Have they not been paying attention these last few years? Should Rove have spoken more slowly, for the Democrats to get the picture? This is prison, and you're the bitch, so either sharpen a toothbrush and look for the carotid artery, or get ready to keep grabbing your ankles.
Pravda's Dan Froomkin gets it, at least.
There are at least two reasons why no one should expect any apologies from Karl Rove or the White House for Rove's controversial comments Tuesday night, in which he described the liberal approach to national security as being weak and possibly even treasonous.
1) This White House doesn't apologize.
2) Why apologize when you said exactly what you meant to say?
Karl Rove didn't get George W. Bush this far just by luck. Rove has a brilliant and so far unbeatable strategy when it comes to political warfare: He doesn't defend his candidate's weaknesses, he attacks his opponent's strengths. Unapologetically.
That's it. There's no real trick to Rove's success, the tactics have been obvious and in-their-face since day one. These guys are sharks, utterly without conscience or scruple, and they have been masterful at reading the Dems' inadequacies and inability (or unwillingness) to play as dirty.
Like I said several months ago, only the Republicans would have the balls to run two draft-dodgers up against a decorated war hero, and attack said hero's documented awards and exploits -- and only the Democrats would let them get away with it.
They'll never apologize. I suppose that the Democrats had to at least go through the motions, but clearly the Republicans' response is somewhere between "suck on it" and "what are you gonna do about it, Nellie?".
That's a good question. What are you gonna do about it, Nellie?
1 comment:
Can it be better? No, defiantly not, this website delivers! Never found so much information in one place before. Thank You Owners! Visit us at http://www.surjo.com/ and http://www.surjo.com/tech/
Post a Comment