Is Karl Rove half as smart as people here sometimes think ?

[kentuck]

I doubt it. He is an opportunist that knows how to take political advantage of opportunites that come up. Just because the Democrats don't take advantage of opportunities does not mean Karl Rove is a genius - it means he is an opportunist. He is no Houdini - he is no magician.

At this moment, there is so much heat on his ass, he has to sit on ice just to keep his roids under control. He is scared shitless. He has no plan. He hopes an opportunity will come up that he can take advantage of - he will be looking for that. But, right now, the poor sucker is worried, in my opinion.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

1. As the criminal mind goes, he's brilliant

[goclark]

20. Criminal mind with Poppy power and $$ backing him up

Hard to be too dumb when so many will cover for you, open doors, fear you.

There are a lot of criminal minds walking around but they have no power and money.

[LittleClarkie]

2. I think it would be easy to appear smart

if you have no morals and are willing to do anything. What he does could be done by anyone with a devious bent, but you'd have to cut out their souls first.

I do think that we attribute more conniving to him than he actually does, but it's sort of a ripple effect. You start to see possibilities everywhere.

How can he talk about them being the party of moral values. I have no idea. Make me want to throw up when I see him.

[KansDem]

3. A large part of his success is the manipulation of a complacent media

Corporate Media were only too happy to accommodate his requests to skew information and lie.

[sendero]

4. He's like oh so many "famous"

... Americans who have parlayed their dysfunctions and/or sociopathic tendencies to a damn good living.

The same people who think Rove is some kind of genius probably think Bill Gates is some kind of technical wizard. Neither is close to the truth.

[jobycom]

5. Oh yeah, he's smarter than people here think, even

Those who know him often claim he's the smartest person they know. He can talk about a wide variety of subjects with a strong degree of authority.

I don't know why you think he's sweating now, or worried. He's neither. He's in control. The memo story is old news, and on the off chance that he gets indicted by the investigation, he's no doubt got plans to handle that.

If we want him beat, we've got to beat him.

As for him being an opportunist, of course he is, but that doesn't mean he's not a master strategist, too.

If it weren't for his amorality, he'd be an impressive person. His biggest intellectual weakness, though, seems to be that after a point he stops processing information, so he never changes his mind or admits he's wrong. That could create a hubris we could play on, but so far we haven't been able to.

[kentuck]

7. If he is so smart, then why....

would he give secret information to a green reporter like Cooper, who had only been on the job one week ??

[jobycom]

11. Hubris. Mistake. Who knows? Even smart people

make stupid mistakes. Ask Clinton.

[sandnsea]

18. That's how you manipulate people

Do them a HUGE favor, steer them from making a tragic mistake in their brand new job. Feed their ego at the same time, with "double super secret background" info. The gratitude would be enormous, and tough for a human to ever believe they're being played down the road.

[SharonAnn]

15. He talks "with a strong degree of authority"? The only thing he's

accomplished is to debase American Politics faster than anyone before hime. That's the only thing he can speak on "with authority". He has no other credentials. None. He's accomplished nothing else. He didn't even graduate from college.

As for the rest of it, he's just pompous and partly informed on a lot of subjects.

Heck, Rush Limbaugh "speaks with authority" if you mean a certain, pompous tone of voice is used.

[jobycom]

19. No, big difference between him and Rush

Rush is average intelligence, at best. He knows how to manipulate a discussion to sound like he knows what he's talking about. If you push him, he changes the subject.

Rove is a big fan of history, for instance. He can talk about Hitler, he can take about McKinley and the Spanish American War. He's knowledgeable about things he has learned. He's the type who finds something he likes, and learns about it in depth.

What he lacks is a comprehensive understanding, which is where a lack of college hurts him. He can tell you all about McKinley, but probably not give you a good idea of the Reconstruction era and how it affected McKinley-era politics. His knowledge is spotty. But on subjects he has learned about, he has a great deal of knowledge.

As for what he's accomplished, that's a different story. He has accomplished a great deal, though. He's controlled national politics and elevated the stupidest world leader since the inbred days of the Hapsburg dynasty. He's controlled the media through on scandal after another. He's made Bush into something Bush would never become on his own. There's a difference between saying someone has not accomplished anything and saying that you have no respect for what they've accomplished. Rove's priorities and values are horrible, and he has no understanding of right and wrong. He's pure evil. But if you underestimate him, you've empowered him.

[C_U_L8R]

6. Bold Yes Smart No

I don't give him credit for being smart.... bold yes or rather... brazen.
Does a smart person decieve people? Does a smart person manipulate people?
No.. that's not a smart person... that's a corrupt person. A criminal person.
KKKarl Rove may be a GOOD CRIMINAL...
but that does not in any way make him a very smart man.

[July]

25. Exactly. Lacking moral restraints, he does what no-one else will do.

Others, having moral restraints, dare not respond in kind. Some have just a few moral restraints, but there are lines beyond which they won't go. Rove has NO restraints and will do ANYTHING to win, since winning is his only goal. That's the sum total of his "genius."

His blunders get little attention because he has had great success and holds great power.

