Hell hath no greater fury

The Republicans have outfoxed the nattering nabobs of negativism again, and Hillary is not amused. (Jamie Rose photo for The New York Times)

"Dividing our country for political gain is an insult to all Americans and to the common memory we all carry with us from that day," spouted Democrat minority leader Senator Harry Reid yesterday in a "hastily arranged news conference" (What's not to love about hastily arranged news conferences? --ed] of senatorial top dogs, including the woman that would be leader of the pack -- all baying at Karl Rove's egregious wounding of their vanities in a speech at a Manhattan Republican fundraiser the night before. As we said in our previous post, Republicans do not apologize for speaking truth to impotence. In case you missed 'em, the red-meat sentences from Rove's speech, soon to appear at a Bartlett's Familiar Quotations near you:

Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers.

Recognizing the White House had foiled her best laid plans to fool all of the people all of the time, the junior senator from New York was beside herself, fiery eyes popping out of her sagging brow in seething rage. The Republicans were on a roll -- big time -- and there was nothing the old gal could do to stem the tide. Reports the Times:

The White House immediately rejected the Democrats' demands for an apology, offering a strenuous defense of Mr. Rove and suggesting that his statements had been taken out of context.

"Karl was simply pointing out the different philosophies and different approaches when it comes to winning the war on terrorism," said Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary.

"If people want to try to engage in personal attacks instead of defending their philosophy, that's their business," Mr. McClellan continued. "But it's important to point out the different approaches to this when it comes to winning the war on terrorism. That's all he was doing."

Too delicious for words. And this coda:

A ranking Republican official later argued that Democrats were blowing Mr. Rove's comments out of proportion, noting that his comments specifically pointed out the post-Sept. 11 positions of MoveOn.org, the filmmaker Michael Moore and former Gov. Howard Dean of Vermont, not Congressional Democrats or the party itself.

Andrew Sullivan claims the Pubs are trying to have it both ways:

[Rove] cannot both use the word liberal to describe everyone who is not a Republican and then, in other contexts, say he means it only for the hard left.

We beg to differ.  It was the Dems who tried to have it both ways last August when they seated flakoid Michael Moore with saint-in-residence Jimmy Carter at the Democratic National Convention. Andrew, we hardly knew ye.

Comments

[Patricia]

Yay Karl! I would have said "left" rather than "liberal" maybe, but it's about time someone called out the leopard by his spots!

I'll take the Dems seriously again when they live their philosophy: send a Kumbaya Squad of Durbin, Reid and Clinton, no weapons allowed, to Baghdad to dialogue and empathize with the terrorists and to promise to end the "occupation." I'm sure everything will go smashingly well!

[Rob A.]

Well done Sissy. Moore & Carter side by side in that VIP box at the convention will be hard to forget.

Though I guess A.S. has.

[goomp]

Has Hitlery lost it. Is she paranoid?

[andophiroxia]

That was a beautiful statement that Karl Rove said. In all honestly, I'm pretty sure it mirrors a LOT of American's thoughts about their treatment of the war on terror and on the terrorists themselves. I cannot believe that the support for this war is flagging, as I see support everywhere.