Rove II: Reaction from Right and Left

We don't generally make a habit of doing a roundup of reaction on a particular story. But the news of Karl Rove's resignation is a special case in that he elicited such intense feelings on both the right and the left that I thought it would be instructive to see what others are saying.

The Corner:

By leaving, Rove could be doing his last bit of service to the president: If it's a successful last year, the myth of "Bush's brain" may be laid to rest.

Michelle Malkin:

But here’s what I find striking about Rove’s exit interview: Not a word here about the Harriet Miers debacle, the botching of the Dubai ports battle, or the undeniable stumbles in post-Iraq invasion policies. And not a word about the spectacular disaster of the illegal alien shamnesty, which will be the everlasting stain Rove leaves behind.


Anna Marie Cox:

Sure, it's tempting to speculate that Rove is leaving because, finally, there's some kind of investigation (just reach into the Congressional Record and pick one) that's made his stay at the White House untenable. Here's a slightly different conspiracy theory: SOMETHING ELSE VERY BAD IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN... OR ALREADY HAS. And everyone covering the White House will be too busy divining* the meaning of Rove's scattered entrails to notice.


Attywood:

He probably didn't want a subpoena-empowered Democratic Congress for the last two years of the Bush administration -- despite what some crackpot may have theorized back in November -- but his final mission in the White House was to boost divisions within the Democratic Party and give a weakened GOP a good a chance as it could hope for to keep the presidency in 2008. And in this instance, it really is a case of "Mission Accomplished."


Daniel Drezner:

I have a different take: Karl Rove did maximize Bush's short-run political influence. The long-term costs, however, will not be experienced until well after 2009. And my hunch is that those costs are far greater than Rove acknowledges. In many ways, this boils down to just mow much power one places in the tyranny of the status quo in politics. It is far more difficult to change policy from its current equilibrium thanb most commentators realize. The question is whether Rove's actions will lead to equal counter-reactions. My hunch is yes, but Karl Rovbe does this for a living... whereas I just teach it.

Tammy Bruce:

Part of Gigot's article deals with Rove's 'myth,' or more accurately, the deluded obsession the left has had on Rove. They've placed on him all manner of control. The left thinks everyone from bloggers to all radio talk shows take orders from Rove. Scott over at Powerline has a good example of how deep the left's paranoid suspicion goes. This indicates more than just the left being paranoid MalNars, it also illustrates how out of touch the Left Elite really are.

As long as they dismiss the true grassroots revolutionary aspect of what's happening with us Commoners, they will continue to make decisions that will, in the end, destroy them. Now the question is: With Rove gone, who will the Left blame for our opinions and actions? Perhaps thy will follow the Right's lead, and start blaming The People directly for daring to reject the continuing failure of the Elite both domestically and abroad.


Andrew Sullivan:

Rove is one of the worst political strategists in recent times. He took a chance to realign the country and to unite it in a war - and threw it away in a binge of hate-filled niche campaigning, polarization and short-term expediency. His divisive politics and elevation of corrupt mediocrities to every branch of government has turned an entire generation off the conservative label. And rightly so. It will take another generation to recover from the toxins he has injected, with the president's eager approval, into the political culture and into the conservative soul.
We don't generally make a habit of doing a roundup of reaction on a particular story. But the news of Karl Rove's resignation is a special case in that he elicited such intense feelings on both the right and the left that I thought it would be instructive to see what others are saying.

The Corner:

By leaving, Rove could be doing his last bit of service to the president: If it's a successful last year, the myth of "Bush's brain" may be laid to rest.

Michelle Malkin:

But here’s what I find striking about Rove’s exit interview: Not a word here about the Harriet Miers debacle, the botching of the Dubai ports battle, or the undeniable stumbles in post-Iraq invasion policies. And not a word about the spectacular disaster of the illegal alien shamnesty, which will be the everlasting stain Rove leaves behind.


Anna Marie Cox:

Sure, it's tempting to speculate that Rove is leaving because, finally, there's some kind of investigation (just reach into the Congressional Record and pick one) that's made his stay at the White House untenable. Here's a slightly different conspiracy theory: SOMETHING ELSE VERY BAD IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN... OR ALREADY HAS. And everyone covering the White House will be too busy divining* the meaning of Rove's scattered entrails to notice.


Attywood:

He probably didn't want a subpoena-empowered Democratic Congress for the last two years of the Bush administration -- despite what some crackpot may have theorized back in November -- but his final mission in the White House was to boost divisions within the Democratic Party and give a weakened GOP a good a chance as it could hope for to keep the presidency in 2008. And in this instance, it really is a case of "Mission Accomplished."


Daniel Drezner:

I have a different take: Karl Rove did maximize Bush's short-run political influence. The long-term costs, however, will not be experienced until well after 2009. And my hunch is that those costs are far greater than Rove acknowledges. In many ways, this boils down to just mow much power one places in the tyranny of the status quo in politics. It is far more difficult to change policy from its current equilibrium thanb most commentators realize. The question is whether Rove's actions will lead to equal counter-reactions. My hunch is yes, but Karl Rovbe does this for a living... whereas I just teach it.

Tammy Bruce:

Part of Gigot's article deals with Rove's 'myth,' or more accurately, the deluded obsession the left has had on Rove. They've placed on him all manner of control. The left thinks everyone from bloggers to all radio talk shows take orders from Rove. Scott over at Powerline has a good example of how deep the left's paranoid suspicion goes. This indicates more than just the left being paranoid MalNars, it also illustrates how out of touch the Left Elite really are.

As long as they dismiss the true grassroots revolutionary aspect of what's happening with us Commoners, they will continue to make decisions that will, in the end, destroy them. Now the question is: With Rove gone, who will the Left blame for our opinions and actions? Perhaps thy will follow the Right's lead, and start blaming The People directly for daring to reject the continuing failure of the Elite both domestically and abroad.


Andrew Sullivan:

Rove is one of the worst political strategists in recent times. He took a chance to realign the country and to unite it in a war - and threw it away in a binge of hate-filled niche campaigning, polarization and short-term expediency. His divisive politics and elevation of corrupt mediocrities to every branch of government has turned an entire generation off the conservative label. And rightly so. It will take another generation to recover from the toxins he has injected, with the president's eager approval, into the political culture and into the conservative soul.