What the hell is wrong with these people?

Let us pause for a moment to consider … well, what should we consider? Indeed, amid the high-volume histrionics of Republicans lamenting the end of the world now that Senator Barack Obama has been elected president, complaining such as they do about things Obama has not even had an opportunity to do—pre-emptively defending themselves against any further loss of credibility, or something like that—one could easily forget that there is, in fact, another man currently serving as President of the United States. For his part, though, it is enough to say that even he seems, at times, to have forgotten that he is still president.

Nonetheless, some, including McClatchy’s Warren Strobel seem surprised at attempts by the Bush administration to revise history in order that the outgoing president will be treated more kindly in our memories. Wait a minute, that can’t be it. Who the hell is surprised at that? After all, the administration has been trying to revise history for most of its tenure.

Perhaps, then, it is the shameless severity of Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice’s remarks in an interview with C-SPAN’s Steve Scully on Monday that caught Strobel and his colleagues’ attention:

QUESTION: But as you know, even overseas, some of that sharpness, some of that derision has been aimed at George W. Bush. So despite all of the accomplishments that you just outlined, why is he, in some parts of the world, detested?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, the President had to do some very difficult things. Look, we came out of September 11th having to make a choice about how we were going to defend this country. Were we going to stay with a strategy that essentially considered terrorism a law enforcement problem, or were we going to go to war against them? And in some quarters, it wasn’t popular to talk in the terms and act in the manner in which we – at recognizing that we were at war with these people. And yes, we had to do some very tough things.

But you know, I think I’ve found over the years, particularly in these most recent years, that much of that rancor is gone. We have outstanding relations with our European allies now. When I go to a NATO meeting, it is about the incredible fact that NATO is fighting together in Afghanistan. Yes, we’d like to see more contribution here. Yes, there are national caveats there that are constraining. But imagine NATO fighting in Afghanistan as its core mission.

When I go to Europe, I no longer see any difference in the view that a stable and secure Iraq is in everybody’s interest, and that an Iraq that is democratic and in which Saddam Hussein, that brutal monster that caused three wars in the region, including dragging us in twice, that used – who used weapons of mass destruction against his own people, that an Iraq that is democratic and friendly to the West is better for the Middle East. I don’t see much disagreement about that.

I see no disagreement that Iran has to be prevented from getting a nuclear weapon. And on the Middle East, I’ve never seen greater harmony behind the Annapolis process as the basis on which a two-state solution will eventually come into being.

And so whatever we went through in the difficult days of 2003, 2004 it would be a mistake to think that we have problematic relations with our allies. We simply don’t. We may not agree on everything, but the transatlantic relationship is in very, very good shape. And you can even say that more so for our core relations in places like Japan and South Korea and India and, indeed, China.

Tell me, please: Do these people ever stop lying?

The problems of being a maverick

Speaking of McCain and lobbyists … oh, wait.

Anyway:

As chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, John McCain began hearings that helped bring down Jack Abramoff, the disgraced lobbyist who was the central figure in a political scandal that landed Mr. Abramoff in jail.

Now, as Mr. McCain releases the names of hundreds of “bundlers” — his top money collectors — one person who popped up is Juan Carlos Benitez, a lawyer and lobbyist whom Mr. Abramoff had championed for a Bush administration post.

Leslie Wayne, writing for The Caucus, reports that the House Committee on Government Reform issued a 2006 report that includes Mr. Benitez’s name. Jack Abramoff apparently wanted him appointed special counsel for immigration-related employment issues, which position—given to Benitez in 2001—allowed him to conduct investigations into allegations of unfair labor practices, including issues important to the scandalized lobbyist’s clients.

The Incredible Something: Rove on Obama on Clinton

Sometimes irony can be so thick, so concentrated, that it is poisonous.

Such is the case with recent comments by Republican (expletive) Karl Rove, who criticized Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama. CNN’s Alexander Mooney reports:

In an interview with CSPAN, the man behind President Bush’s two White House wins cited a recent debate in Philadelphia when Clinton was asked why more of her records as first lady have not yet been made public.

“He missed the opportunity,” Rove explained. “If he had stood there and said, ‘Senator, with all due respect, it is entirely within the power of you and your husband to immediately order the release of those documents. And your failure to do so reveals legitimate questions in the minds of the American people about what you might be hiding and it’s not going to be good for the Democratic party or for you if you allow those questions to persist,’ it would have been a moment, it would have been a big moment.”

This would be amusing save for the fact that this is Karl Rove.

First, Rove is seeking a two-for-one swipe, knocking Hillary Clinton in the same breath as he criticizes Obama for not being hard enough on her. This, I suppose, counts as good politics, but we ought not pretend that—regardless of whether we agree with the criticism—Rove is offering this in any spirit other than the advancement of the GOP.

Especially as this is Karl Rove. The idea that he is any position to criticize anyone regarding the release of historical records is laughable.

Of course, we will get much more of this kind of disingenuous analysis from Rove as he squares off with the Kos himself at Newsweek for the 2008 cycle.