Karl Rove’s America
Jul 15th, 2005 at 7:14 am by Susie
And now we know just how far he was willing to go with these smear tactics: as part of the effort to discredit Joseph Wilson IV, Mr. Rove leaked the fact that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked for the C.I.A. I don’t know whether Mr. Rove can be convicted of a crime, but there’s no question that he damaged national security for partisan advantage. If a Democrat had done that, Republicans would call it treason.
But what we’re getting, instead, is yet another impressive demonstration that these days, truth is political. One after another, prominent Republicans and conservative pundits have declared their allegiance to the party line. They haven’t just gone along with the diversionary tactics, like the irrelevant questions about whether Mr. Rove used Valerie Wilson’s name in identifying her (Robert Novak later identified her by her maiden name, Valerie Plame), or the false, easily refuted claim that Mr. Wilson lied about who sent him to Niger. They’re now a chorus, praising Mr. Rove as a patriotic whistle-blower.
Ultimately, this isn’t just about Mr. Rove. It’s also about Mr. Bush, who has always known that his trusted political adviser - a disciple of the late Lee Atwater, whose smear tactics helped President Bush’s father win the 1988 election - is a thug, and obviously made no attempt to find out if he was the leaker.
Most of all, it’s about what has happened to America. How did our political system get to this point?
Moral relativism, Paul. Moral relativism. One side (guess which one) has convinced themself that winning is the only thing that matters, and they don’t care what happens to the country as a result. After all, they probably have nice fat offshore accounts to cushion them when their policies implode.
Of course, Paul knows the answer too - this is the result of a deliberate, long term plan to create the political environment we now see. I am sure that some of the aspects of this were accidents, but the long range planning to create the partisan moral relativism Paul decries is clear from the radical right wing’s own documents.
A subtle but real point: In middle of Krugman’s piece about the destruction of nonpolitical truth, he writes that if Dems had done what Rove did, Republicans would call it treason.
Look, Krugman is a beacon of light. We know that. Still, his point here shows just how deeply ingrained the problem has become. He should have written, “If Dems had done what Rove did, it would be treason.”
Not, the Reps would call it treason. It would be and is treason. A nonpolitical truth.