It would be entirely unrealistic and patently false to say that Karl Rove wasn’t capable, deserving or intelligent, moreso than most in a competitive environment where the standards are sharp.
This sums things up well (KARL ROVE’S DEPARTURE MET WITH REVERANCE, VILIFICATION):
“He is a brilliant, funny, passionate advocate for the president and his policies. I know he’ll continue to play that role outside the administration. We’ll all miss him a great deal of course,” added former White House adviser Karen Hughes, an old school Bushie who served with Rove in the president’s inner circle.
“The president and our party have benefited from his commitment, along with his good counsel, his optimism and his sense of humor. He has served his country long and well,” said Republican National Committee Chairman Robert “Mike” Duncan. “Karl was and is, at heart, a policy person, someone who has strong beliefs and a deep commitment to making our nation better.”
Rove’s position on these issues (as that “policy person”) has been neglectful if not encouraging of the many woes that beset our nation as caused by that neglect. Rove’s jovial, nearly irreverant, declaration last year that he didn’t want his son picking tomoatoes (and, thus, he found illegal immigration beneficial) was the do-in end-all for Rove’s acceptability in the White House for many of us Conservative, Republican voters. And that was after the Nancy Miers immensely disappointing (but revealing) nomination for the Supreme Court by the Bush White House (Conservatives realized that we had a Liberal White House after voting for a Conservative one).
But to what extent Rove’s “good counsel” is responsible for the radically poor position by President Bush as to turning a blind eye of justice on the issues of illegal aliens in our nation, immigration enforcement and border security, to what extent Rove is responsible for those failings by the Bush Presidency remains to be seen clearly despite Rove’s resignation announced today for August 31st.
My best guess is that it’s been a combination of both their perspectives meshing on these problematic issues, that Rove’s attitude was moreorless reflected by the Bush Cabinet behaviors about these issues — Departments of Commerce, Homeland Security, Transportation, Justice — they all have contributed if not worked to enable the harms that beset our nation caused by illegal immigration, lack of immigration enforcement and our insecure borders (crime, drugs, gangs, forgeries and other identity fraud, use of public services illigitimately by illegal aliens, resources and community erosions, so much more, all enabled at taxpayer expense because someone doesn’t want their son to pick tomatoes, among other disrespectful rationalizations).
And, once these issues boiled over in frustration for voters — both Republicans AND Democrats but the Democrats will and do revile Rove (and Bush) for everything, about anything, so the point is as to what extent these policy betrayals have disenfranchised Republican voters despite the issues of illegal immigration and lax immigration enforcement are of key concern to people throughout the political spectrum — once these issues boiled over in frustration for voters, it became clear that the White House was not only not helping but was servicing the problems, as are key lobbying interests such as agriculture, hospitality and public workers unions.
Rove’s level of irreverance about these issues — that because he didn’t want his son picking tomatoes so it was fine with him that the nation had a population of people despite legality available to do such manual labor — was the failing point as to confidence in the man for Conservative voters.
And to what extent at this point it is Rove’s “architecture” that has set these failings in place in the current Administration versus as to what extent it has been the intent by President Bush, will be among key confidence measures in the 2008 elections.
However, no Democrat candidate is even touching these subjects, much less addressing them — the predictable Liberal workaround of refusing to discuss issues that offend when and as Democrats, as they always do, campaign upon racial and income stereotypes with Socialism as their default solution — which reveals the saturation of the problem right there.
For Republicans, it’s a problem of confidence. We’ve seen what it is to be misled and aren’t as easily taken by personality and “policy” promises. We look at, and evalute, actions.