Skip to main content

Karl Rove on ABC's This Week With George Stephanopoulos
Karl Rove
Americans don't approve of Karl Rove's outlandish claims about Hillary Clinton's health, but that doesn't mean Rove isn't sitting home cackling like a Bond villain:
Two-thirds of Americans in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll disapprove of the Republican strategist raising questions about Clinton's age and health in advance of her potential presidential run. The lopsided negative reaction to Rove's commentary -- just 26 percent approve of his topic of criticism -- includes majorities of every age group as well as Democrats and independents. Republicans split evenly on the issue, with 45 percent approving and 46 percent disapproving of Rove broaching the issue.
This is a sign of Clinton's strength, but it's also pretty much mission accomplished for Rove: He's got major news organizations going out to poll 1,017 people about whether they "approve or disapprove of political strategist Karl Rove raising questions about Hillary Clinton's age and health." Not whether they approve or disapprove of Karl Rove claiming Clinton was in the hospital when she was only there for a few days, but her "age and health." Whatever the approval levels in this poll, Rove has successfully gotten the basic question into the media debate about the presidential race. He doesn't mind if he looks like a pile of crap doing it.

Originally posted to Laura Clawson on Wed May 28, 2014 at 06:58 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Rove should be spending his time attempting to (7+ / 0-)

    avoid stuff like this....

    instead of getting his face plastered on the 6 o'clock nooz.

  •  And it's always that same 20-something percent. (12+ / 0-)


    We can make a documentary about that 25-30 percent, bitter-enders as they are, and why they're so loud and prominent in today's politics and governance.

    Do they have all the money?

    Is that it?

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Wed May 28, 2014 at 07:01:57 AM PDT

    •  First They Are Aware of a Political Cycle (8+ / 0-)

      Well I'm being disingenuous; Democrats aren't unaware of the cycle, they just use it to conservative advantage.

      Repubs understand that turnout plummets in non Presidential elections except for the politically motivated and older voters, both of whom support Republicans' big money constituency, so they concentrate on motivating mainly those voters in off years. THat's how they make their big gains.

      Democrats being conservatives must always run away from their base, in both Presidential years and off years, because the Dem base favors the people over big money donors. So Democrats play the election cycle as if it's eternally the last 2 months before a Presidential election, when it's important to appeal to persuadable moderate Republicans.

      THey could win big if they like Repubs appealed to their philosophical base in off years, but then they'd be stuck expected to govern for them, which would cost their donors, so they can never work the election cycle as the right does, and in fact they have to act as though it doesn't exist.

      So the rightwing has most of the money but they also have a populist base that they wish to energize. And they have 3 elections out of 4, plus all the local and state races, and obviously a 50 state 435 district strategy, so yeah, the're going to be quite important.

      You step out and fight for the Kochs and for stopping birth control and you'll be prominent too.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Wed May 28, 2014 at 07:45:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Proof of your theory,…2006 (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        That was the year that the GOP handed the Dems a Dem-base issue on a silver platter:  the faltering Iraq War.  This is a Dem liberal base issue, and it polled well with the overall voting public, who by 2006 disapproved of the war.

        Using this base issue, the Dems motivated their base, demoralized the Right, and walloped the GOP in the off-year elections.  The problem is that this is one of the few issues that motivate the Dem base that is relatively benign to the Powers That Be (the Donors) - so they let the Dems run on it.  Real, serious, anti-war issues don't come along that often.  

        All the other Dem base issues are either social (and the GOP is trying to back away from those) or economic, and Dems aren't going to whip up their base on socialist-progressive economics, because if they do, their donors will find someone else to donate to next cycle.

        •  there is competence (0+ / 0-)

          and I think that's always the necessary requirement when it's a woman, and so Rove's 'attack' fails because whatever anyone thinks about Hillary, everyone knows she's smart, A+ curvebreaker, smartest girl in the class, and everyone knows she's competent and dislikes incompetence and rewards talent and competence plus finish the job right.

          Did anyone else, by the by, notice that the NYT is more boring since they fired Jill? That was very retro of them, for a woman to get that high in that sexist family owned rag, she'd had to trump everyone along the way, and it showed, the paper was vibrant, at times even thrilling, and now it's ... boring.  

