Let's hear MORE on Karl

For those of you, who aren't FROM around here, or haven't paid much attention to my letters to The Daily Nonpareil newspaper, I have recently asked one of my detractors to offer us some timely advice, or articulate his version of the Karl Rove story. This is a person who supposedly has a son, serving in the Marines in Iraq, and is completely against anything and everything done by the current administration in Iraq, and elsewhere on the globe.

He's the kind who cannot have an intellectually-honest discussion of facts, and who eschews the truth with the disdain of an eight-year-old child, on his second trip to the dentist for several fillings. He cannot help but attack his political adversaries, in a very personal way, and attempt to hold them responsible for everything he can utter, in the way of misdeeds, whether true or not.

As a hard-core member of the extreme left, he probably is obsessed with destroying Rove simply because they want to taint President Bush by taking out one of his closest confidants.

This guy, and his kind, are not completely focused on their fantasy that Vice President Cheney is the de facto president, . . . . sometimes, they think Karl wears that hat. To them, the destruction of Karl Rove is to neuter the Bush presidency. It's all about playing to their base.

As resolute, effective, and visionary as President Bush has been, during his time in office, the extreme left obviously still doesn't consider him the man in charge. Only a superhuman Machiavellian strategist could have engineered this bumbler's unlikely ascension to the presidency. Again, playing to the base.

And, anyone capable of facilitating a lightweight's rise to the highest office in the land must be not only brilliant, but sinister. For who but a sociopath would foist on the nation such a dangerous Neanderthal, hell-bent on reversing the advances of "progressivism"?

The extreme left's underestimation of Bush and irrational fear of Rove distort their perception and drive them into a mouth-foaming feeding frenzy to devour this mad political scientist. These misapprehensions also explain their jaded view of the baseless claims against Rove in the Valerie Plame matter.

But in considering the extreme left's possible motives in this manufactured scandal against Karl Rove, let's not forget the underlying subject matter driving the story: the extreme left's obsessive claim that Bush lied in maintaining that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling or trying to acquire WMD. Talk about revisionists! These guys conveniently forget that they were right there, calling for action, (playing to their base), during the months of late-September, October and November of 2001, but we're all supposed to ignore those facts, and concentrate on the rhetoric they're uttering these days, instead.

As editorial columnist, David Limbaugh pointed out, recently, "If there were such a thing as the personification and eventual death of an ideology, American liberalism would doubtlessly derive some degree of deathbed comfort from repeatedly chanting until it's final breath the 'Bush lied' mantra. What began as a monstrous deception would finally ripen into a full-blown delusion where the engineers of the lie came to believe it themselves into eternity."

But the extreme left is far from gone, and it's eager to retrofit any available snippets, no matter how intrinsically unreliable, onto its "Bush lied about Iraqi WMD" template. One such snippet was former-Ambassador Joseph Wilson's supposed revelation that President Bush lied when stating these notorious 16 words in his 2003 State-of-the-Union address: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Now, let's be completely clear, here, . . . . President Bush's statement was true when he made it, and it remains true today. The British made such a claim and reiterated it emphatically (with the Butler inquiry expressly validating President Bush's State-of-the-Union claim) even after the Bush-scavenging extreme left falsely accused him of inventing the story. So much for honoring truth, among those we send to Congress.

That Joseph Wilson claims he couldn't substantiate Britain's findings on his own trip to Niger in no way alters the irrefutable fact that the British made, and stood by, their claim. But as we now also know, analysts contradict Wilson's present version of the story, saying that his findings did more to support the Brits' conclusion than discredit it.

In their zeal to dispatch Karl Rove, the extreme left willfully ignores that Joseph Wilson not only lied about his findings but also about who sent him, denying his wife recommended him for the job, and sometimes, even alleging that Vice President Cheney, who didn't know him from any other bureaucrat, sent him.

The extreme left simply ignore that a bipartisan (that means it includes members of the extreme left party, the Democrats), Senate Intelligence Committee completely discredited Joseph Wilson in two essential particulars: 1.) It confirmed that Plame recommended her husband for the African junket, . . . and, . . . 2.) It found that certain forged documents Wilson bragged about debunking were not even discovered until some EIGHT MONTHS after his trip to Niger.

The extreme left also chooses to overlook Joseph Wilson's OBVIOUS political motivation to damage President Bush -- his admitted longtime support of John Forbes Kerry and his monetary contributions to Kerry's presidential campaign.

They would have us believe the flawlessly calculating genius, that man named Karl Rove is gratuitously vindictive. That he is foolish enough to risk conspicuously violating a federal criminal statute by revealing an undercover CIA operative to a presumptively hostile member of the mainstream media, . . . and all for the sake of petty revenge on the Joseph Wilson/Valarie Plame duo. I can only imagine the fabricated facts that will appear, when my adversary takes up the gauntlet. Are you out there, Bill?

It strains all intellectually-honest credulity far less to deduce that Mr. Karl Rove -- who readily provided information to authorities with no apparent fear of incriminating himself -- alluded to Joseph Wilson's wife's CIA status to refute his fraudulent implications against the Bush administration: that it sent former Ambassador Joseph Wilson to Niger.

It is uncontroverted that Karl Rove didn't know Plame's name, much less that she was a covert operative. He was alerting Time's Matt Cooper to the incestuous, conflict of interest-laden genesis of Wilson's assignment (through his wife) in defense of his boss, not to lash out at or imperil this star-struck couple, who didn't even respect Ms. Valarie Plame's undercover status themselves. It's also uncontroverted that the couple had appeared in Vanity Fair, PRIOR to all this hoopla.

If the extreme left didn't have so much invested in Joseph Wilson's fictions and obliterating Karl Rove and his boss, George W. Bush, they would abandon this non-starter against Rove and concede that the clear misfit in this overblown episode is the truly tainted and already thoroughly discredited Joseph Wilson, himself. I sure hope my adversarial nemesis takes up my challenge, as I cannot wait to point him to these archives for this very story, predicting his position, and debunking it, in advance. Looking forward to having heard from you in The Daily Rag, Bill! In the mean time, I'm still praying for your son.

God Bless,
Dan'L