"Is this just math that you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better or is this real?"

Megyn Kelly asked Karl Rove — as hilariously/painfully magnified by Jon Stewart:

[VIEW CLIP HERE.]

As the tags below indicate, there's some other material in that clip too. If you're one of those who find this painful rather than hilarious, I would recommend that you seriously contemplate the meaning underlying the humor. It's important.

Donald Trump hurt Karl Rove's feelings.

"'Sloppy looking . . . hack . . . bad person . . . so-called pundit" — that's what he called me, snivels Rove in the Wall Street Journal.

Remember when Rove was the evil genius? When did he go all beta and start worrying that one of the other boys was calling him a bad person?

"I wasn't gonna punch back because, again, I think the office of the presidency is precious."

George Bush, speaking to Rush Limbaugh — transcript, audio — consistently expressed the idea that a President should handle himself with dignity and concentrate on doing what he thinks is right:

RUSH: ... What's it like to sit in the Oval Office, or wherever you happen to be as president and believe the people are tired of you, and do you want to do anything about that?

PRESIDENT BUSH: ... [Y]ou know, sometimes if you're president and people are tired of you, you just have to soldier on....

RUSH: ... In my lifetime, I don't recall a political party ever opposing their own country at war, seeking a defeat as the Democrats were. I mean Harry Reid was out there, Mr. President, "This war is lost."

PRESIDENT BUSH: ... You can disagree with the policy, disagree with whether we should work to establish democracy in Iraq after we liberated it, but to condemn soldiers heading into mission to a lost cause is just, you know, is inexcusable, as far as I was concerned.

RUSH: Why didn't you do more about it? Why didn't you comment more about it at the time?...

PRESIDENT BUSH: ... I do believe in the institution of the presidency, and I didn't think it was right then, I still don't think it's right to engage in name-calling if you're the president of the United States. I was focused on the mission... I still feel very strongly that's the way a president ought to conduct himself.

RUSH: Well, some of the people in your administration, Karl Rove, have said in hindsight that they think -- maybe Karl is speaking for himself, certainly other people in the administration -- should have done more to defend you and the administration against these attacks....

PRESIDENT BUSH: That's right. Now, Karl feels that way. I read his book and recommend it, he'll be happy from me to hear. And, yeah, I mean Karl felt like we shoulda punched back harder. I can't remember if he was referring to I shoulda punched back harder or we shoulda punched back harder. I wasn't gonna punch back because, again, I think the office of the presidency is precious. It's an institution that needs to be strengthened and getting into a verbal mud fight with people, in my judgment, demeans the office. And so I chose not to do that....

... You know, and eventually the truth wins out, and this book is an attempt to set the record straight from my perspective.

RUSH: Is that your faith speaking, "the truth will out"?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Do I think that? Yeah, I do. 

I'm hearing the Sermon on the Mount in that: "But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also." And:

Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.

So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you....

Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. 2But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

Obviously, the phrase "punch back harder"— which Bush introduces — is a reference to Obama, so there is an implied attack on Obama for fighting like a politician while he is President. And yet, Obama too resists defending himself as much as some people would like.

ADDED: After Bush is off the line, Rush comments:

I try to put myself in his shoes, try to imagine myself president of the United States, and in my mind, I'm doing everything I'm doing for the benefit of this country.  If it's a terror attack that I'm responding to with military policy, it's to keep the country safe.  If I'm coming up with an economic policy, Social Security reform, it is to benefit the people of this country.  And to have that maligned, be personally maligned, I could not -- if I were inclined not to sully the office and not respond to it personally, I would not silence my administration.  I would turn 'em loose.  It's too serious.  It matters too much.  I would make sure the people that voted for me understood that they had a leader, but he was hell-bent on not sullying the office of the presidency.  He told me that I can't tell you how many times, and to this day it's tough for me to understand, even now.  We've got an economy unlike any since the Great Depression.  He's being blamed for it.  The Democrat Party and the media are blaming him and he's content to let long-term history be the judge of this.  Now, I know that his faith in God is what gives him the comfort and the confidence to do this, but I would not be able to stand mute about it like he is.

"'Krush' (Karl-as-Rush) was the palest simulacrum of a Rush Limbaugh."