          Lucky there is VOX.

          plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

          by anna shane on Wed May 28, 2014 at 10:23:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Rove is the 4th Kardashian (8+ / 0-)

    Shameless self-promoter, luring the right wing rubes to pay admission to get into the tent

    •  Yup.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      IB JOHN

      ....and promises of (insert whatever evil thing or deed) of (insert any demonic 'D' of the day)....
      But once inside, nothing but fog and mirrors....
      Another one taken for the Karl Rove ride to sucker-ville.

      I think, therefore I am........................... Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose....AKA Engine Nighthawk - don't even ask!

      by Lilyvt on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:56:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Well, yeah (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rb608, tikkun, IB JOHN

    that's how his whole thing works.  It's never been about making himself popular.  Being completely reviled is actually part of the schtick.  

    When truth is only a matter of opinion, advantage goes to the liars.

    by Sun dog on Wed May 28, 2014 at 07:04:45 AM PDT

  •  They have nothing to offer. (21+ / 0-)

     photo 96c7f3c2-43ad-4d9b-92d3-ca67f034c036_zps55475e2a.jpg

    If the Old Testament were a reliable guide in the matter of capital punishment, half the people in the United States would have to be killed tomorrow. ~ Steve Allen

    by Gordon20024 on Wed May 28, 2014 at 07:04:50 AM PDT

  •  My view, it's all about him keeping relevant (7+ / 0-)

    Rove took a major beating in 2012 and he's never going to be able to live down his Fox News meltdown on Election Night. He probably feels he needs to do anything possible to stay relevant and influential in the GOP, many of whom still resent him for his shitty 2012 performance. And what better way to do that then by pushing an untapped attack line against one of their favorite boogeymen? (I'd say "boogeywoman," but is that even a term? Are boogeymen sexist by nature?)

  •  He's just "asking questions" (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rb608, tikkun, IB JOHN

    So how long before "when did you stop beating Bill, Hillary?" gets "asked?"

    Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. --Martin Luther King Jr.

    by Egalitare on Wed May 28, 2014 at 07:12:03 AM PDT

  •  ME! (5+ / 0-)


    Mission accomplished.

    I live under the bridge to the 21st Century.

    by Crashing Vor on Wed May 28, 2014 at 07:12:11 AM PDT

  •  it is hilarious that Rove continues to hack (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TomP, Ahianne, rb608, IB JOHN, Little Lulu, jyssco

    away at Hilary while the plutocrats who fuel his PACs and think tanks continue to cut back on donations.  Karl is looking at having to get a real job any day now.

    Karl now says that Hilary is "stale and old". Can someone get this man a mirror and a year's supply of irony to add to his diet?

    •  The Plutocrats LOVE Hillary (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      They have said so.  If they can get Jeb or Chirstie, that would be preferred, but they've said that the Big Money would rather have Hillary than Ted Cruz or Rand Paul.  They know Hillary is with them on all the stuff they care about.

      I know it too.  So do most of you.  But,…alas, a lot bloggers here want her anyway.  Sign….

  •  If the Rove Lie gains any traction at all (6+ / 0-)

    He's done the job he does best.  He's been pulling this crap since George Walker Bush beat Ann Richards with a pack of Rove lies.  Charles Pierce at Esquire calls it "ratf@cking"  Rove is the undisputed master at "ratf@cking".

    •  Rather, "was" (8+ / 0-)

      Rove is washed up. As said above thread, it's the height of irony that he call Hillary "old and stale." (Or it would be, if Dick Cheney hadn't opened his mouth about Benghazi.)

      And Rove was never that good to begin with. One thing I liked especially about 2012 was that it destroyed for good and all the reputation of Rove as being some kind of political genius. He's not, not even remotely. What he is is a thug with no limits to what he'll go to in order to win. But a genius? Hell no. Need I remind you that this is the moron who blew a truckload of cash and effort in the home stretch of 2000 in a futile effort to win California, therebye allowing Gore to lock down Michigan and Pennsylvania and push Florida to the limit? Or his "THE MATH" garbage from 2006?"

      Rove is no genius. He's a goon. And now, he's a washed-up goon who, if he were in a Mafia clan, would be taking a long ride to the Jersey swamps for blowing too much of the boss's money.

