Skip to comments.Rove's Risky Embrace (Libs Relying on Fake Polls, Question Rove's 2006 Strategy)
Posted on 06/22/2006 1:31:51 PM PDT by new yorker 77
Karl Rove is a master of high-stakes brinksmanship, as he has proven time and time again.
But his latest venture may be his riskiest yet.
Rove is betting that he can reframe the war in Iraq as a battle between courageous Republicans and pusillanimous Democrats.
The stakes: Congress. (And subpoena power.)
Rove believes that this strength vs. weakness rhetorical construct, combined with continued attacks on the media, will be enough to counterbalance whatever negative news about the actual war continues to emerge between now and the mid-term elections.
The actual war remains one in which people die every day, sometimes in the most gruesome ways, for reasons that aren't entirely clear. It's a war that according to the polls the public now thinks was a mistake, feels it was misled into supporting, and would like to see ending on some sort of timetable. It's a war that has raised questions about American devotion to human rights. It's a war we may not be able to win.
But Rove thinks he can win the war over the war.
And although his plan appears highly susceptible to events on the ground in Iraq and/or assertive media coverage, betting against Rove -- thus far, at least -- has been a sucker's move.
The latest evidence of Rove's plan comes in a New York Times story this morning by Jim Rutenberg and Adam Nagourney , in which they write about what's behind the congressional Republicans' vigorous embrace of Bush's war strategy.
"That emerging Republican approach reflects, at least for now, the success of a White House effort to bring a skittish party behind Mr. Bush on the war after months of political ambivalence in some vocal quarters," Rutenberg and Nagourney write.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
When was it ever NOT thus.
As opposed to the wars where weeks and weeks go by with no deaths......
They're back to teeny tiny issues like school uniforms and V chips. That may have worked for slick willie, but America knows better now.
King of Comedy... Rupert Froomkin.
Who to put my money on? Froomkin and Shrumm or Rove? Oh, this is sooo hard.
""Rove doesn't have to do a thing.""
Rove is the scapegoat for Democratic bad ideas, missteps, and inability to explain themselves and inability to censor opponents.
Someone should buy the author of this article a clue. People die every day around the world, sometimes in the most gruesome ways, for reasons that aren't entirely clear. Iraq does not have a corner on the market of human violence and depravity.
All Rove did was to tell the Rats where rope was on sale, they tied the knots.
This is one aspect of why our media opinion-makers are doing a disservice. They never believed President Bush when he gave concrete reasons that involve an understanding of how history can be changed by moral action. They pretend not even to understand it. They are rewarded handsomely by praise when their failure to understand makes the President look bad.
Oh, I don't know, he seems to have somewhat (/sarc) successful in the past when it comes to elections...
I love it when the RATS fear the ROVIAN!! LOL!
(betting against Rove -- thus far, at least -- has been a sucker's move. )
The author doesn't seem to take his own advice!
Are you comparing a casualty in a war with a fatality in a car accident? Talk about apples and oranges.
Is your mind only able to imagine deaths due to accidents or natural causes?
Around the globe, people are murdered every day, often by warring parties similar to the factions in Iraq. Just this week, a thread appeared here on FR with an article about three men who were beheaded in Mexico, probably in some drug-related turf war. I'd find the link for you if I could remember the title of the thread.
Bob Bekel was just on FOX maintaining that the idea that if we don't fight the terrorists in Iraq we will have to fight them here, is a nutty idea. I wish I had a recording of that statement so I could play it back to him the next time the terrorists hit us (and they will).
More journalists have died in Iraq than did in Vietnam.
When will the media be pulling out of Iraq?
Beckel is a typical Leftist dolt. Throughout the 1990's, when Beckel's boy Clinton was in office, the jihadists hit us often. The first WTC bombing, the Khobar Towers, the embassy bombings, the USS Cole, the Egyptian airliner crash, and multiple other smaller hits. Isn't it interesting how, since GWB took us to war in Afghanistan and Iraq, we have not been hit anywhere else other than in the war zones?
You're right. The odds are we'll be hit again at some point, but that "dumb Cowboy" from Texas must be doing something right.
that is ancient history now, thanks to buffoons like kerry,feingold, abdul murtha need i go on
Not to mention all the crazed jihadis in the thousands we're offing that would otherwise be free to wreak havoc HERE. I think of all the available talent we've put in the ground in Iraq alone, and if for no other reason than decreasing the jihad pool this has been a resounding success, IMO.
" pusillanimous Democrats. "
When it comes to Democrats- I believe that it's spelled pussyillanimous.
I totally agree with you about this. The Islamofreaks may have lots of young followers, but no "army" can take the kinds of casualties the jihad pool (great phrase, BTW) has been taking and still remain effective over the long haul.
In Iraq it's mostly Sunni vs. Shia hatred driving the violence. Far as I'm concerned, as long as they're killing each other, I'm not gonna complain.
I'm sure that's true..that is their private polls not the "hamburger helper" polls the media engages so they can pawn off opinion as "news".
Translation: Oh me, oh my, Bush isn't governing by polls.
The Dims have lost two straight elections on national security issues. And they can't wait to do it again.
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.