Comments on: Who’s Getting Conned?

by: The Mahablog » Karl Quits

Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:02:00 +0000

[…] Seriously, it’s seemed to me for some time that Rove was in over his head. I wrote in November 2005 – What about Karl Rove, who has been trying to build a permanent Republican majority? Although Rove is supposed to be some kind of all-seeing evil genius, I wonder sometimes if he isn’t more of an idiot savant. He’s brilliant at doing one thing–building political power through sheer nastiness. He may not be wise enough to see the seeds of destruction he has planted. […]

by: The Mahablog » Rove Over

Sun, 12 Nov 2006 20:06:12 +0000

[…] I’ll believe it when I see it. Karl still whispers in Bush’s ear, and I don’t believe Karl has learned much from the thumpin’. I wrote a whole year ago – What about Karl Rove, who has been trying to build a permanent Republican majority? Although Rove is supposed to be some kind of all-seeing evil genius, I wonder sometimes if he isn’t more of an idiot savant. He’s brilliant at doing one thing–building political power through sheer nastiness. He may not be wise enough to see the seeds of destruction he has planted. […]

by: Jack K.

Fri, 18 Nov 2005 18:25:00 +0000

…someday I hope the left will get over the notion that Karl Rove is some sort of evil political genius. He is nothing of the sort, and even “idiot savant” may be a little too generous. Karl Rove is simply willing to engage in the sort of dirty political gutter-fighting that most folks don’t have the decency or audacity to try. He could probably be matched by a couple of middle-schoolers juiced up on a couple too many bottles of Mountain Dew, if a person were willing to play with that sort of dangerous energy…

by: Anonymous

Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:09:00 +0000

They want to win the game and to them it is just the game and winning matters. Without Roe they’ll have the gay button to push. they don’t care what the issue is as long as they can push the button and get the wacko vote.

by: merciless

Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:55:18 +0000

You got it, Maha; more suffering for children, more suffering for women.

It will, however, come as a big shock to the guys when they figure out that they can’t just slip the girlfriend/mistress a few hundred bucks and get the “problem” taken care of.

My suggestion is that, if state and federal legislation is passed that outlaws abortion, a slew of accompanying legislation should be passed that protects and empowers these new mothers, including mandatory paternity testing and child support (with results that can be made public at the woman’s choosing), heavy emphasis on adoption (at the woman’s choosing), and more state-run orphanages.

The reason abortion is a woman’s issue is because the woman is the only member of the team that gets caught. We should level the playing field.

by: Swami

Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:25:08 +0000

George W. Bush is the one making nominations, and he doesn’t care about consequences. He just cares about power.

That’s exactly right…Bush’s sincerity to protect life is only political, just like his “we weep and we mourn” affront to the victims of his war president fantasy. When your delusional consequences don’t exist. We’ve seen his true being with his mocking of Carla Faye Tucker’s pleas for mercy…That’s who he is.