Rove: Shouting liberal doesn't work now

Well one republican gets it.

Is that the Raving Rove, come to enlighten us, as he bestowed President Bush on this once great nation ?!! The one who took a sneak as soon as an investigation started as to his manipulations and firings, for purely political purposes, of the U. S. Attorneys!!? That same dufuss !! Here is one " shouting liberal " accusing a Raving Rove Republican of helping to diminish America, both here and abroad !!! Maybe, he will give Senator " questionable conduct " McCain a hand in his futile attempt at gaining our White House !!! He could start by explaining the roles and the benefits The Senator and the Bush dynasty gained, in their involvement in the S & L Scandal? Don't count on it, he's still taking that sneak from those investigations, like many a Ridiculous Republican !!!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE. NOW.

"Liberal" doesn't work, because to people born after the culture wars of the sixties, "Liberal" is not an insult, in fact it's a bit of a compliment.

We hear liberal used as a slam, and we get confused. Is it supposed to be a bad thing to beleive in civil rights, equality of opportunity, peaceful solutions to problems, and economic fairplay?

Our "elders" seem to associate "liberal" with a charicature of Pentagon bombing dirty hippies holding orgies in the park and spitting on veterans.

We associate "liberal" with "liberty", and what could be more patriotically American than that?

Rove should be writing his editorials from jail.

That's very kind of Karl to label the millions of Obama supporters as the elite of America. Hey, I'm so elite I can still manage to make my mortgage payments and fill the gas tank of my Civic. Obama is the best for all the middle class liberal elitists like me. He's not just a liberal, he's an elite liberal.

But I think Rove has his work cut out for him trying to convince other Americans that an elite president is a bad thing after eight years of President Dumbass. We're eager for an elite president who is intelligent enough to actually understand the information he gets each day. One who might, for example, have thought about the actions we should take if he were presented with a CIA briefing in 2001 entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US". We could use a leader who was capable of understanding the potential for disaster when informed that a huge storm was headed for a large, low-lying US city and might consider postponing his vacation plans. A president who is intelligent enough to consider the all the consequences of starting a new war in the middle east would be a major plus. And it would be wonderful to have a president who is capable of stringing together a coherent sentence.

Good luck convincing us otherwise Karl.

Barack Obama is rated the most leftwing senator by national Journal.

Yet the DNC Swamp constantly avoids giving any ideological label to this leftwing equivalent of Jesse Helms, let alone the label "ultraliberal". It's not that Swampies are reluctant to pin labels. They do it all the time to Republicans.

And Frank James omits the bulk of Rove's article, which makes points that the Obama backers at the Swamp don't want readers to see:

"Democrats shouldn't be complacent after Tuesday. Their problems start with Mr. Obama's 41-point loss to Hillary Clinton in West Virginia. Mr. Obama lost the primary because the rejection of him by blue-collar voters is hardening. The last Democrat to win the presidency without carrying the Mountain State was Woodrow Wilson in 1916.

Barely half of Mrs. Clinton's supporters in Indiana, North Carolina and West Virginia say they're ready to support Mr. Obama against Mr. McCain today. Without solid support from these voters, Mr. Obama will be in trouble in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, West Virginia, Wisconsin and other battlegrounds.

So far, Mr. Obama owes his success to elites captivated by his personality. But in the general election, most folks will care more about a candidate's philosophy and stand on the issues. And what's considered mainstream values in a general election is different than in a primary.
...

Then there are the record low congressional approval ratings. No Congress has fallen as far and as fast as the Nancy Pelosi/Harry Reid-led House and Senate. Unlike President Bush, congressional Democrats will be on the ballot this fall..."

Liberals got women the right to vote.

Liberals got African-Americans the right to vote.

Liberals created Social Security and lifted millions of elderly people out of poverty.

Liberals ended segregation.

Liberals passed the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act.

Liberals created Medicare.

Liberals passed the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act.

What did conservatives do? They opposed them on every one of those things.

Yes, conservatives, you should be very proud.

"Rove's premise is that congressional Republicans are being hurt by the taint of scandal which still sticks to them, the economy, Iraq and President Bush's declining popularity, in no particular order."

Is this man a political genius, or what!!!!

"Liberal" doesn't work, because to people born after the culture wars of the sixties, "Liberal" is not an insult, in fact it's a bit of a compliment.

We hear liberal used as a slam, and we get confused. Is it supposed to be a bad thing to beleive in civil rights, equality of opportunity, peaceful solutions to problems, and economic fairplay? ...

Posted by: fontapa | May 15, 2008 11:30 AM

Hey, great post fontapa. I'm conservative and of course, Republican, and I believe in every principle that you stated in your 2nd paragraph. One Hundred Percent. I tend to be confused too (liberals vs conservatives). What I don't believe in are High Rates of Taxation, strength through Weakness, an energy policy of No-Energy, the Government is Thou Savior, only Jimmy Carter knows anything about peace, and above all else, be sure to Hate America First.

I sincerely believe that you and I have a lot of common ground though, but just see different realities at work. Really do Appreciate your post. No Cynicism here.

Scott, The Republican energy policy based on drilling more wells to pump what's left of America's diminishing oil resources seems like the no-energy energy policy to me. We need to be developing solar, wind, and nuclear power sources if we want energy security. We have the opportunity to build an American alternative energy industry.

