Karl Rove sums up Obama's facade

[youandme]

May not like the man (Rove) but he summed up Obama's facade leaving out the other anti-American antics he's pulled (wife not included)

link: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/16/rove-slams-obama-over-bitter-comments-flag-pin/#more-7169

Rove slams Obama over 'bitter' comments, flag pin
Posted: 08:32 PM ET

From CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney

 
Rove addressed the NRA Convention Friday.
(CNN) — Karl Rove launched a wide-ranging attack on Barack Obama during a speech at the National Rifle Association Convention Friday, blasting him for his recent comments calling some small town American's "bitter," and suggesting the Illinois senator is an effete politician unable to connect with a broad swath of Americans.

The comments, received enthusiastically by the large crowd in Louisville, Kentucky, are a likely sign Obama's words at a San Francisco fundraiser last month may be a major Republican talking-point should he capture the Democratic Party's nomination.

“You know in the age of Barack Obama I don’t know exactly what to call you, because after all, as he said, because we’re bitter and economically anxious, we ‘cling to our guns and we cling to our faith," Rove told the crowd to laughter and cheers.

"You probably didn't know you hunted out of economic anxiety, and if gas was a $1.50 a gallon, you probably wouldn't be hunting," he continued. “You probably thought you hunted because you enjoyed the outdoors and companionship with family and friends.”

Rove, largely credited with orchestrating campaign strategies that painted former Democratic nominees Al Gore and John Kerry as out of touch with small town Americans, also cited Obama's recent primary losses in Pennsylvania and West Virginia as evidence a large demographic is unwilling to vote for the presumptive Democratic nominee.

"We here have news for Barack Obama," Rove said. "The values of those people you diminished are the values of America. And those people don't like getting patronized, or viewed as an alien species, by a fellow who pretends to embody a new kind of politics, and especially by someone who wants to be president not of red states or blue states, but the United States."

Rove, who does not have an official role within John McCain's presidential campaign or at the Republican National Committee, also took Obama to task for recently wearing a flag pin.


"It is distracting to say in a Democratic primary when you are trying to cozy up to Moveon.org that an American flag on your lapel is a quote 'substitute' for true patriotism," Rove said. "Belittling all those who care to wear our country's flag, calling them false patriots, and then when you focus on the general election, like this week, start to showing up with an American flag on your lapel again. That's distracting."

Obama was asked last October why he normally does not wear a flag pin on his lapel, as many politicians do. The Illinois senator said then he wore one shortly after 9/11, but later decided to show his patriotism in other ways.

"After a while, you start noticing people wearing the lapel pin but not acting very patriotic,” he said then. “My attitude is that I'm less concerned with what you're wearing on your lapel than what's in your heart. You show your patriotism by how you treat your fellow Americans, especially those ones who serve."

[TerminalPower]

Rove is awesome.  HE is now a contributor on Fox News.

[240 is Back]

Rove is awesome.  HE is now a contributor on Fox News.

he also works for the mccain campaign.  an observant reporter pointed out that the state-by-state comparisons that the mccain team was showing them, said "prepared by Karl Rove & Associates" at the top.

[TerminalPower]

he also works for the mccain campaign.  an observant reporter pointed out that the state-by-state comparisons that the mccain team was showing them, said "prepared by Karl Rove & Associates" at the top.

They should disclose that information anytime he is on TV, imho.  I didn't know he was working for McCain. 

[Hedgehog]

"It is distracting to say in a Democratic primary when you are trying to cozy up to Moveon.org that an American flag on your lapel is a quote 'substitute' for true patriotism," Rove said. "Belittling all those who care to wear our country's flag, calling them false patriots, and then when you focus on the general election, like this week, start to showing up with an American flag on your lapel again. That's distracting."

Karl Rove talking about being true and false.







Now I've seen everything.

[Bindare_Dundat]

Are we talkling about lapel pins, again?! Weak.

[Hugo Chavez]

Rove is awesome.  HE is now a contributor on Fox News.

yaaaa... Karl Rove... mmmmm... what a gem...

[MidniteRambo]

yaaaa... Karl Rove... mmmmm... what a gem...

We are going to give "Hugo" a little lesson in logic (a course I aced by the way). Okay, "Hugo" you have beautifully illustrated the following fallacy.  Read and learn.

www.skeptics.org.uk/article.php?dir=articles&article=Seven_fallacies_of_thought_and_reason.php

 "Argumentum Ad-hominem: Shoot the messenger fallacy.

This is a common logical fallacy. Argumentum ad hominem basically means that the argument becomes directed towards the individual as opposed towards the crucial issues being discussed. It is succinctly described as, attack the messenger not the message (hence – shoot the messenger). It is often seen in both politics and pseudoscience. Its aim is to undermine the position of ones opponent, by undermining the opponent personally (in a manner that is actually completely irrelevant to the debate). The hope here is that if one can discredit the individual, this by default, discredits his / her argument. It does not. The fallacy here relates to the irrelevance of the attack. It is not viable to argue against a position and then justify that argument by criticising the individual who holds it.  . . . Any claim or theory should not be rejected solely on the basis of who holds it."


