Why Democrats are ob­sessed with Karl Rove . . .

The Washington Times Weekly - - Commentary - David Lim­baugh

Those de­criers of “hate” on the left just can’t im­bibe enough ha­tred for Karl Rove to quench their “tol­er­ant” and “com­pas­sion­ate” ap­petites.

What drives them to this per­sis­tent state of un­mit­i­gated and un­for­giv­ing rage? I’ll tell you what it’s not. It’s not that he’s an un­friendly, hate­ful, un­com­pas­sion­ate, un­lik­able ogre — be­cause he is none of those things.

It’s also not about Iraq, for even the Democrats’ most fan­tas­tic claims can’t rea­son­ably pin that one on him — though they’ve tried.

The painfully ob­vi­ous an­swer is sim­ply that he has made his ca­reer beat­ing Democrats and keep­ing them out of power most egre­giously with that in­tractible “uni­lat­er­al­ist” Ge­orge W. Bush.

Peo­ple for­get that the left’s in­fer­nal ha­tred for Pres­i­dent Bush be­gan way be­fore their fa­mous catch-all ex­cuse, the Iraq in­va­sion, was a glim­mer in the pres­i­dent’s eye. Their per­ma­nent an­tipa­thy be­gan with the Democrats’ 2000 elec­toral de­feat.

It didn’t mat­ter that Mr. Bush didn’t draw first blood in the end­less Bush/Gore saga in Florida. It was ir­rel­e­vant that Mr. Bush was on the re­ceiv­ing end of an un­prece­dented Demo­cratic party-wide con­spir­acy to steal the pres­i­den­tial elec­tion. All that mat­tered was that he wasn’t com­pli­ant. He wouldn’t get out of their way.

When the United States Supreme Court fi­nally said, “Enough is enough,” to the Democrats‘ dis­grace­ful, chad-ma­nip­u­lat­ing, rule-of-law crush­ing, pro­pa­ganda-filled Dade cha­rade, the Democrats’ mis­ap­pro­pri­ated vic­tim sta­tus in one of the most colos­sal PR flim­flams in Amer­i­can his­tory. And who was most re­spon­si­ble for mak­ing them vic­tims?

That’s right. That “right-wing Rasputin,” the ubiq­ui­tous Karl Rove.

He was there from the be­gin­ning. No one has been a greater en­abler of the per­ni­cious Ge­orge W., not even Dick Cheney. To the left, Mr. Cheney might be the de facto pres­i­dent, but Karl Rove paved the way for both of th­ese demons to be in power. He has earned him­self a spe­cial place in Hades.

Any­thing that has gone wrong for Democrats — from suc­cesses in the war on ter­ror, to sus­tained eco­nomic growth, to the dis­cred­it­ing of their dar­ling Joe Wil­son — had to be laid at the feet of Karl Rove. No one else was quite as mas­ter­ful at derail­ing their grand schemes of derail­ing the Repub­li­cans’ grand schemes as Karl Rove, so when things went awry for Dems, Mr. Rove had to be be­hind it.

Thus, when Mr. Rove tes­ti­fied to the grand jury, Dems were just sure he com­mit­ted per­jury. Why? Be­cause he is Karl Rove, the king­maker of evil kings, most no­tably “King Ge­orge XLIII.”

They were sure Mr. Rove would be “frog-marched” out of the White House in hand­cuffs. Why? Be­cause he is Karl Rove, the grand ob­struc­ter of Demo­crat nir­vana.

Now that the mad ge­nius has an­nounced his in­ten­tion to leave the White House, sali­vat­ing left­ist blog­gers are fan­ta­siz­ing there will still be a hu­mil­i­at­ing (and crim­i­nal) end to Rove’s ca­reer. They’re on their knees send­ing up (or side­ways) sec­u­lar prayers that the in­sa­tiable Demo­cratic con­gres­sional pseudo-in­ves­tiga­tive ma­chine will vir­tu­ally im­prison him with end­less sub­poe­nas and en­snare him in an­other per­jury trap.

Mr. Rove truly has driven them crazy from day one. And I do mean crazy. Re­mem­ber when for­merly revered CBS news an­chor Wal­ter Cronkite spec­u­lated that Mr. Rove was be­hind the re­lease of the Osama bin Laden tape on the eve of the 2004 pres­i­den­tial elec­tion?

Even Demo­crat oper­a­tive James Carville, who one would think through em­pa­thy alone would be less anx­ious to suc­cumb to his party’s neg­a­tive spin on (and un­in­ten­tional mytho­log­i­cal el­e­va­tion of) Mr. Rove, re­cently wrote a piece opin­ing that de­spite his “spec­tac­u­lar suc­cesses” in win­ning elec­tions, Mr. Rove has sin­gle-hand­edly “lost an en­tire gen­er­a­tion for the Repub­li­can Party.”

I don’t know where Sir James got his crys­tal ball, but I’d be a lit­tle less san­guine about the Democrats’ short-term cap­i­tal­iza­tion on a war fa­tigue they helped bring about. Be­fore count­ing Repub­li­cans out for a gen­er­a­tion, he bet­ter be sure his party hand­ily pre­vails in the 2008 elec­tion, which is far from cer­tain at this point, be­lieve it or not.

More re­cently, main­stream me­dia play­ers are milk­ing Mr. Rove’s im­pend­ing de­par­ture for all the sadis­tic plea­sure it can pro­vide them and their fol­low­ers. They beg him to an­swer ques­tions about Hil­lary Clin­ton, and when he re­sponds they ac­cuse him of “re­lent­lessly at­tack­ing” her.

An As­so­ci­ated Press “re­porter” in the Wal­ter Cronkite mode spec­u­lated that the Machi­avel­lian ma­nip­u­la­tor had turned his sights on Hil­lary as part of a cal­cu­lated ploy to get the left to rally be­hind her be­cause Mr. Rove al­legedly fears Messrs. Ed­wards and Obama would be tougher to be beat.

The AP re­porter went on to por­tray Mr. Rove’s recita­tion of the ob­jec­tive fact that “more peo­ple have an un­fa­vor­able than fa­vor­able opin­ion” of Hil­lary as “harsh crit­i­cism.”

The only way you can win with the left is if you let them win. And Mr. Rove, as long as he can help it, is never go­ing to let that hap­pen.

David Lim­baugh, the brother of talk ra­dio host Rush Lim­baugh, is a na­tion­ally syn­di­cated colum­nist.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.