Writes Tunku Varadarajan about Rove's guest-hosting on yesterday's show.

Oh, but no one can step in and imitate Rush. With the exception of Mark Steyn, all of Rush's guest-hosts mostly make you think about how much better Rush is and: When is Rush coming back? (Steyn does his own thing, and it's brilliant. I prefer him to Rush.)

It would have been foolish for Rove to go all bombastic and over-confident on his first radio show, so Varadarajan's criticism is lame:

Rove, by comparison [to Rush], is a lightweight. What we learned today is that he does not have the voice for radio. By that I mean not just that his timbre is too thin, his tenor too brittle, but also that he has little oratorical or rhetorical structure, and no apparent ability to cast a spell over listeners. 

Ha. He's from Austin, Texas. He sounds like a character from the movie "Slacker." I found that charming ... disarming. Rush gets a lot of his oratorical power from his self-conception as an outsider — actively excluded from the power-elite in Washington. Rove is the opposite — so self-restraint is good.

Reading his weekly column in The Wall Street Journal, one was already aware of the modesty of his mind. In fact, his column has done much to baffle many Americans: How on earth did this man become the dark genius of the liberal imagination? Listening to him riff on the radio, one was filled with retrospective alarm: Was this the mastermind in the Bush White House?

Oh, Tunku! Do you really imagine the President, in his confidential, private conversations, listening to a Limbaugh-like blowhard overwhelming him with a big rant? Try to imagine why Rove's style works in the context in which he was highly successful. Gentleness and friendly, quiet, sound advice... is it really such a puzzle?

"Among the dozens of giant bouquets of white roses, the famous faces lit by the glow of hundreds of candles included those of..."

"... former Bush White House weasel Karl Rove; former presidential hopeful and Law & Order star Fred Thompson; former Kansas City Royals slugger George Brett; Fox News talker Sean Hannity; former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani; New England Patriots owner Bob Kraft; former Clinton White House weasel James Carville and his wife, GOP analyst Mary Matalin; and golfer Tom Watson, among others."

Aw, come on! You reused "weasel." Can't you think of some other loathsome animal?

"We have a temperamental WASP in the White House."

Writes Andrew Sullivan.

IN THE COMMENTS: I wrote:

At first I thought Sullivan's sentence was missing a word, that he was referring to the past and meant to write "We have had..." So, we used to have a "temperamental WASP" in the WH, but now we don't and people need to understand that somehow. Then I decided what he meant was "temperamental" not in the sense of moody and unpredictable, but as the adjectival form of "temperament." So, Obama has the temperament of a WASP. I guess you're allowed to have a big old stereotype about white people. And he's applying that stereotype to Obama.

John Stodder wrote:

For the record, I think Karl Rove was the first guy to compare Obama to the WASP stereotype of the sarcastic guy at the country club, leaning against the wall, smoking a cigarette and making comments about everyone else at the party. I always thought that was the oddest perception, but it's turned out to be very apt.

Correct! ("He's the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by.")

Karl Rove says "[Bush] was set on Cheney for vice president, and I thought it was a bad idea."

So I guess he wasn't Bush's Brain.

"For about 30 to 35 minutes I laid out the reasons why he shouldn't pick Dick Cheney"...

... his age and health, [his] close association with Bush's father...

"[Bush] prodded and poked at me, and disagreed," Rove said....

"I can't be concerned with the politics of it," Rove said Bush later told him, noting he needed a "good partner," and Cheney was that man.

"It really was his first presidential decision...."

"Karl Rove (KarlRove) is now following your tweets on Twitter."

Would that enthuse you? If so, you're a nitwit — a twitwit. "Karl Rove is following 96071 people." 116120 people are following him. Be impressed if you're one of the elite 20049 who follow him without being followed. If you want to be impressed with yourself. It's not recommended. Not in the twitterverse anyway.

"He's a serial exaggerator. If I was being unkind I would say he's a liar, but it's a habit he ought to drop."

"You should not exaggerate and lie like this when you are the vice president of the United States," said Karl Rove. Funnily, the headlines say Rove called Biden a liar. And really, I guess he did... if he was being unkind.