Except, maybe, Hugo . . .

[OzmO]

We are going to give "Hugo" a little lesson in logic (a course I aced by the way). Okay, "Hugo" you have beautifully illustrated the following fallacy.  Read and learn.

www.skeptics.org.uk/article.php?dir=articles&article=Seven_fallacies_of_thought_and_reason.php

 "Argumentum Ad-hominem: Shoot the messenger fallacy.

This is a common logical fallacy. Argumentum ad hominem basically means that the argument becomes directed towards the individual as opposed towards the crucial issues being discussed. It is succinctly described as, attack the messenger not the message (hence – shoot the messenger). It is often seen in both politics and pseudoscience. Its aim is to undermine the position of ones opponent, by undermining the opponent personally (in a manner that is actually completely irrelevant to the debate). The hope here is that if one can discredit the individual, this by default, discredits his / her argument. It does not. The fallacy here relates to the irrelevance of the attack. It is not viable to argue against a position and then justify that argument by criticising the individual who holds it.  . . . Any claim or theory should not be rejected solely on the basis of who holds it."


Except, maybe, Hugo . . .

Good stuff Rambo, but does that apply to Gore and Global warming too?   

[MidniteRambo]

Good stuff Rambo, but does that apply to Gore and Global warming too?   

Ahhhh . . . am I being a hypocrite?  Let me ponder . . . .

[OzmO]

Ahhhh . . . am I being a hypocrite?  Let me ponder . . . .

I'm not accusing you of that.  Please don;t miss understand,  I was being sarcastic, becuase Gore received major attacks on his character regarding Global warming.

[MidniteRambo]

I'm not accusing you of that.  Please don;t miss understand,  I was being sarcastic, becuase Gore received major attacks on his character regarding Global warming.

No, I didn't perceive it as an accusation, I took it an an intellectual challenge.  Am I guilty of the very same fallacy I accuse "Hugo" of  . . .  I am capable of self examination.

[War-Horse]

Rove is quite possibly the ugliest man in America.    poetic justice i think.

BTW he might serve jail time if he refuses subpoenas for much longer.....bush/cheney next.

[Dos Equis]

Rove is quite possibly the ugliest man in America.    poetic justice i think.

This guy gives him a run for his money:

[240 is Back]

Rove is quite possibly the ugliest man in America.    poetic justice i think.

BTW he might serve jail time if he refuses subpoenas for much longer.....bush/cheney next.

No way.  All bush has to do is pardon cheney for everything, then resign, and let pres. cheney pardon him

anyway, as crooked as they might have been, the presidency is a symbol of america and a big messy trial would hurt us in the world's eyes.  Better to get a new admin in 2009, who keeps their nose clean and let this sad, sick chapter fade into history.

[Decker]

The republican elite always play the same cards time after time.

Instead buying the "liberal elite" con job, read about how the republican masters play the average american for the fool.

The effete liberal elite v. the plain talking regular conservative guy.

For more than thirty-five years, American politics has followed a populist pattern as predictable as a Punch and Judy show and as conducive to enlightened statesmanship as the cycles of a noisy washing machine. The antagonists of this familiar melodrama are instantly recognizable: the average American, humble, long-suffering, working hard, and paying his taxes; and the liberal elite, the know-it-alls of Manhattan and Malibu, sipping their lattes as they lord it over the peasantry with their fancy college degrees and their friends in the judiciary.

Conservatives generally regard class as an unacceptable topic when the subject is economics—trade, deregulation, shifting the tax burden, expressing worshipful awe for the microchip, etc. But define politics as culture, and class instantly becomes for them the very blood and bone of public discourse. Indeed, from George Wallace to George W. Bush, a class-based backlash against the perceived arrogance of liberalism has been one of their most powerful weapons. Workerist in its rhetoric but royalist in its economic effects, this backlash is in no way embarrassed by its contradictions. It understands itself as an uprising of the little people even when its leaders, in control of all three branches of government, cut taxes on stock dividends and turn the screws on the bankrupt. It mobilizes angry voters by the millions, despite the patent unwinnability of many of its crusades. And from the busing riots of the Seventies to the culture wars of our own time, the backlash has been ignored, downplayed, or misunderstood by liberals.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17982

Stop making the republicans con job so effective.

[shootfighter1]

"I like when we talk about shifting the tax burden" this election.  The tax burden is already shifted to the upper middle class and upper class Americans.  We have a graduated tax system!  We're just asking if we want it to get more unfair than it already is!  (ie, a vote for Obama).

If we could force republicans like Bush & Cheney to stop giving big companies subsidies, the republicans would have a lot more ground to stand on.  Its their support of big business that most Americans don't like.  But for Christ sakes, stop punishing the acheivement of the upper middle class!