[charlyvi]

8. He tried to bring a "don't mess with Texas"

attitude to the White House. Anyone worth half their salt knows, once you reach the WH, politics should end. But instead of governance, he steered this administration toward power. All politics, no policy. Very high school, very sad.

[TwilightZone]

9. Actually, he's smarter than many on DU think.

He managed to get a complete idiot installed as president. Twice.

You can claim theft, stolen votes, etc., (and you'd be correct, in part), but Bush should have never been anywhere close enough in either election to allow it to be stolen. The fact that he was close enough is in significant part thanks to Rove.

Do not underestimate him. Bush isn't the only master of low expectations.

[Peace Patriot]

10. I think his reputation is way overblown.

How hard is it to feed "talking points" to a lapdog media?

How hard is it to invent lines to to make stolen elections seem like real elections? (f.i., it was their "invisible" get out the vote campaign) (har, har).

He has a certain dexterity at P.R., given the craven shallowness that US journalism has become.

But, really, how many people has he convinced? 42% and falling.

Iraq: 58% of Americans opposed the war BEFORE the invasion. (I'll never forget that stat.) I think it's up to about 80% today.

Torture: 63% of Americans oppose torture UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.

Social Security: Approx. 60% of Americans don't trust Bush on it.

Deficit: About 90% against Bush's deficit (both right and left).

Name the issue. 60% to 70% of Americans oppose Bush policy.

That's how successful Rove has been with all his spinmeistering. And I think that's about how many votes Bush got in 2004--40-45%.

(Dems blew Repubs away in new voter registration in 2004, nearly 60/40. That, and a whole lot of other election evidence, points to a Kerry win by a margin of about 10%.)

Opportunistic. Unscrupulous. But not all that smart. I think other political figures fear him because they're all a bit dirty (some very dirty) and they know he is without conscience. They know that, if he doesn't have a secret dossier on them, he will invent one--and now has boffo capability for black ops.

And I go back to my original line of questions: How hard is it to create P.R. with Diebold and ES&S on your side (Bushite companies counting all the votes with secret, proprietary software)? I mean, you'd have weeks, months, to come up your "Bush's mandate" paragraph.

I think that's why it all sounds so empty. Everything the Bushites say lacks conviction, to my ear. They are writing lines for foregone conclusions--not to debate or win arguments, or convince anybody, but to "rubber stamp" things they know will happen. It's like their lines are written months in advance, and programmed in.

It's hard, hard work to run a real political campaign, and to be a real politician, and really get in there and argue and debate, never knowing how it's going to go. But how hard is it to write propaganda? To arrange highly managed and structured photo ops? To keep everybody speaking the same three and four word sentences, over and over?

How hard is it to run a propaganda campaign with billions and billions of Bush/Saudi money behind you, and whole news conglomerates slathering at their war profits?

I think Karl Rove is a lazy butt. And not at all convincing.

[DivinBreuvage]

12. It's the "Hitler Phenomenon" and is not all that uncommon historically

It isn't all that difficult for brilliant, ruthless people with powerful resources to take advantage of weak and divided enemies. They have been doing it since the days of the Mespotamian kings. One could just as easily call this the "Julius Caesar Phenomenon" or the "Napoleon Phenomenon" or the "Robert E. Lee Phenomenon". But I'll use Hitler as the example, since that's the one everyone always wants to hear about.

Despite having a smaller army than the British or French, Hitler sensed the political disarray and lack of resolve in their governments and took advantage of this to reoccupy the Rhineland, annex Austria, and force the cession of the Sudetenland and then the absorption of "Rump Czechoslovakia".

Hitler himself later admitted that if the French had had the moxie to slap him down when he went into the Rhineland -- which they could easliy have done -- it would have been the end of his political career. But they didn't do it, and they continued not to do it, so he became stronger and won a greater aura of invincibility for himself with each victory while at the same time making his enemies look even more feeble and incompetent.

German agression and speed secured the initiative and all his hapless enemies could do was react, usually too late and in too ineffective a fashion. By the time France fell many people had come to despair and believe that Hitler just couldn't be beaten. And indeed some historians have worked out "alternative scenarios" where this might have proven to be true.

But Hitler ended up biting off more for Germany than it could chew, and it gradually became clear that Hitler really wasn't all that hot a player once he stopped holding the winning hand.

The usual (although, alas, not the inevitable) demise of the great conqueror is that he eventually becomes a little too cocky, a little too confident, a little too sure of his own invincibility, and makes a misstep (I actually think it goes deeper than that, that psychologically he either begins with or develops a pathology which eventually compels him to overreach). The spell of his invincibility is now broken. And depending on the egregiousness of his misstep, or the resolve, strength, and unity of his enemies, or his tendency to learn from mistakes or persist in them, his downfall can be envisioned.

Caesar overreached. Napoleon overreached. Robert E. Lee overreached. Hitler overreached. And it would now appear that perhaps Karl Rove has finally managed to overreach. Is he brilliant? Yes. Is he bold? Yes. Is he invincible? Not at all. His ruin is by no means yet certain, but at least his downfall can be envisioned; and my feeling is that, even if he does recover, he will never again be able to wield quite the same degree of power as hitherto.