Karl Rove... "The wounds I received I got in a job I love."

I see that quote in the WSJ's email teaser for a Karl Rove column and click over thinking maybe this will be Karl's musings on all the hate that's been aimed at him over the years. It's not:

During my White House years, I came to know of the heroic actions of the Seals and other special operators in the global war on terror. These men willingly follow evil into dark and perilous places. They volunteered to be on the front edge of the conflict whose outcome will shape this century....

I met [a Seal who had] been shot eight times in Iraq and had undergone nearly two-dozen operations. One bullet had taken off part of his cheek and nose. He was destined for reconstructive surgery in a few days.

Yet he didn't feel sorry for himself. He was full of charisma, confidence, cockiness and joy. After all, he confided, when you're a wounded Seal, the world's best doctors want to operate on you so they can brag about it. Besides, he explained, he was just showing that a Seal really could catch bullets with his teeth....

The next day, I got an email from the retired Navy Seal buddy who'd talked me into speaking at NSWF. He shared a picture of the sign the wounded Seal put on his Baghdad hospital door.

On it, the Seal had scrawled that visitors shouldn't "feel sorry" for him. "The wounds I received," he wrote, "I got in a job I love, doing it for people I love, supporting the freedom of a country I deeply love. I am incredibly tough." And on his sign he promised "a full recovery" and wrote that his hospital room was a place of "fun, optimism, and intense rapid regrowth. If you are not prepared for that, GO ELSEWHERE." He signed it "The Management."

IN THE COMMENTS: knox said:

There's a wealth of material in the stories of our special forces. Too bad Hollywood ignores them all... there's got to be hundreds of great action/war movies just begging to be made.

Pogo said:

Well, at least we have a good movie about gay rights and other one about/not about pederasty, plus a Hitler movie and a Nixon movie (not the same film, BTW).

Larry J said:

My SEAL story is from October 1975 when I was in Jump School. SEALs go to Jump School after their much tougher UDT training. To them, Jump School is a vacation.

I heard a lot of commotion when falling out for noon formation one day. From what I was told, one of our SEAL students had just jumped from a 3rd story window, did a parachute landing fall, and entered formation saying, "This shit bores me."

I didn't see it happen so I can't swear it's true but it would be typical of SEALs. They're genuine bad-asses not to be messed with.

Richard Cohen reacts to that Karl Rove column about how President Bush read a lot of books while he was President.

And by "Richard Cohen," I do not mean my ex-husband Richard Cohen. I mean that WaPo columnist to whom people have often asked me if I am/was married.

The never-slept-with-Althouse Cohen writes:

One of [the books Bush read] was Albert Camus' "The Stranger," with its unforgettable opening lines: "Mother died today. Or perhaps it was yesterday, I don't know." After reading Rove's Wall Street Journal column, it's clear there's much we all don't know.

Bush's choice of the Camus classic is odd on the face of it. It is a novel about estrangement, about an amoral, irreligious man (Meursault) who never shows emotion. It is a book out of my Gauloise-smoking youth, read in the vain pursuit of women of literary bent,* and not something I would think an over-60 president would read. Maybe this is what happens when you have to give up jogging.

And what's Cohen's excuse for forgetting so much of the book he claims to have read? Or did he just read the first page? Or was that just the only part of the book that was "unforgettable"? If you want to skewer Bush for reading "The Stranger," you should bring up the part where he kills an Arab for virtually no reason at all.

[T]hat Bush is a prodigious, industrial reader... does not conform at all to his critics' idea of who he is.

"Industrial reader" is a good phrase, one that makes me think I'm being too mean to RC.

They would prefer seeing him as a dolt, since that, as opposed to policy or ideological differences, is a briefer, more bloggish explanation of what went wrong.

Bloggish? Bloggish? As if your column — your column that is entirely parasitic on Rove's column (ugh! that sounds like Rove needs a medicinal ointment) — is so damned deep. Cohen, you're losing me.

[But] the books themselves reveal -- actually, confirm -- something about Bush that maybe Rove did not intend. They are not the reading of a widely read man, but instead the books of a man who seeks -- and sees -- vindication in every page....

