It's so easy to take the bait, demand apologies, and go down that path. There might even be some temporary political benefit. But except for the baiting word "therapy," aren't
Rove, Scotty, Bartlett and Mehlman saying something fundamentally true about how Democrats think differently from Republicans - and
should think differently - in responding to 9/11 and Bush's phony "War on Terror"?
Doesn't a sane, smart, moral, legal response include "understanding" why we were attacked and "indictments" against terrorists - instead of gleeful ignorance, vengeful violence, and war we know puts us at greater risk?
For Democrats, the tragedy of Rove's comments is, they're really more compliments than insults - only maybe they aren't true enough. More below the fold...
How to respond to 9/11:
Bush: Attack somebody you hate - anybody - ideally the same ethnicity as the hijackers. Use violence as political capital. Try military solutions, not political ones. Never charge or convict any terrorist with a crime. Suspend due process.
Sane: Find out why we were attacked; what the terrorists' grievances were. Decide whether invading or bombing someone will really prevent future attacks or resolve the problem. Investigate, charge and punish actual criminals and conspirators. Preserve due process. Don't engage in violence for its own sake.
Rove is no genius, but he's much smarter than the Democrats demanding apologies from him. He's dared them to insist they're really closer to the Bush way than the Sane way, and they're taking the bait.
Worse yet, it might even be true.
Like fools being called "chicken" by a bully, they guarantee the phony "War on Terror" will remain unchallenged, and thus that Rove and Bush will continue to beat them.