke of liberal appeasers, not democrats. Compare that to Howard Dean speaking of republicans in general, "...a lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives."
Here's just a few examples of the viewpoints that make Rove's comparison valid:
Ultimately, Rove compared two different philosophies of foreign policy in terms of historic effectiveness. Wouldn't it be nice if liberal politicians could actually debate that issue, instead of getting their panties in a wad and whining because they find a factual statement of their own beliefs offensive?
The most important thing to remember: Karl Rove got a deferment for Viet Nam. I guess it's easy for a conservative to call for war as long as he doesn't have to go personally. What a hypocrite!!!