The list Rove provides is long, but it is narrow. It lacks whole shelves of books on how and why the Iraq war was a mistake, one that metastasized into a debacle.

Metastasized into a debacle? That's one of those dead-metaphor mixed metaphors. I wonder what George Bush thinks about mixed metaphors....

Bush read David Halberstam's "The Coldest Winter," which is about the Korean War, but not on the list is Halberstam's "The Best and the Brightest," which is about the Vietnam War. Bush read some novels, but they are mostly pre-movies, plotted not written, and lacking the beauty of worldly cynicism. I recommend Giuseppe di Lampedusa's "The Leopard." Delicious.

Delicious? Are women attracted to men who pronounce things that are not food/drink "delicious"? I think not! And what's his point? From the novel:

"We were the Leopards, the Lions, those who'll take our place will be little jackals, hyenas; and the whole lot of us, Leopards, jackals, and sheep, we'll all go on thinking ourselves the salt of the earth."

So... the Democrats are jackals and sheep?
_____

* That might have impressed Althouse. But the truth is that I can't think of a single time that I found a man attractive because I noticed the book he was reading. And yet there are many times when I snap-judged a man to be a fool because of the book he was reading. Be careful with the books, lads.

_____

IN THE COMMENTS: Meade said:

"I wonder what George Bush thinks about mixed metaphors...."

Best bloggish idle musing of the year!

I really appreciate that. Meade has my number.

NOW will you sleep with me?

More things to wonder about.

Anthony said:

C'mon already, Althy, we're waiting for what books would make you throw yourself in a blind passion at he-who-would-be-reading-one.

Well, there's "Get Me a Table Without Flies, Harry"...

A friend once told me that (this was in the late '80s, mind you) if I just went into a local coffee shop wearing my spandex biking shorts and read Sartre I'd "get all the p*ssy you want". Maybe so, but it'd be hairy and wearing Birkenstocks. No, I never tried it.

Who wears shoes that way? Is it like the Red Hot Chili Peppers and socks? (NSFW.)

Chip Ahoy said...

Why Literature Is Bad For You, Peter Thorpe

A onetime professor of literature at CU Boulder. Here, let me save you $3.20 on the secondary market. The book amounts to a screed against the people with whom Professor Thorpe shared a Department, and the Masters students with whom he came into contact. He apparently studied their traits closely, eagerly tallied their most damaging characteristics and categorized them, then described how it was Literature that distorted otherwise perfectly good personalities. It's hilarious. It's horrible. I laughed, I cried, I couldn't eat or sleep for days. I'm fairly certain I made up this last part, or possibly I read it somewhere.

Yes, that's right, I'm doing it too. Cohen reminds me of someone I've previously met somewhere in literature. His archetype has already been perfectly delineated in a book by a writer good at describing people. I automatically subsumed Cohen to a characterization I have already meet, thus I deny his unique contribution, if there is one.

Actually, Cohen's review, which I'm smart enough to avoid, makes me go, "Gah!" Reminds me of real people I know in real life, irritating people, always eager to tell me what books I really must read, lists of them, in order to become enlightened like themselves. The unstated assumption sits flatly, that I'll remain dull and unenlightened until then. I reflexively spit on the floor and immediately regret having spit, because it is uncivilized, and because now somebody must clean it up, most likely myself.

And have you ever cleaned spit off a carpet? A dampened rag, a little Oxiclean, it's not all that bad. But I wouldn't have to do it! If everyone would just stop telling me which books I must read, and stop using words like Galuoise instead of cigarettes, industrial instead of industrious, and delicious instead of good. Yes, it reminds me of overlapping cases in Peter Thorpe's book. Students of literature, avoid them.

On the other hand, I'm reading Robert Sabuda's delicious adaption of Barrie's Peter Pan. Well, I'm not actually reading it, but rather, I'm studying the industrial pop-ups. A real tour de force in pop-uppery, and you're really not sufficiently educated in paper engineering pop-up mechanisms until you've studied Robert Sabuda.

This is a fun game to play. Let's bludgeon each other with the names of books we supposedly read, or possibly scanned the cover jackets or the Cliff Notes, or possibly heard about, and then use inappropriately artsy adjectives in an effort to elevate ourselves at each other's expense. Sniff.

