Peter Steinfels wrote an interesting columna few days in which he revealed that Karl Rove is set to be the featured speaker at the National Right to Life Committee’s annual convention (Hat tip: Grant Gallicho.) Steinfels asks:
“Is it politically naïve to be surprised that the nation’s leading anti-abortion organization, which describes itself as nonpartisan, would make the star of its election-year convention the embodiment of the Bush administration’s politics at their most calculating and hard-hitting?”
That’s putting it pretty politely. Rove is not only the grand master of sleazy calumnous negative campaigning but intimately associated with the worst errors of the Bush administration. Has the NRLC given up all pretense of being non-partisan?
More to the point: what did Karl Rove ever do on the abortion issue? Oh, he was active all right, but probably not in the way that the NRLC would appreciate. For Karl Rove was an intimate of Jack Abramoff, and was effectively his doorkeeper to the halls of power. This is now official: a House committee report shows quite clearly that Abramoff influenced White House policy through Karl Rove. They sometimes met clandestinely on street corners to avoid a paper trail. They had even shared a secretary, who remained a conduit between the two men. Most notoriously, Abramoff used Rove to remove a Department of Interior official, Alan Stayman, because Stayman favored better regulation of labor market conditions on the Northern Mariana islands.
We should note exactly what Jack Abramoff was defending in the Northern Mariana islands. A recap: the Northern Mariana islands are a US territory in Micronesia. The main industry is textiles, and its (female) workers come from a variety of Asian countries, especially China and the Philippines. These textile manufacturers enjoyed a distinct advantage as garments could travel tariff-free and quota-free to the US and could display the all-important “Made in the USA” label. They were also big clients of Jack Abramoff.
The female employees were subjected to appalling sweatshop conditions that included being forced to work 12 hour days, for half the U.S. minimum hourly wage, and to live in barbed wire prisons. They were effectively slaves. As Josh Marshall noted, this particular guest worker program was notorious for “forced abortion, slavery, child prostitution, sex trafficking, beatings, female workers kept in shacks with no plumbing surrounded by barbed wire and other fun stuff.” It’s true, the sweatshop owners forced women who became pregnant to have abortions. And as a sideline, taking advantage of the women’s highly vulnerable position, they also fostered sex slavery.
The man who provided support for the perpetuation of this system, the man who engaged in formal cooperation with this evil, the man whose close ally was turning a blind eye to forced abortion- is the man honored by a so-called pro-life organization. Not only this this an absolute scandal, but it shows that parts of the organized pro-life movement seems to have sold its soul…for nothing. Fr. Richard John Neuhaus is also a guest speaker. Shouldn’t he be put on the spot for sharing a podium with Rove?
I really think they could get much better examples like Bishop Botean. But I doubt the NRL would ever consider him as a speaker, despite being one of the most honest, most consistent pro-life speakers I’ve seen of late.
This would be NRLC’s coming out party. How else can you explain Rove? The hope, I think, is a political one meant to reinforce the GOP’s “pro-life” persona.
This is what overstaying your time in D.C. does to even the best of us.
“The hope, I think, is a political one meant to reinforce the GOP’s “pro-life” persona.”
I think, in a grasping time and desperate time, it is also a coming out party for the NRLC meant to reinforce its GOP persona.
Once again, the these pro-life groups retain a methodologic imprimatur: they never do wrong, are always noble and have never impeded their cause.
This assertion is unlikely on its face.
Karl Rove loves babies… especially John McCain’s little black baby mothered by another woman.
There are dozens better ideas out there for speakers. This is shameful.
Just to be clear in case Henry doesn’t ax Matt K’s comment, John McCain did adopt a child from overseas. During the 04 or 00 primary in South Carolina, disreputable people implied that the child was fathered by McCain.
“…disreputable people implied that the child was fathered by McCain.”
Mr. Rove would be one of these disreputable people. Funny that…
Actually Matt K’s comment is a quite blatant exemple of Rove’s handiwork. I would let it stand as a glaring example of the man’s work and talents. This is who NRLC chose to allow to speak.
As if life issues were not hyper-politicized enough.
“Karl Rove loves babies… especially John McCain’s little black baby mothered by another woman.
There are dozens better ideas out there for speakers. This is shameful.”
Despite Urban legend there is no evidence that Karl Rove actually authorized that call or was aware of it when it was in the making. It just gets repeated a million times and it people think it must true. ROve has always deneid it in the most explicit of terms and I tend to believe him looking at the facts on the ground.