I had just finished reading Rove's article and turned the page to read the editorials. The lead editorial parroted the "liberal, liberal, liberal" line written by Rove.
So, who's Edgar Bergen and who's Charlie McCarthy?

Tom O @ 5:05 p.m.

I am a guitar player, somehow stuck in an engineer's body. I am for the development of ALL forms of Energy within reasonable considerations for safety and yes, even the Environment, if you can believe that. 'Reasonable' would be the operative word, for me, however.

As a practical matter, the Energy form that we need now, today, to power cars, boats, planes, and busses, is still primarily the fossil fuel stuff. Until the alternatives get to be viable on a very large scale basis, my view is that we develop the oil and use that resource to buy some time for the other forms. There is an estimated 10,000,000,000 Bbls in ANWR, and it is not in anyone's back yard unless you consider 4,000 miles from Chicago your back yard. To me, this is the only good in-the-hole card that we have right now.

I have worked with ExxonMobil. I did not find them to be the criminals that they are often portrayed by a certain political point of view. I would have to tell anyone that their technology goes considerably Beyond Top-Notch. All of the majors are very good at what they do. ExxonMobil writes the manual on beyond good with respect to their expertise. My point here, is this, I am not worried about the survival or long-term fate of ExxonMobil, but what really good reason do we have for not letting them do what they are extremely good at doing within the laws and regulations of the United States, that they are not looking to violate, for any reason. It offends their sense of project perfection.

In the interim, develop every reasonable form of energy there is, real or imagined, as fast as it is practically possible. It certainly is, or easily could be, a very major security issue at any unexpected moment in time. This would include the 3:00 a.m. hour.

Thanks for not attacking. Not sure that I'm use to that. Preesh-ate-that, as some of the good ole boyz down here may (occasionally) say. Thanks.

I thought Karl Rove left. Being liberal and willing to give someone a helping hand is a hell of a lot better then the neo-cons and their right wing, troops in the background, like Hitler in 1930's. Every press conference had troops as a backdrop, they even went so far as to have fly-overs by the air force at nascar races. How much did this cost the taxpayer, in there effort to get the "people" who threatened our freedom. These liars and fornicator"s are still trying to fill the citzen's with fear. When the only thing this country has to fear are the neo-cons.

"...I'm guessing they'll be a lot of 'liberal, liberal, liberal' thrown around...."

Should that be "there'll be" vs. "they'll be"?

Scotty, Sorry about the lack of childish attacks in my previous post. I guess I'm not feeling very creative today. I suppose some sort of demonization for working with those monopolistic devils at Exxon would be in order, but I don't have the energy right now. No energy? Hey, that's probably the result of some devious Exxon plot! Like what the commies did to our precious bodily fluids with flouridation! ("Dr. Strangelove" reference.)

Anyway, drilling ANWR won't provide immediate help either, although I suppose it is a "short term" solution when compared to building new nuke plants or large solar power plants and new grid infrastructure. I'm not going to research the oil estimates, but I did read that there were widely varying estimates for ANWR.

Personally, I think we could do quite a lot with fairly simple things like buying more efficient cars, conserving energy, and recycling my neighbor's massive SUV. $120 a barrel oil makes my Civic look pretty darn good, but my next car will be a plug-in hybrid or maybe the Honda fuel cell car. I have some roof space on my house that would look real nice covered with solar panels for heating and electricity generation as gas and electric energy prices soar. I'll do that when I can afford it. Engineers don't get paid enough, do they?

It would have been nice if we'd gotten serious about energy security at some point in the last 20 years instead of doing pretty much nothing, but I can't think of a better time to start than right now.

Tom O @ 2:52 a.m.

Tom O, those are MY kind of hours, holding one of my special non-human friends, ~ one of four candidate, most reliable, electric guitars.

Would like to add that although I have, and am now again, working with ExxonMobil, I have never worked directly for them. Quite honestly, I do NOT consider myself to be nearly smart enough to work directly for ExxonMobil on a day in-day out basis. In my younger day, they hired only the very, very best ~ Dead Solid A GPA Engineering graduates, a very select group that I would not be in. As an older rooster, I know that I would never be comfortable in their perfectionist dedicated culture. We would never be social friends.

Through my work experience with them, however, I would have to tell anyone that their Engineering Design Systems and Project Management methods are planned and executed to achieve what I would consider 110% perfection ~ AHEAD of Schedule, UNDER Budget, Every Aspect Works BETTER Than Design. Nothing gets left to chance. Every technical issue evaluated. Yes, Stuff Still Happens, (the tanker running agound near Valdez), but it just about has to be an Act of God that they will apply their best technology to prevent a repeat occurence. A guitar-playing, Latina-chasing dude like me, has a lot of appreciation for their day to day perfectionism that they apply to practically everything that they do. If it may rain one day in a 10-year period, you had better have a plan for that event. They are certainly not out to violate any laws, and there are zillions of them already, that regulate their energy / environmental business activities.

Thanks again, for not attacking.

Tom O,

Should have added that ANYTHING that you or anyone can do to use less fossil fuel based energy is great, I would say. When I become King, I would load the tax code up with incentives for doing just that. Just think that we are past the Conservation Solution Point and for most folks, oil derivatives (gasoline and diesel) are still cheaper than new stamped metal (Mr. All-Electric Auto). Totally agree with U on though on doing all that you can, but I could never take the view that ExxonMobil is a fugitive cuz-in' of the Darth Vader clan. Thanks for not attacking.