Wow! Now, I think "Why Literature Is Bad For You" would work.

As for "Robert Sabuda's delicious adaption of Barrie's Peter Pan"... delicious... Chip Ahoy is named after a cookie, so it might be okay to call him delicious.

AND: About Chip's fun game — naming "books we supposedly read, or possibly scanned the cover jackets or the Cliff Notes, or possibly heard about, and then us[ing] inappropriately artsy adjectives in an effort to elevate ourselves at each other's expense" — may I suggest the adjectives "luminous" and "astonishing."

Live-blogging the election returns!

5:01: Finally! Results. Settle in. Pour yourself a nice glass of win or whine, as you see fit.

5:37: "There's only one thing to take to a Kenyan election victory feast: a goat. Preferably still breathing - 'a sign of freshness' - and with big testicles, apparently the sign of quality breeding."

5:42: Per Fox News, McCain will lose (if he loses) because McCain's idea of the surge worked so well and because President Bush kept us free of terrorist attacks. The national security issues have receded into the shadows, and that makes it hard for McCain.

5:48: Polls about to close in a lot of places at the top of the hour, so let's while away the moments by looking at the sedate polling place where I arrived at 9:15. Enter:



Vote:



Drop by the church-school bake sale:



6:00: CNN declares Obama the winner in Vermont and McCain in Kentucky, which is unsurprising. It does not resolve Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina, and Virginia. So does that mean that there is no overwhelming landslide for Obama? Or is CNN playing us (or playing it safe)?

6:16: Wolf Blitzer beams in a hologram from Chicago. It's Jessica Yellin, floating about oddly. It's also funny how obvious it is that she is being photographed outdoors. There is a subtle hunching against the elements that looks slightly daffy projected indoors. [Video.]

7:00: Polls just closed in a bunch of states, and CNN is only predicting the states that were very predictable. So the big blowout is not happening.

7:09: Elizabeth Dole crushed.

7:15: In the comments, there's quite a lot of talk of getting drunk. Palladian shows us what he's got lined up:



7:18: MSNBC calls Pennsylvania for Obama. Is that a cry for attention, or do they know something CNN and Fox don't?

7:33: CNN Headline News has Nancy Grace going on about a psychic looking for a missing toddler. I guess "Headline" doesn't mean what it used to. Now, it means holding pen for politicophobes.

7:40: Now, CNN calls Pennsylvania for Obama.

8:00: My state went for Obama. So did Michigan and Minnesota. Obama's at 179 electoral votes, with McCain at only 49.

8:04: Per CNN, twice as many voters said age was important as said race was important. But both groups tended to see that factor as a reason to vote for Obama.

8:34: CNN calls Ohio for Obama. "A huge, huge win," says Wolf Blitzer. "A huge, huge win," he says a second time.

8:34: Here, fiddle with this interactive map. It seems rather clear that Obama will win.

8:45: John King fiddles with the CNN interactive map to see if there is any way, given the states already called, that McCain could win. He gave him everything except Hawaii, California, Oregon, and Washington, and it was not enough to hit 270. So unless they've made some wrong calls -- and I vividly remember when Florida was called for Gore in 2000 -- McCain cannot win.

8:53: I hope the McCain supporters are holding up. Don't despair. Glenn Reynolds had an op-ed this morning saying: "[O]nce someone is duly and legally elected president, you do owe some respect to the office and the Constitution. And to your fellow Americans. I'm not an Obama fan, particularly, but a lot of people I like and respect are. To treat Obama as something evil or subhuman would not only be disrespectful toward Obama, but toward them. Instead, I hope that if Obama is elected, their assessment of his strengths will turn out to be right, and mine will turn out to be wrong." Yes, can we please not hate the President this time, for a change? (Or did I just rile you with the word "change"?)

9:01: More states called. Obama's up to 206 electoral votes... which doesn't include California (with 55). Do we have to keep watching?

9:08: "The Republican Party is getting a drubbing tonight, the likes of which we have never seen," says James Carville.