[knight_of_the_star]

16. I wouldn't slot Lee in that category

The North DID believe him to be unbeatable, but he didn't lose because of overreaching due to cockiness. Based on his writings and what others said of him, he didn't let himself get too cocky, his problem was that his notion of warfare hadn't quite caught up with the idea of industrial warfare and Grant fully understood what was involved there. The only reason he seemed so invincible was because the North kept feeding him opposing commanders that he ate for breakfast who were, for the most part, horrible tacticians and poor strategists.

[DivinBreuvage]

21. You make some good points, but Lee's great overreach was Gettysburg

Some historians question his judgment in invading the North at all that summer, although it has to be said to his credit that he had valid reasons for doing so -- you're right that it wasn't an indulgence of megalomania. At any rate, once he got there he overreached big-time, particularly with Pickett's Charge, and the common consensus is that Lee had, in fact, simply grown overconfident in the ability of his men to trounce the Federals no matter what. Gettysburg inflicted irreperable damage on Lee's army and, although he was far from beaten, it still started him on the long downward slide from which he never managed to recover.

Curiously, though, Lee's bloody beating at Gettysburg did not dispel his aura of invincibility in the minds of many of the officers of the Army of the Potomac (much to Grant's subsequent irritation).

That being said, though, you are certainly right that Lee doesn't really fit very well with this group, except as a general example of bold genius that overreaches. He was not a megalomaniac or a self-aggrandizer, and as a human being he occupies a far higher plane than any of the other fellows I mentioned.

[Gemini Cat]

13. Smart enough to know how to manipulate

some the people a lot of the time. He knows how to work his crowd and he works that crowd well. As far as him being a political genius, he's not unless one considers a snake oil salesman a genius. There are always those that will buy the snake oil, thinking the snake oil is good for them. The snake oil will make them rich, cure their ills and/or give them an endless supply of whatever they want. It's part of our job to wake the masses up to the fact that snake oil doesn't work and will never work.

That's something a lot of them already know, but the message needs to be driven home, hard.

I think a lot of people are waking up to the fact that the snake oil they bought is worthless. I hope by '06 even more have.

[PurityOfEssence]

14. Not even. He's just amoral, and that passes as innovation.

Cheney and Rumsfeld are smart. Rove is reasonably intelligent, as is Card. Condi's mediocre, which is why she buttresses herself with advanced degrees and accomplishments.

Junior's a moron.

Very few civilized humans would stoop to the bludgeoning and nasty insinuations of Karl Rove. To the many of the weak, this passes as genius. To others, it's enjoyable abuse.

He's simply an asshole, and to the bulk of humanity who live within the covenant of society, he's extraordinary.

Bear this in mind: he is not in control of the present situation, and those who are in awe of him are just plain silly.

[July]

26. PofE, I tried to say the same above, but not as well.

Your assessment of the brains of this administration seems dead-on to me.

Where do you put Powell, Wolfowitz, Hughes?

[Writer]

17. In a word: no.

All others are merely objects to this man. Once a person discovers the gift of casting aside all empathy, he or she is possible of accomplishing anything.

[Imagevision]

22. Rove has Bush,the house and senate, he just got ahead of himself

and finally screwed up - 25 years with Bush?- sh*t, it was bound to happen sometime! Happiness is?...Rove being indicted! Even if Bush does the pardon thing, just to have his fat ass being wrung thru the justice system with his archetect name being mentioned daily on trial updates.

[skip fox]

23. Right now he and his lawyer may well be reviewing a draft of his pardon

before he retires later this afternoon.

[immoderate]

24. IMO smart people always do the right thing.

You can't credit Rove with that. His lack of foresight is catching up with him.

--IMM

[acmavm]

27. No, he simply has a low-rent thug's mentality. That means that there isn't

any act too low that he won't stoop to.

Now smart thugs know when they've gone too far. Obviously this is proof once and for all that KKKarl's legend for genius is crap.

[TroglodyteScholar]

28. I agree with you...he's got greed and savvy, but he's a borderline idiot

I'm a SOURCE not a TARGET

[warrens]

29. No, he's vicious and single-minded

He seemed to have good timing in planting distractions and allowing them to bloom at just the right time. Which may be the derivation of turdblossom. I think his talents failed him this time.

[Greeby]

30. ....................

When you're in the business of manipulating a bunch of knuckle-draggers, you're automatically the smartest guy in the equation ;)

[JaneQPublic]

31. Let's see, he blew off Jim Jeffords, he left his briefing on a park bench,

...he tried to get back at an administration critic by performing a treasonist act...

As Mama Gump would say, stupid is as stupid does!

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

32. NO. He's a thug. He has no conscience. He takes action based on that.

He knows how to get the fish in the net, but it's not because he's brilliant. He just knows where the fish are.

[Dr Fate]

33. He would be a paper tiger without a GOP owned media.

When the mass media repeats all your lies as facts, even a ruthless hack can be a "genius."