My friend Darrell alerted me to last night’s edition of The O’Reilly Factor, with Bill retaking the reins from guest-host John Gibson, who was rather unbalanced during his prime-time stint.
Gibson, you may recall, used his Fox News bullhorn to tell viewers that Rove should be given a medal because Plame deserved to have her undercover identity exposed. Rove, as Gibson saw it, is a hero, while Plame is a villain who had it coming.
The interesting thing is that O’Reilly doesn’t really agree.
Now Gibson’s a smart guy, but I disagree with him on this. Karl Rove wasn’t doing anything heroic when he dished to reporters about Wilson. He was protecting his boss, President Bush.
Naturally, O’Reilly goes on a predictable harangue about Plame having “ties” with the Dems, Howard Dean being “Mr. Smear,” Sidney Blumenthal being mean to Republicans in the ’90s, and the scandal being a “media-driven partisan display.” Yet after all the nonsense, O’Reilly ends up at a sensible place.
The reason Karl Rove should not be praised is because there are ways to counter policy attacks that are above board.
If the Bush White House felt that Wilson’s assessment of Saddam’s African yellow cake policy was politically motivated, just say that publicly. Let the folks see the evidence, let them decide. That’s always the best policy.
From the get go, “Talking Points” has said Karl Rove should tell everybody what he did and why he did it. He’s already told the grand jury his story. And he should tell us as well.
Proving once again that even a broken clock is right twice a day, O’Reilly made the same point last night that the rest of us have been making for quite a while. And if Rove has lost O’Reilly….