In 2002 I was very involved with a Senate Campaign. Because of the unique election laws we were the only Election after the 2002 election in December. I was amazed of how every political group descended on the state. We had no control over them or their push calls. In many ways they were more of a hassle I thought at least to me because I was partly having to respond to complaints from people that thought we were authorizing all this.
The South Carolina Primary I expect was very similar. It should be recalled that McCain was enemy number 1 to many groups because of his efforts at CFR. In other words it was just not about Bush.
This past year the HUckabee Campaign was accused of doing a Whisper campaign that was anti Catholic nature agaisnt Brownback in Iowa. Now of course it was nonsense but it amazing how quickly what some yahoo in the field that is not even associated with the Campagin does is quickly associated with top policy makers.
Sadly there is not much you can do about it and it is an occupational hazard.
As to the article it should be noted that Rove on not one of the Principal speakers but of several headline Speakers. Others included Fred THompson. I think Neuhaus was the grand Keynote closing speaker and there was one other I cannot recall.
Karl Rove of course has worked with Pro-lifers before so there are associations. Larl Roves is now an analyist for Newsweek , Fox News, and the Wall Street Journal. His appearance does not quite shock me since this is a political year. I don’t think they would be inviting Donna Brazille.
Good Grief, why is anyone surprised? Did Liberace need a special Coming Out party for people to know he was gay?
There is of course much more going on that the National Right to Life than Karl Rove
For those interested in their schedule go here
http://nrlcconvention.blogspot.com/2008/04/2008-schedule.html
Despite Urban legend there is no evidence that Karl Rove actually authorized that call or was aware of it when it was in the making. It just gets repeated a million times and it people think it must true.
That’s my understanding as well, for what it’s worth. Do you guys have any hard proof here?
The reason the country is about to elect a wholly owned vassal of Abortion Inc. to the Presidency is in large part due to the Architect’s assurances of a popular war. One that would Bush’s party as the dominant political brand for a generation. How this could escape the attention of NRTL is beyond me.
“How this could escape the attention of NRTL is beyond me.” Because I think many of them are so blinded by their conviction that as long as someone says he/she is pro-life and passes anti-abortion legislation EVERYTHING else that person does is irrelevant. So nothing else matters, including the Mariana “issue,” and anything else Rove is connected to.
On the other hand, support for abortion is non-negotiable for the Dems. Sure they’ll run a pro-lifer in a Christian congressional district, but once they get to DC it’s muzzle time. Or, worse, as the treatment of Bob Casey proved. Let’s face it, if the Democrats tolerated pro-lifers 1/10th as much as the GOP rewards pro-aborts we wouldn’t be having this discussion. After Obama signs FOCA, those pro-lifers who followed Kmiec will enjoy the same prestige and respect as Petainists in liberated France. They will be men without a country; distrusted by pro-lifers and loathed by pro-aborts. No one respects a quisling.
“Because I think many of them are so blinded by their conviction that as long as someone says he/she is pro-life and passes anti-abortion legislation EVERYTHING else that person does is irrelevant. So nothing else matters, including the Mariana “issue,” and anything else Rove is connected to.”
As to Mariana issue there is the question of how much Rove knew of what is going on. I know three good politicans in my State two republicans and one Democrat US Senator that got guilt by association because of Jack Abramoff.
I am not prepare to take the leap that MM is making that ROVE just didn’t care about abortion or sex slavery. I highly suspect that the Islands were not high on his radar at this time. Especially as the stage for this was set during the busy transition period
The demonization of Karl Rove is an effect of overreachhing by conservatives as to the Clintons. THe 2000 election and the controversy surrounding it added gasoline to the fire. Democrats and liberals pained wanted to hit back hard and Rove was among many of a conveint boogymen that in the lefts mind took on almost dark powers because of his success.
“The reason the country is about to elect a wholly owned vassal of Abortion Inc. to the Presidency is in large part due to the Architect’s assurances of a popular war. One that would Bush’s party as the dominant political brand for a generation. How this could escape the attention of NRTL is beyond me.”
Really? I think most of the Country doesn’t really care not much whether pro or con which is one reason why we are seeing dismal media coverage of both conflicts we are in.
