My personal musings about anything that gets on my radar screen--heavily dominated by politics.
2005-06-24
Gotta Give 'Em Credit For Chutzpah
The six Democratic senators from New York, New Jersey and Connecticut signed a letter to Mr. Rove demanding that he apologize. At a press conference yesterday to announce the letter, the four from New York and New Jersey said Mr. Rove should be fired if he doesn't apologize by today.
"There's a certain line that you should not cross, and last night, Karl Rove crossed that line. He didn't just put his toe over the line; he jumped way over," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York.
A certain line? Seriously? Does that line include using "miserable failure" to describe the Commander-In-Chief? Does that line encompass the great girth of Ted Kennedy saying the "torture chamber of Saddam Hussein are open again under new management--U.S. management"? Does that line mark a place that Howard Dean sprints past on his way to saying that he "hates Republicans"? Does that line demark the point where it's inappropriate to link U.S. treatment of prisoners to that of Hitler or Pol Pot?
Oh, and speaking of that . . .
None of the leading Democrats who criticized Mr. Rove yesterday called for Mr. Durbin to apologize for his own remarks, with some even specifically refusing to comment when asked.
Asked yesterday about the different reactions, Democrats would say only that Mr. Durbin's eventual apology sets the stage for Mr. Rove to do the same.
There are, of course, some pretty important distinctions. One, Durbin is an elected representative of the state of Illinois, and the number two man in the Democratic leadership in the Senate; Karl Rove is an unelected, non-confirmed political advisor to the President. Two, Durbin's assertions bear no resemblence to reality, while Rove's all reflect some aspect of liberal philosophy as practiced over the last four years. Three, Durbin stonewalled for ten days before his "eventual apology", Rove has had barely 48 hours to deal on this point (though I don't think any apology is forthcoming).
But more importantly, what is wrong with the Democratic Party that their first instinct is to say "he's being mean to me and should apologize" rather than to articulate a clear, concise and unequivocal defense of their position? Is it that their "position" is all over the map, as John Kerry so aptly demonstrated last year?
Or is it actually that the Democrats would prefer a law-enforcement response, a defensive posture, and a diplomatic approach to Islamic extremism, in which case they can only agree with Rove's assessment? | |
|
