Is Rove about to go?

November 17, 2006

Guest Post by Michael J.W. Stickings

Think Progress is reporting (quoting Bulletin News) that Rove may soon leave the White House:

The rumors that chief White House political architect Karl Rove will leave sometime next year are being bolstered with new insider reports that his partisan style is a hurdle to President Bush’s new push for bipartisanship. “Karl represents the old style and he’s got to go if the Democrats are going to believe Bush’s talk of getting along,” said a key Bush advisor…

The advisor said that Rove is aware of the situation and that a departure might come in “weeks, not months.”

We’ll see. The Republicans lost badly last week, and Rove deserves some of the blame (if hardly all of it) for their poor performance. (See Dickerson at Slate.) If he goes, he goes.

But what’s this nonsense about Bush’s “bipartisanship”. Do you see it? I don’t. Sure, he met with the Democratic congressional leadership and, despite the evident awkwardness, said all the right things. But that’s self-interest, not conviction. The GOP losses didn’t reform Bush. If anything, I suspect they made him incredibly bitter. One thing we know about the Bushes, father and son (and brother), is that they’re highly competitive and hate losing. And when they do lose, they don’t take it well.

So despite some friendly rhetoric, what have we heard from Bush since the midterms? He signalled his intention to nominate (or re-nominate) extremist judges. He appointed an extremist to head the Office of Population Affairs. And although his chief of staff, Josh Bolten, claimed he’s open to new ideas on Iraq, and although he met with the Iraq Study Group (which will likely propose a new course in Iraq), he came out today and compared Iraq to Vietnam, stating that “the task in Iraq is going to take awhile”. Plus, according to the Post, he “launched a sweeping internal review of Iraq policy” on Tuesday that “parallels the effort” of the Iraq Study Group, or, in other words, that essentially negates its work. Plus, according to The Guardian, he “has told senior advisers that the US and its allies must make ‘a last big push’ to win the war in Iraq and that instead of beginning a troop withdrawal next year, he may increase US forces by up to 20,000 soldiers”.

Does this sounds like bipartisanship? Does this sound like he intends to compromise? Does this sound like he intends to work with Democrats? If Rove goes, it’s because he’s done his job and there’s really nothing left to do. But don’t expect anything new from a president convinced of his own righteousness. The Democratic victory will only strengthen the bubble in which he presides over his own delusions and fantasies.

Regarding that vaunted Iraq Study Group… Here’s one of its members (via TPM):
http://tinyurl.com/y6dykv

With guys like that as “opponents”, I don’t see any reason for Bu..sh.. to launch any “reviews” which would skew the results more to his liking. The results of the ISG are likely to be a blanket pardon and a cover-up for public consumption, not a course-correction.

Excuse me while I go and barf.

  • If Rove goes, who does Bush have left?

    Did Cheney somehow reach out and *touch* Bush?

    Cheney is probably the most exposed of them all, since Rumsfeld left. Did he convince George to throw Rove under the bus?

    Naw.

    Rove, Rummy, and Cheney are like Spiro Agnew cubed. With Rummy gone that leaves the other two just that much more weakened. If Rove goes (or Cheney, for ahem, health reasons), they’re not getting fired, they’re not quitting, they’re *escaping.*

  • aw, come on…

    Bush promised us six years ago that his candicacy for the presidency was based on the fact that he would never govern based on polls.

    He would never engage in nation-building, much less fail miserably at nation-building.

    Ummm… did something go wrong?

  • Great. That would be perfect. Rove is a twisted and vindictive goon. If he his departure is less than 110% voluntary, look for regular and thorough airing of the White House’s dirty laundry.

    It might be lies, Karl is good at that, but it’ll wind up the Monkey good and proper.

  • I think the Bushites delude themselves that the Democrats view just Rove as the obstecle to bipartisanship. The whole White House is disfunctional, not just Karl.

  • Ah yes, Bush is so bipartisan he’s looking hard for bipartisan support for his re-nomination of John Bolton and his re-nominations of a gaggle of farfar right incompetents to the judiciary, and bipartisan support for his Terr’st Survei…survu.. oh you know, we like listenin’ in on ’em program…

    Bush’s brain is not leaving and those who think he will are cordially invited to come here any day, go out on the Santa Monica Pier, stare out over the Pacific and watch the sun rise in the west.

  • The NYTimes reports that,

    White House officials say President Bush has every intention of keeping Mr. Rove on through the rest of his term. And Mr. Rove’s associates say he intends to stay, with the goal of at least salvaging Mr. Bush’s legacy and, in the process, his own.

    The article goes on to say that Rove will have a tough time of it.

    • Comments are closed.