      •  Rove was a master (6+ / 0-)

        The smearing of McCain in 2000 and Kerry Swift Boating were two masterstrokes of sludge.  The man is a genius at dirt, and you can ignore the Hilary smear at your peril.  The man knows how to plant schoolyard insult lizard brain taunts in the nation's subconscious like a modern day svengali.

        •  Very useful statement (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          IB JOHN

          Karl Rove being down and out for one cycle does not signal his death.  Getting the turnout in the 14 election down is his goal and we may well help him do it, if we keep misjudging our enemies in order to make ourselves feel better.

          Newt 2012. Sociopath, adulterer, hypocrite, Republican.

          by tikkun on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:48:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Rove ran three masterful campaigns (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            METAL TREK

            GWB in 2000 and 2004, and the Senate campaign in 2002.   It took brilliant tactics to position GWB to beat Al Gore with the best economy in 50 years at Gore's back.  

            Then in 2002, he leveraged GWB's 9-11 popularity and capital, and used it to win a Senate majority that made the implementation of the Bush Agenda and the Iraq war possible.  Remember the unmitigated gall it took to go after disabled war veteran Max Cleland as soft on terror/defense?  Brilliant and ruthless.

            It took even more genius to realize that GWB could only win a base election in 2004, and only then if they ran on John Kerry's record, and not GWB's - and he pulled it off, easily winning FL and the popular vote.  

            These are not the repeated successes of a fraud.  Rove has seen his better days (and has had far better candidates to work with), but to discount his enormous impact on our electoral politics in the last 20 years is to rewrite history.  

          •  no but (0+ / 0-)

            it is possible that he is. And it's not just one cycle. Remember, he has the "Math" in 06, too.

      •  Rove will get no traction with the public (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        IB JOHN, METAL TREK, aimeehs

        with his "old and stale" routine.  In addition to being remarkably brilliant, Hillary has always been a damned classy lady who can disprove "old and stale" with a single apprearance.

        You can't spell CRAZY without R-AZ.

        by rb608 on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:45:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Hillary is neither brilliant nor classy (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ChuckChuckerson, PorridgeGun

          If she were either, she'd be president right now.  

          She is a corrupt, sleazy, opportunist.  And, Rove doesn't have to get traction.  As the diary suggests, the MSM has done that for him.  The seed is planted, and will get watered and fertilized repeatedly until it bears fruit.

    •  Ratfuckers have itty bitty dicks. n/t (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Cogito, ergo Democrata.

      by Ahianne on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:23:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Getting it out there is not enough (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Ahianne, rb608, IB JOHN, aimeehs, jyssco

    if it has no impact.  Rove's feeble attacks are as flacid as he is.  :-)  

    Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

    by TomP on Wed May 28, 2014 at 07:23:57 AM PDT

  •  two goals here (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greenbell, rb608, IB JOHN, PorridgeGun

    1. Spread as much negative about Hillary as possible, as early as possible.

    2. Attempt to show Hillary just how nasty things are going to be in hopes it dissuades her from running at all.

    •  Agreed (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      "2. Attempt to show Hillary just how nasty things are going to be in hopes it dissuades her from running at all."

      This is the first goal of the Right.  They'd much rather scare Hillary out of the race before she gets in.  They aren't afraid of anybody else (cough, Coumo!) on the Dem side.  That's a lot easier than beating her once she's the nominee.

  •  Well, his first name is Turd. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    He doesn't mind if he looks like a pile of crap doing it.
  •  He's an attention whore; he wins again (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I voted Tuesday, May 6, 2014 because it is my right, my responsibility and because my parents moved from Alabama to Ohio to vote. Unfortunately, the republicons want to turn Ohio into Alabama.

    by a2nite on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:16:35 AM PDT

  •  The idiot mainstream media fall for it every time. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rb608, tikkun, IB JOHN, PorridgeGun, jyssco

    Another case in point:  CNN setting up and hosting "debates" with prominent NON SCIENTISTS to once and for all get to the bottom of whether or not climate change is real and man made.  What an embarrassment these people are.

  •  On the other hand, piles of crap everywhere… (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rb608, Champurrado, IB JOHN

    Are deeply offended by the comparison…

    Baby, where I come from...

    by ThatSinger on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:21:57 AM PDT

  •  LBJ would understand (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rb608, tikkun, IB JOHN, METAL TREK

    Johnson instructed his staff to spread the rumor that the opponent had a proclivity for sex with animals, pigs in particular. “My God, we can’t say that,” protested a staffer, “it couldn’t possibly be true!” “I know,” said Lyndon, “but let’s make him deny it."