9:27: In the comments, Doyle asks, "You guys having fun?" Which provokes Palladian: "No, I wouldn't be having fun no matter who won this miserable election. But are you going to be having fun? It's not enough to sit around and bitch, you sour little cocksucker. You're in charge now! In charge of all of us! In charge of our future! You're not going to get to protect and govern only those that agree with you. You're going to have to protect and govern all of us, just like George Bush did with your sorry asses these last 8 years. We're ready for the brilliance, for the leadership, for the change and hope and all that. Time to deliver! Bring it on, doily!" Balfegor responds to the same question: "I am, actually. If we must endure the unendurable, and suffer the insufferable, we may as well have a bit of fun while we're at it. I am young, and may reasonably expect that, barring accidents, I will live to see a day when the Obama presidency is nothing more than a distant memory. And he may, after all, surprise us -- we know next to nothing about his ability to lead, or what he really believes, as he has hitherto studiously avoided any situation in which either could be put to the test."

10:00: CNN projects Obama as the winner!

10:01: I've been sitting here feeling completely cool and calm all evening. But that announcement -- that Obama has won -- gave me chills, made me almost cry. Something big has happened.

10:13: Karl Rove says "Every American should celebrate." That's on Fox, where there is some sedate but sincere celebration of the historic achievement: the first black President.

10:19: McCain speaks (over booing). "I deeply admire and commend him." He speaks of racial progress. "Let there be no reason now for any American to fail to cherish their citizenship in this, the greatest nation on earth." He urges us to "come together." "Whatever our differences, we are fellow Americans."

10:37: Charles Krauthammer, on Fox, praises Obama as a self-made man, who came out of nowhere, with no real resources. He says we don't really know who he is, but we'll find out. But he seems to think -- I do too -- that Obama is not really an ideologue, but a sensible, intelligent, pragmatic man who will check the Democratic Congress.

10:52: CNN is showing the crowd -- gathered spontaneously -- around the White House. Are you where you can see or hear people celebrating in the streets? I'm not. The window is open on this warm night, but all I'm hearing is a train whistle in the distance.

10:58: Obama walks out on the stage in Chicago. He looks happy. It makes me feel happy enough to laugh out loud. Michelle is wearing a very strange dress, black with glowing redness spreading upward and downward from a black X across the midriff. The little girls look elegant, as if they'd grown much older since we saw them this morning. He compliments McCain. He tells his girls they're getting a puppy. He gives us all credit for his victory. We understand "the enormity of the task that lies ahead." (Yikes!) He's going to listen to us, but he wants us to help him "rebuild this nation." "Let us summon a new spirit of patriotism, of responsibility." Let's not be partisan and petty. Let's remember Abraham Lincoln. He was a Republican. He faced a nation more divided than it is now. But he reached out to them. And we share a destiny with everyone in the world. "Democracy, opportunity, and unyielding hope." "America can change. Our union can be perfected." Now, he's in a sing-song poetic part of the speech, with the refrain "Yes we can." The crowd catches on and shouts the refrain. "Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States of America."

"Beware the long arm of Butt-Head."

A Code Pink lady tries to make a "citizen's arrest" of Karl Rove:



That sent me looking for the great old "Citizen's Arrest" episode of the Andy Griffith show, but I got distracted by the less-remembered, but hilarious "Citizen's Arrest" episode of "Beavis and Butt-Head":



And, yes, the Code Pink woman commits a crime in that video. And a tort.

Biden "has been absolutely butchering Senator John McCain across the Rust Belt this week."

According to Mark Leibovich in the NYT. The evidence? You got me. I read the whole article. Didn't notice any butchering.

Yet Joltin’ Joe has also become a fascinating Off Broadway spectacle in his own right. He is a distinctive blend of pit bull and odd duck whose weak filters make him capable of blurting out pretty much anything — “gaffes,” out-of-nowhere comments (pivoting midspeech to say “Excuse my back!” to people seated behind him), goofy asides (tapping a reporter’s chest and telling him, “You need to work on your pecs.”)

Mr. Biden’s role is red-meat serious: to pulverize Mr. McCain, lend foreign policy heft to Senator Barack Obama and be his campaign’s main ambassador to two at-risk constituencies: former supporters of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and blue-collar Democrats. He speaks to working-class voters in the harsh language of their economic trials, and summons easy rage at ear-splitting volumes.

