Embittered GOP (& Karl Rove) Bitterly Decry White House's Use of Rovian Political Tactics

by Damozel | And, after all, who knows more about political posturing than the GOP?  But you've got to love it when a comparatively light counter-thrust causes the opposition to fall onto the ground, writhing, clutching its testicles, and wailing  "Below the belt!  Not fair!! " 

Indeed. How dare the White House laughingly suggest that they behave as thought the blowhard Limbaugh is their official voice? Meanwhile, I can't help noticing that in the midst of excitedly  denouncing this tactic as a tactic, they're not really denying that this is in fact the case.  They seem more incensed by the implication that this is a bad thing.

If I understand them aright, their reasoning is as follows:  While their posturing, refusal to work together with the White House toward any solution, and divisive political tactics were only to be expected -- they are, after all, Republicans -- anything from the White House that can be framed as a ploy or tactic is wrong and divisive and not constructive.

Obama promised to change the tone of Washington, and he is therefore required to do so single-handedly.  Never mind that when he pleaded for bipartisan unity to solve the nation's problems, the embittered GOP responded as one to undermine him every step of the way. 

So while they are free to engage in the most negative and obstructive behavior imaginable Obama is estopped from saying anything about it because he promised he would change the tone, i.e., his tone.  Yes, that's got the hallmark on it of GOP "logic." 

And how about the irony of Karl Rove denouncing tactics that are nowhere near dark and twisted enough to be characterized as...er, "Rovian"?

At enjoyably deadpan Think Progress, Satyam Khanna reports:

Yesterday, in a piece that has become a media and right-wing favorite, Politico’s Jonathan Martin suggested that the White House hatched the strategy framing Rush Limbaugh as the face of the Republican party.

Interviewed on Fox News yesterday, Karl Rove strongly objected to the recent focus on Limbaugh. “Is this appropriate?” Rove asked. “The idea that the White House is devoting all this time and energy and effort when we’ve got all this myriad problems facing the country.” “They’re trying to draw attention away from the things that the country wants to talk about,” he quipped. Rove criticized the White House for allegedly engaging in “old style politics” that elevates politics over policy.

And he plangently asks how political posturing serves the nation's interests. (I know!)

But don't get excited.  It turns out that Rove hasn't seen the error of being the very man whose name has replaced "Nixonian" as a synonym for "dirty tricks." 

The "old style" politics Rove is thinking of don't include anything that we saw during the last eight years.  So what old style of politics could he possibly be thinking of?

Think Progress again:

ROVE:  And it’s clear that this is — that this is the same old style politics that we grew to really dislike in the 1990s, when the White House thought everything through from a political perspective, road-tested it by running polls and focus groups and did everything with a very keen eye towards the politics of the matter, not what was in the best interests of the country.

See there?  After a whole eight years under the Bush regime, everything is still Clinton's fault. 

Speaking of tactics, ain't it remarkable that the entire GOP seems to be suffering from mass amnesia for anything that happened between the time Obama was sworn in (almost two whole months ago!) and that time they almost impeached Bill Clinton?

And never mind what Rove himself was getting up to during the Clinton administration.  "In a 1996 campaign for Arkansas Supreme Court, Rove printed flyers that “viciously” attacked his client’s opponent’s family. President Bush’s 1994 gubernatorial campaign, on which Rove was a top adviser, featured an infamous push poll hinting that opponent Ann Richards was a lesbian." (Think Progress)

Other Republicans are equally saddened and disappointed by Obama's failure to continue play by the rules they are trying to set for him.  Here, for example, is Jim Cramer responding in tedious detail and more in anger than in sorrow to what Eric Boehlert argues is a mainly imaginary premise that anyone in Obama's administration knows or cares what Jim Cramer thinks or says.

But at least one GOP advisor showed a welcome and most unexpected awareness of reality and history.

Mark McKinnon, a top adviser in President George W. Bush's campaigns, acknowledged the value of picking a divisive opponent. "We used a similar strategy by making Michael Moore the face of the Democratic Party," he said of the documentary filmmaker. "That's why we gave him credentials to cover the 2004 convention and then turned the spotlight on him."  (Washington Post)

More blogger reaction at Memeorandum.

RECENT BUCK NAKED POLITICS POSTINGS

More Awesomeness: Congressman Alan Grayson Grills the Citigroup CEO on "The Worst Deal Since Manhattan Was Sold for $24 in Trinkets"

Wonkette: Texas Gov Writes Whiny Letter Begging for Stimulus Welfare He Doesn't Think Anyone Should Get

Whistleblower Harry Markopolos on Bernie Madoff and SEC

Report Details how Lobbyists & Politicians Caused our Nation's Financial Meltdown

Judiciary Committee Secures Rove's and Miers' Testimony

Alan Grayson, the Most Awesome Guy in Congress, Apologizes to Limbaugh

"You Can Fool Some of the People All of the Time" Part 2: Rush Limbaugh, the Official Voice of the GOP