July 20, 2005
-- by Gary Boatwright
OK. Everybody can put their hands down now. That was a rhetorical question prompted by a query from the razor sharp Niewart at Orcinus, Eliminationism from the top:
The Plame affair, it seems, really has Republicans snarling, their usual response when backed into a corner.
You can tell that because now the eliminationist talk is coming from the Bush White House's own mouthpiece -- namely, Rep. Peter King, who's been selected as the House point man for defending Karl Rove.
And of course we need to keep in mind the Seeing the Forest Rule. When Republicans accuse, they are really describing their own tactics.
King was on MSNBC's Joe Scarborough show the other night and, according to the MSNBC transcript, had this to say:
And Joe Wilson has no right to complain. And I think people like Tim Russert and the others, who gave this guy such a free ride and all the media, they're the ones to be shot, not Karl Rove.
From the Department Of The Obvious: Not a single Democrat has suggested that Karl Rove should be shot. As far as I know, we are perfectly willing to settle for Karl being frog stepped out of the White House in cuffs. That won't stop hacks like Peter King and Rush from accusing Democrats of resorting to their Rove patented gutter politics:
I haven't seen the tape of the show, but the quote is enjoying an odd half-life on the radio, thanks to Rush Limbaugh, who alters it slightly to "ought to be shot", and then chimes in inimitably: "That's Peter King, who's right on the money."
Just wondering: Have any Democrats in Congress -- or Joe Wilson, for that matter -- suggested that Karl Rove be shot?
Neiwert answers his rhetorical question with the obvious:
Ah, I didn't think so.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)