  •  Asdf (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jon Says


    Not to point out the irony too explicitly, but Rove did not force anyone to carry his remarks nor spend massive amounts of time debating them at length. Nor do polls about them.

    Those were choices made.

    Ironically, even here at DailyKOS.

    One could simply have noted the remarks in a 15-second segment, perhaps spent 15 seconds (or a paragraph) rebutting him and bringing up Reagan's age and health, and moved on.

    Complicit in Rove's foolishness is a political media that jumps to his every command and laps up whatever he says to them whenever he wants attention. After his abysmal performances of late, why is anything he says newsworthy?

    And who, in the end, truly has the power to stop it?

    I have been saying for years that liberal and mainstream news sites should NOT be giving such foolishness (along with Westboro, Joe the Plumber, Palin etc.) a single column inch of coverage since they are not newsworthy in any sense and exist now merely to self-promote and attract attention where none is warranted.

    The best way to tell a Democrat from a Republican is to present someone requiring food and shelter. The Democrat will want them housed and fed, even if they be faking need. The Republican will gladly see them starve until all doubt is removed.

    by GayIthacan on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:29:26 AM PDT

    •  Right on point (0+ / 0-)

      And to expand further, it was actually a headline writer that started the "brain damage" idea, extrapolating from what Rove said about "traumatic brain injury." "Brain damage" and "traumatic brain injury" are not synonymous. The left then picked up on "brain damage", attributed it to Rove, and amplified it 1000x. Many seem to think that repeating the "brain damage" idea will some how do more damage to Rove's reputation than to Hillary's, and maybe it will, but Rove is not running for president. His reputation is entirely sacrificial if it serves a larger purpose.

  •  karl rove (0+ / 0-)

    Karl suffers from analglacoma.  He can't see his ass telling the truth.

  •  the real problem (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    as always is the media's complicity in this type of propaganda campaign.  Now since he asked the questions and told the lies, they ignore the lies, they don't delegitimize the questions, they don't report the facts, they just add an opinion poll.  So then they can start the conversation over again,  most Americans think questions (no mention of lies told and not debunked) about Hillary Clinton's health are off limits.  Do you think they should be.

    They know their audience, pretty soon half of them will be convinced that Hillary Clinton does have brain damage and that she is trying to hide it.  

    Propaganda works.  And the media barely ever report news anymore, they just work in a propaganda mill.

    •  It's just politics (0+ / 0-)

      He needs to increase her negatives slowly bit by bit over the next two years.  Her problem is that she may peak too soon.  Her problem is that she may be old news in two years and Americans might be ready for a new story.  

      •  it is not just politics (0+ / 0-)

        if there really was a fair and balanced media, then it might be 'just politics'.   In today's media it is a deliberate editorial policy to move away from facts, from reporting, from presenting news to transcribing for a point of view and sensationalizing and promoting talking points for a point of view.

      •  I think that's the only way she loses (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ChuckChuckerson, PorridgeGun

        Hillary is most popular when she's out of the media spotlight.  Then, Democrats and independents can visualize in her, whatever it is they want to see:  She's more liberal than Bill;  She's learned her lesson from the Iraq War;  She's not in bed with Wall Street;  It's not the 1990's;  etc. etc.

        Sound familiar???

        I am 100% sure that the more people see of Hillary, the more they dislike her.  That is what happened in 2008, and Obama was a viable alternative in an election the GOP couldn't win with anybody alive that they could run.  If the GOP can keep her in the media, drive up her negatives, and make her deny and posture, they can make this competitive by election day.  Then, they can rely on Clinton hubris, a political miscalculation or two (like in 2008), and general Clinton fatigue to narrowly beat her.

        It's a long shot, but unless they can scare her out of running, it's the only strategy they've got.

  •  Rove played this much too early... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...because this issue will long have been exhausted and demolished long before the 2016 general election campaign, without Hillary having to divert time answering it summer/fall of 2016.  Of course,this will leave hard-core GOP partisans fuming and sputtering why the MSM and general electorate aren't paying much attention to what they fervently believe should be a seriously damaging matter to Clinton's candidacy.  Also too Bengazi!