Huh? So he's supposed to "pulverize" McCain. That's his role. But what did he do? What is the this "harsh language of their economic trials"? He recounts the story of growing up poor? How does that become "harsh language"? He "summons easy rage at ear-splitting volumes." What is "easy rage"? Completely relaxed, yet mad as hell?

Leibovich is stretching for vividness, and a lot of it just doesn't make sense. Is Biden effective? I feel like he's not but Leibovich wants to say he is.

Anyway, Drudge linked for the "You need to work on your pecs" thing. That was funny.

By the way, Biden makes Rush Limbaugh positively giddy and giggly. Example here. Oh, that link fortuitously has something I wanted to quote:

...I should have pointed this out to you last night on the plane, Snerdley, but Karl Rove literally skinned Alan Colmes alive.

Literally. Yikes! At least Leibovich didn't have Biden literally butchering McCain. Politics is quite the blood sport these days.

MORE: Here.

"Even if you never met him, you know this guy."

"He's the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by."

#78 in a collection of "moments" from the 2008 campaign.

"According to Lucille, the waitress serving her table at the time and who asked that her last name not be used..."

Incredibly weakly sourced anti-Palin crap. (Via Memeorandum.)

But being openly racist is only the tip of the Palin iceberg. According to Alaskans interviewed for this article, she is also vindictive and mean. We’re talking Rove mean and Nixon vindictive.

"This woman is an Obama-level political natural."

Says Megan McArdle. Indeed.

It's like some bizarre nightmare/dream (depending on your party preference). The Dems had Obama, and then... suddenly Sarah.

It's as if some mad right-wing scientists designed and built an android to counter all the things that Obama is. Can she be real? Can it be that there was this actual human entity, on ice in Alaska, waiting for this moment to be thawed out and set loose in the lower 48?

IN THE COMMENTS: Simon:

Ann, remember Jon Turley's line about John Roberts et fam. at the 7th Circuit Bar meeting last year? "Hydroponically raised by Karl Rove in the White House basement" or something to that effect.

Good memory. Here's Turley:

Roberts is a handsome, perfectly groomed man who looks like he was raised hydroponically by Karl Rove in the White House basement.

I got completly distracted by Marilyn Monroe.

I like this collection of clips of Marilyn Monroe making funny faces:



And here's a nice clip of her trying to get a scene right, where it's not her that's screwing up, but a dog (some wretched spaniel):



Now, why am I looking at Marilyn Monroe clips on YouTube at 7 a.m.? Because I was trying to get a good clip of the character Addison DeWitt (in "All About Eve"), and this is as close as I could get:



See how you get completely distracted by Monroe? Addison DeWitt is the guy sitting on the stares stairs, making snide comments about everyone who passes by. I was hoping to get more of a clip of him at a country club with a beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette and standing against the wall making snide comments about everyone who passes by, but that was as close as I got, so the post I'd had in mind to write is not being written.

But I do understand what Karl Rove was trying to say. Trying. Ridiculously. The core of the statement makes sense. The entire surface of it is absurdly distracting.

Hillary Clinton's best argument to the superdelegates.

Look at these Electoral College maps.

"Selecting Daddy's top foreign-policy guru ran counter to message. It was worse than a safe pick -- it was needy."

Karl Rove said to George Bush about Dick Cheney -- according to Robert Draper's new book "Dead Certain: The Presidency of George Bush." So much for Rove being Bush's brain.

When Rove, President Bush's top political adviser, expressed concerns about the [nomination of Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court], he was "shouted down" and subsequently muted his objections, Draper writes, while other advisers did not realize the outcry the nomination would cause within the president's conservative political base.

Now, this is surprising:

It was John G. Roberts Jr., now the chief justice of the United States, who suggested Miers to Bush as a possible Supreme Court justice, according to the book. Miers, the White House counsel and a Bush loyalist from Texas, did not want the job, but Bush and first lady Laura Bush prevailed on her to accept the nomination, Draper writes.

But a spokesperson for Roberts denies the report. And there's no clear source for this in the book's footnotes. Seems like a juicy but dubious book. I'm going to guess that Roberts said something about Miers but that it was far from a recommendation that she get the position.