Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs
Why this particular crazy revisionist tidbit from Karl Rove, from an 11/21 interview with Charlie Rose, isn’t on every news channel and in every paper in the nation is beyond me. Rove wants to claim that Congress pushed the White House into a premature war with Iraq:
Rove: One of the untold stories, about the war, is why did the United States Congress, the United States Senate, vote on the war resolution in the fall of 2002?
CR: Why?
Rove: This administration was opposed to it. I’m going to talk about that in my book.
CR: Well tell me, give me something…
Rove: I just did. I told you the administration was opposed to voting on it in the fall of 2002.
CR: Because?
Rove: Because we didn’t think it belonged within the confines of the election. There was an election coming up in a matter of weeks. We thought it made it too political. We wanted it outside the confines of it. It seemed to make things move too fast. There were things that needed to be done, to bring along allies and potential allies abroad.
Incredible. It’s hard where to begin without laughing uncontrollably, or crying. But Obermann knows. (Watch the video, it’s worth it.) Keith tells us that according to a Rove website - “whitehouse.gov” - that despite Rove’s current claim that the WH opposed voting on the resolution on Iraq at the time, on the first day of fall 2002 they had a press release “urging” passage of the resolution “promptly.” A week after the resolution to authorize force was approved in the House, WH.gov said Bush was “pleased” with the House vote. What’s more, former minority majority leader Daschle recounted his meeting with the WH in Sept 2002, asking Bush why the rush, and getting the response, “We just have to do this now.”
What appears to be happening here, is that Rove is trying to trick Americans into forgetting that the Republicans were in charge at the time of the House and virtually in charge of the Senate (since even with Jeffords’ switch, they threatened to filibuster everything, and you need 60 votes with these jokers) when this resolution was passed, in hopes that people will not vote more Dems into Congress in 2008. He wants to cast the shadow of “being rushed” to fake people into faulting someone other than the Bushies.
I mean, what the hell are these guys smoking, thinking that they can so blatantly rewrite history like this? Does anyone in their right mind think that there was any indication that the Bushies weren’t lobbying their asses off for this use of force resolution in 2002? Anyone?
Any comparisons to the book 1984 are now just simply too obvious for words. Good god.
[powered by WordPress.]
43 queries. 0.570 seconds
November 28th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
I mean, what the hell are these guys smoking, thinking that they can so blatantly rewrite history like this?
That statement suggests that it is crazy or delusional for Rove to think that he can get away with telling obvious lies about matters of such importance and interest, but it isn’t insane at all for him to think that.
Rove and his buddies got away with telling much bigger lies about issues of much greater import, without any visible challenge, from September 12, 2001 through about January 2005. Of course he thinks he can get away with it - history has “proven” that he can.
The problem is, it’s not September 12 anymore, and people aren’t buying it.
November 28th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
This one’s not going to sell, Joe. He’s not in the White House anymore and the Americans know that Rove & Company were the ones who sold the war, not the other way around.
November 28th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
Don’t be so certain! Rove and company are geniuses at taking the truth and turning it around. Get Fox News behind this and I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that a large portion of the population will buy into it.
Look at the numbers of Fox News viewers that believe Saddam Hussein was behind the 9-11 attacks!
Never let the truth get in the way of a presidential legacy!
November 29th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
True, Eleanor, but the size of that “large portion of the public” has dropped from about 60% of the population to about 30%.