  •  Yeah, yeah, we know. Everything Rove does is (0+ / 0-)

    unadulterated genius. CNN does a poll that will be forgotten in a few days not just by people who heard the results but by people who took the poll which makes Rove a modern day Machiavelli.

  •  "Turd Blossom" (0+ / 0-)

    Wasn't that George Walker Bush's pet name for Rove?

    And this is the perfect example of how appropriate that nickname is/was.

    Rove successfully grew a giant national turd. Like most turds, everything about it is pretty...disgusting...including its  seeding, its "blossoming" and its end result...a giant turd.

  •  Your last paragraph is spot on. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    For days immediately after, it seemed as if every media outlet I bumped into was talking about Hillary's head injury with barely the slightest nod to the fact that Karl Rove was an unprincipled liar. The head injury faux story is now in the mainstream, but shouldn't be; while Rove's lying is not, but should.

    You can't spell CRAZY without R-AZ.

    by rb608 on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:40:13 AM PDT

  •  Lieing is great for Rove (0+ / 0-)

    Republicans love to be lied to. Just witness faux "News". They continue to hire Rove and other confirmed liars, as long as it serves their propaganda. And his rich clients, the Koch's and others don't seem to mind one bit.

    Nice work if you can get it.

  •  Karl's just trying to distract from #BENGHAZI (0+ / 0-)

    Keep on muckin', Poop Posie.

    NRA: "Not Responsible." Again.

    by here4tehbeer on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:46:31 AM PDT

  •  i think its backfired (0+ / 0-)

    making clinton look sympathetic and the GOP look even worse

    The Seminole Democrat
    Confronting the criminally insane who rule our state; as well as the apathy of the vast majority who let them.

    by SemDem on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:47:48 AM PDT

  •  Hmmmm.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Where do they get the people for these polls?
    No one I know, not one person I know, has ever been polled (and I've lived in a deep red state).
    I suppose we should consider ourselves lucky not to be on any Rovian lists, but still, one wonders how skewed these 'polls' really are.
    Whatever, anything coming from Karl Rove needs to be absolutely and soundly denounced.  Loudly, publicly, everywhere, all the time.
    Karl Rove is manipulative liar.  Period.

    I think, therefore I am........................... Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose....AKA Engine Nighthawk - don't even ask!

    by Lilyvt on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:48:08 AM PDT

    •  They only polled a thousand people (0+ / 0-)

      There are 350 million or more in America.  How many people do you think you know?

      •  Hmmmm.... (0+ / 0-)

        About 1000 less than 350 million I guess.
        OK, just kidding, but with all my friends from every walk of life in all my years, I have NEVER met anyone who has been polled.  
        By contrast, I know 3 people who have won huge lotteries.  Go figure.

        I think, therefore I am........................... Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose....AKA Engine Nighthawk - don't even ask!

        by Lilyvt on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:36:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  It's kinda the whole point. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Karl Rove doesn't need anybody to like him except the people willing to pay him for his turdblossoms.

    He's running for no office, he seeks no government position. His sole function is to make the enemies of his political sponsors less popular. Full stop.

    And as long as he gets people talking about it, true or not, it serves his execrable purpose.

    "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

    by raptavio on Wed May 28, 2014 at 08:52:42 AM PDT

  •  So it's ok to question McCain's health (0+ / 0-)

    in 2008, but not Hillary's. Nice double standard.

    •  Huh? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Little Lulu, PorridgeGun, aimeehs

      I was here in 2008 and I can promise you that McCain's age and health were not a prominent topic of discussion.

      We were all far too busy picking our jaws up off the ground every other day at his astonishing lapses in judgment, which began with his appointment of Sarah Palin and then continued unabated right up until election day.

      Almost everything you do will seem insignificant, but it is most important that you do it.

      by The Termite on Wed May 28, 2014 at 09:23:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  His health was mentioned fairly (0+ / 0-)

        frequently. A lot of people were acting like he was going to die 2 days after taking office and leave Palin as the President.

        Hillary Clinton's Liberal Ranking

        by tigercourse on Wed May 28, 2014 at 09:44:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I will admit... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          ...that the discussion of his health escalated after he picked Palin. But it still wasn't a core topic of discussion.

