Bush's Brain, or Lack Thereof

They call Karl Rove "Bush's Brain," but that's too kind. For one, Bush already has a brain in his head. It's just small and mushy from years of hard-living and substance abuse. And, let's be honest, it probably wasn't terrificaly large to begin with. Look at Jeb.

And the name likewise implies that Rove is some sort of mad genius, a behind the scenes Svengali figure who's got the whole system nailed. This is really too kind. Sure, Rove's kind of clever, in a sneaky, underhanded way, but he's hardly the Emperor Palpatine-like figure the press makes him out to be, planning his moves 5 steps ahead of everyone else like some sort of political Bobby Fischer.

Let me put it this way. Imagine when you go to the bar and everyone decides to play darts. Even if you're good at darts, you're not playing your best game at the bar - you're getting drunk, trying to talk to girls (or guys, as the case may be), deciding whether you'd prefer "Evenflow" or "Porch" on the jukebox, and so on. Except for that one friend who always takes the competition angle too seriously. That guy probably wins every time, because while everyone else is goofing off and having a good time, he's planning a strategy and working on his wrist movements.

Okay, Karl Rove is that guy. He's a cheater, and he's lame, and he'll do anything to win, and he's been studying demographics statistics since he was 16 for lack of anything better to do. Hey, maybe that's a low blow, but look at the guy.



You know he wasn't getting any action in high school. It would be like going out with Winnie the Pooh, except instead of searching the 100 Acre Wood for honey pots, you're organizing Voter Suppression Drives in Mobile, Alabama.

At this point, it's pretty obvious what Rove has done. Divide the country on social issues, and then convince the insane half to back his guy no matter what he actually does. That's it. Simple as that. Cause, you know, God hates fags and their attempts to intermarry.

This week, all those of us to detest Karl Rove has been treated to a rather delightful news break. It seems Karl, after nearly two years of denials, has finally been identified as the Valerie Plame leak.

A paragraph to bring you up to speed: Valerie Plame was a CIA agent investigating WMD's (an important topic, no?) Her husband was a former ambassador named Joseph Wilson. Wilson was sent on behalf of the CIA to do some research in Africa, as to the possibility of Iraq importing yellowcake uranium (for use in WMD's) from Nigeria.

Wilson came back and said that there was no interest from Iraq in this uranium. That went against Rove and Bush's plan to bomb the living fuck out of Iraq. So, they tried to discredit him by leaking to the conservative press the fact that Wilson's wife was a CIA agent and that she got him the job.

I guess they thought it would be embarrassing for Wilson to have everyone know that his wife got him a job. What's more embarrassing is that Karl Rove thinks scoring a cheap point off of a political foe was more important than protecting the identity of an undercover CIA agent. And what's even more embarrassing was that he was doing this as retribution for Wilson filing a 100% truthful report that went against Rove's plans to fund an illegal war.

I mean, man, that's evil. That's just pure unadulterated evil. Karl Rove is motivated by a strong lust for wealth and power and nothing else. Nothing. Most of us are motivated by a variety of factors, one of which is a lust for wealth and power. But Rove's missing all those other parts, like concern for his fellow man, or a desire to help those less fortunate, or, you know, sanity.

I think the White House assumed it could slither out of this fiasco no problem, as they always do when Democrats start telling Americans about the horrible stuff they do. It's always the same. It seems like this news may actually remain in the public eye for more than 24 hours this time, though, which has got to be of some concern to the Bushies.

My friend Matt called me this morning and stated unequivocally that Bush would have no choice but to fire Rove. He did, after all, promise to fire whomever was responsible for leaking the identity of Valerie Plame to the press way back in 2003. So now that we know it was Rove, Matt theorized, Bush has to fire him. It can't be spun.

Isn't he sweet? I wish I could be so optimistic. There problably was a time in America where, when the country was presented with convincing proof of a man's guilt, that he might be fired from a presidential administration. But those days are long gone. I fear the Republicans' strangehold on the American media dialogue will prevent anything from going to far.

Suffice it to say, I can't see Rove actually going down for this. He'll blame some underling or just continue to deny it in the face of all available evidence. I mean, Andrew Sullivan's still arguing on his blog that there was a connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda! If he can still try to make that case stick, anything's possible.

But the best thing about this whole case? The press conference with Mouth of Sauron Scott McClellan the other day. Here's a complete transcript! Thanks, White House.Gov! Or you can check out the handily abbreviated version in Salon, that highlights the truly insane and egregious parts.

Scott's kind of been put in a corner now. For two years, he's been freely commenting on the Valerie Plame leak. He's said things like, "Karl Rove wasn't the leak," and "whoever is the leak will be fired" and so forth. Now that we all know the leak was Karl Rove (and, yes, we all know...they found dated e-mails from reporter Matt Cooper telling his editor he'd spoken with Karl Rove and confirmed his information that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent...), Scott obviously has nothing to say on the issue.

But he can't very well just say that he won't comment on the investigation, because he's been commenting for two years!

Q. At the very least, though, Scott, could you say whether or not you stand by your statement --

MR. McCLELLAN: John, I'll come back to you if I can.

Q. -- of September 29th, 2003, that it is simply not true that Karl Rove disclosed the identify of a CIA operative? Can you stand by that statement?

MR. McCLELLAN: John, I look forward to talking about this at some point, but it's not the appropriate time to talk about those questions while the investigation is continuing.

Oh, Scott, Scott...You can't speak about a quote of yours from 2003 because it concerns an ongoing investigation? For that statement to make sense, I think you'd have to invent a device capable of time travel.

[UPDATE: It's less than one hour after I initially published this article, and I have just seen the video confirming how the RNC and Rove plan to spin this latest revelation. Republican mouthpiece and noted complete moron John Gibson, of Fox News, said today on TV that Rove is a hero for revealing the identity of an undercover CIA operative.

Yes, a hero! Watch the video here.

See if you can follow Gibson's tortured non-logic.

• The trip to Niger was important in determining the level of Hussein's commitment to WMD
• Plame selected her husband Joseph Wilson to go write up a report
• Plame knew that Wilson opposed the war
• Therefore Plame knew that Wilson would deny an Iraqi connection, in order to avoid a war
• Therefore Plame is guilty of endangering national security
• Therefore Rove was correct to out Plame as an operative, to prevent her from further undermining America's overseas interests

Good luck selling that one in the sticks, John. It's so convoluted, I can barely follow it, and I just typed up a summary.

Anyway, I won the argument with Matt. He says it was unspinnable, and that sure looks like spin to me. And we only had that conversation this morning. They work fast, people.]