[War-Horse]

"I like when we talk about shifting the tax burden" this election.  The tax burden is already shifted to the upper middle class and upper class Americans.  We have a graduated tax system!  We're just asking if we want it to get more unfair than it already is!  (ie, a vote for Obama).

If we could force republicans like Bush & Cheney to stop giving big companies subsidies, the republicans would have a lot more ground to stand on.  Its their support of big business that most Americans don't like.  But for Christ sakes, stop punishing the acheivement of the upper middle class!

You see my friend...we are the next to go.  The writing is on the wall, that you will either be a "Have" or a "Have-not"

[Decker]

"I like when we talk about shifting the tax burden" this election.  The tax burden is already shifted to the upper middle class and upper class Americans.  We have a graduated tax system!  We're just asking if we want it to get more unfair than it already is!  (ie, a vote for Obama).

If we could force republicans like Bush & Cheney to stop giving big companies subsidies, the republicans would have a lot more ground to stand on.  Its their support of big business that most Americans don't like.  But for Christ sakes, stop punishing the acheivement of the upper middle class!

Right!  Let's have the poor pay more taxes!

[Dos Equis]

Right!  Let's have the poor pay more taxes!

Much of the "poor" don't pay income taxes. 

[Decker]

Much of the "poor" don't pay income taxes. 

How do know you what taxes poor people pay?

[shootfighter1]

The 'poor' pay a much lower % of taxes Decker, you know that.  Its not taxes that are a problem for poor people.

When small business and upper middle class earners follow gov. rules, they get crushed by the higher % of taxes.  Its subsidies for the large companies that are a problem IMO.  I understand the democrats trying to shift some of the $ but they are targeting people they shouldn't.  They need to look at the large companies, CEOs, kickbacks, awarding contracts preferentially, etc

The people that have worked hard & acheive do not need to be punished.

[Decker]

The 'poor' pay a much lower % of taxes Decker, you know that.  Its not taxes that are a problem for poor people.

When small business and upper middle class earners follow gov. rules, they get crushed by the higher % of taxes.  Its subsidies for the large companies that are a problem IMO.  I understand the democrats trying to shift some of the $ but they are targeting people they shouldn't.  They need to look at the large companies, CEOs, kickbacks, awarding contracts preferentially, etc

The people that have worked hard & acheive do not need to be punished.

Income tax is graded to income earned. 

Everyone pays the same exact tax rate at the same income grade.

The higher the income grade, the more tax paid on that income earned.

Income taxes are based on the person's ability to pay the tax. 

The poor pay most of their taxes in payroll taxes which are flat taxes.  The non-medicare portion of those taxes is limited to the first $105,000 earned.  It's capped.

Plutocrats make most of their money in capital gains which are taxed at a 25 or 15% clip.  The income they earn is fairly incidental.

Trust me, the people whose income has grown at a rate 300 times that of the average worker is not being punished.  Tax exemptions, deferments, credits, etc are tools of tax avoidance and the rich know that game well.

[shootfighter1]

Yes, correct its graduated based upon $ earned.  I knew you were knowledgeable.

I argue that many upper middle class earners are unfairly affected by the high rate of taxes, which will get worse under Obama.  Capital gains taxes only affect people who own companies or stock.  Income is still taxed very high.  Capital gains will also go up with Obama.  Its an aweful situation IMO that penalyses people who are taking risks, starting companies, being productive, plus the gov will get less people taking business start-up chances and less invest in the market, which drives our economy.  Cut spending!!!

The people who's income has grown 300% are not upper middle class.  They are the elite.  CEOs, etc.
Obama's policies will hurt regular productive Americans.

[Decker]

Yes, correct its graduated based upon $ earned.  I knew you were knowledgeable.

I argue that many upper middle class earners are unfairly affected by the high rate of taxes, which will get worse under Obama.  Capital gains taxes only affect people who own companies or stock.  Income is still taxed very high.  Capital gains will also go up with Obama.  Its an aweful situation IMO that penalyses people who are taking risks, starting companies, being productive, plus the gov will get less people taking business start-up chances and less invest in the market, which drives our economy.  Cut spending!!!

The people who's income has grown 300% are not upper middle class.  They are the elite.  CEOs, etc.
Obama's policies will hurt regular productive Americans.

I would like to cut spending as well but that's the Congress's department.  And that'll never happen as long as politicians cry about quitting the senate if the funding is cut for a bridge built to nowhere.

I see nothing wrong with middle class tax relief and a modest increase on the top marginal tax rate of earners making %330,000+ per year.  In fact, I would add a new bracket for those earning million a year and attach the tax increase to those highrollers.

The US cannot afford to not raise taxes.  Thanks to Bush's irresponsible tax cut and ludicrous spending, we have a deficit that has turned our 5 trillion dollar debt amassed over the century to a 9 trillion dollar debt amassed over his presidency.

We have to pay some of our bills b/c the interest alone on the debt is killing us.