          Should Hillary pick a bellicose, blathering dimwit as her running mate, I think her health and her age will become a more legitimate topic as well. I don't see her doing that.

          Almost everything you do will seem insignificant, but it is most important that you do it.

          by The Termite on Wed May 28, 2014 at 10:01:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  he's jealous of fellow-grifter Palin making (0+ / 0-)

    so much money.

    He needs to be in the conversation, almost any conversation, in order to make money.

    He does not have a regular job as we do.

  •  The 2016 election campaign will settle it. (0+ / 0-)

    Something tells me there will be few who doubt Hillary's faculties on Election Day.

    Battling psychiatric myths with sensible skepticism at

    by candid psychiatrist on Wed May 28, 2014 at 09:15:08 AM PDT

  •  This was just the first salvo. (0+ / 0-)

    The GOP still can't use the parade of imbeciles from the Bush administration for anything except flinging poo like monkeys on Starbucks, so this is their play. Doctor Who fans might recognize it as the Harriet Jones strategy: do whatever it takes to get people asking "Don't you think she looks tired?" whenever possible.

    Frankly, it's the only smear against Hillary that hasn't been trotted out before, so there's something to be said for its novelty. But expect this song to become very familiar, very soon, as the media looks for any excuse to talk about her age, mental fitness, or general competency, especially under the guise of chastising those who mention such things directly.

    "Speaking for myself only" - Armando "Pay Attention To Me diplomacy never works out very well for anyone but the defense contractors." -Hunter

    by JR on Wed May 28, 2014 at 09:16:58 AM PDT

    •  Don't forget her appearance (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      She LOOKS like an old lady, now.  That subtle, "old", "ugly", "tired", meme will become the subtext of this campaign.  

      Ultimately it will evolve into the unspoken "bitch" and "witch".

      If they're smart, it will be very subtle, and perhaps deadly effective.  She can't hide behind her poll numbers forever.  As she found out in 2008, at some point she will have to come out and speak, and  debate, and campaign.  And, then people just may see the real (or imagined) "SHrillary".

      That said, I can't believe that we on this site are going to support/nominate a presidential candidate that a huge percentage of us HATE and talk this way about.  The GOP would never, could never, do such a thing.

      •  "we on this site" (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dr Swig Mcjigger, aimeehs
        That said, I can't believe that we on this site are going to support/nominate a presidential candidate that a huge percentage of us HATE and talk this way about.
        First of all, we on this site don't choose the nominee.  That's done by the whole party, of which Daily Kos members are a tiny subset.  
        Second of all, the percentage of people here who HATE Hillary Clinton and talk that way about her is a tiny subset of Daily Kos members.  
        If you don't see that she's a very popular figure among Democrats, you may need to get out more among rank and file party members.
  •  That will teach Hillary...... (0+ / 0-)

    .... to have hired Rove as her brain doctor......

    I mean, how else could he know about this?

  •  I'm not so sure about that (0+ / 0-)

    I mean sure Rove got people to poll the question but if he continues this he could end up screwing himself over. Not that I would mind that I mean his 'math' on election night was great drinking entertainment.

    Der Weg ist das Ziel

    by duhban on Wed May 28, 2014 at 09:40:49 AM PDT

  •  He was just stirring the pot. Nothing more... (0+ / 0-)

    ...nothing less.

    He was playing carnival barker to gauge reactions, see how far and wide his remarks went and plant the seed.

    If the weren't so incestuous, they might just ignore him. But as he is part of the media glitterati, his peers in the bubble throw him the professional courtesy.

    "Trickle-down economics expresses a crude and naive trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power." Pope Francis

    by SpiffPeters on Wed May 28, 2014 at 09:45:17 AM PDT

  •  Wait, what? That gray haired, balding old man (0+ / 0-)

    who lies for a living is still being quoted as if anyone's interested in what he has to say?  Bizarre.

    Best. President. Ever.

    by Little Lulu on Wed May 28, 2014 at 10:47:20 AM PDT

  •  Bush's brain vs. Hillary's brain (0+ / 0-)

    I know which I'd trust more.

    (And which I'd hand a banana to.)

    Rick Perry - the greatest scientist since Galileo!

    by Bobs Telecaster on Wed May 28, 2014 at 11:53:00 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site