I don’t think the American public nor the Pro-life movement is going to be affect because Karl ROve is giving a Speech at a event that most people will not be aware of
Rove hit a brick wall 2 years ago. A funny thing happened on the way to the Permanent Republican Majority—the 06 midterms. As for RTL, it’s been in denial for years, criticize anything about this administration and you’re called a proabort. From NRTL to the KC grand dragons filmed hugging and kissing Bush at their 04 convention to the Catholic media empire to the smugness of big shots like Wiegel & Novak—all of them smoking the same crackpipe, marching in lockstep toward that glorious day the Republicans will lead us into the promised land. In the meantime the collateral damage was piling up but God forbid anyone should notice. Party on, folks—ignore it and maybe it will go away. Surely Americans would never be so evil as to consider issues other than abortion, stem cells & gay marriage. After all, they are Non Negotiable (!) Karl Keating said so himself. Yes, the past 8 years have been heady times for the leaders of the parade so take another drag on that pipe geniuses, it will help you forget that the music will stop in a few months thanks to your shortsighted arrogance. Some people have to learn the hard way.
Turd blossom!
“I think most of the Country doesn’t really care not much…”
You don’t think the Iraq War is the reason for Bush’s 70% disapproval rating and why the GOP lost Congress 2 years ago? Really?
SB,
Do you guys have any hard proof here?
Liberals don’t need proof. You’re just supposed to believe their allegations, they’re smarter than you after all. On the contrary, you must provide evidence for everything you say. You are not to be trusted.
By the way, I’m not a fan of Karl Rove, but I’ll defend anyone against the liberal spin machine.
“You don’t think the Iraq War is the reason for Bush’s 70% disapproval rating and why the GOP lost Congress 2 years ago? Really?”
Iraq of course was much more in the news even a year ago. I am not totally idscounting IRaq but is that for the loss of Congress. It explains a few seats but noi the majority
THe reason why the GOP lost in 2006 were
(1) Too much party infighting and callng each other RINOS that we did not realize we had a fight on our hand
(2) THe immigration debate that caused us to lose substantial Hispanic vote
(3) grumblings on the econimy
(4) in about 5 races the people in office refuses to believe they had a race going on
(5) oh and corruption.
(6) It was time in the cycle for a very good Democrat year especilly in the Senate wherethey have made more gains in the past
“Kevin Says:
June 24, 2008 at 5:41 am
“I think most of the Country doesn’t really care not much…”
You don’t think the Iraq War is the reason for Bush’s 70% disapproval rating and why the GOP lost Congress 2 years ago? Really?”
While I don’t think the 70% number is correct, I’ll assert his low approval numbers are not primarily because of the war. He started out with fairly low approval numbers due to the contested 2000 election. He reached across the aisle and gave in to Kennedy and others on many issues trying to be conciliatory thinking they would like him. Never gonna happen. Folks on the left would not like him even if he found a cure for cancer. The reason his approval rating went from average/low to very low was he lost part of the base in the years after the 2004 election. His refusal to veto spending bills lost his conservative support and gained no love from the left. He went from 50% approval to 33% approval because he lost Republicans not because he lost approval of folks who never approved of his performance in the first place. It is similar to McCain’s habit of saying stupid stuff occasionally (global warming for example) thinking the left will like him. Nope, won’t work. McCain doesn’t support infanticide and would rather win the war than lose so the left would never like him. All McCain has done is ensure his own side has little enthusiasm for his candidacy. He is still, obviously, better than the alternative, but the casual conservative won’t be fired up to vote for him. That is where Obama is likely to win. He has a cult like following of mesmerized supporters who mistakenly believe he will solve all the worlds ills magically.
Frank ,
“criticize anything about this administration and you’re called a proabort”
Really anything? I doubt that
“the KC grand dragons filmed hugging and kissing Bush at their 04 convention”
SO Knight os Columbus can not be happy to meet the President? THis is bad?
“to the Catholic media empire ”
What exactly is the Catholic News Empire?
“Surely Americans would never be so evil as to consider issues other than abortion, stem cells & gay marriage”
Well they are three. I also see that at least as to the Bush administration you ignore their advocacy of Immigration reform that cost BUsh a ton of Political Captial. Of course those BUsh HUgging Knghts of Columbus were backing that too. ALso there was Vouchers and other matters
“it will help you forget that the music will stop in a few months thanks to your shortsighted arrogance. Some people have to learn the hard way.”
Good Grief
A word on the National Right to Life. It has endorsed John McCain. In fact it has always endorsed JOhn McCain-
Planned Parenthood, the mega chain ABortion provider that is squeezing the poor mom and pop abortion providers out of business, has endorsed Obama.
THe fact that RTL has brought in a POltical guy in an election year to pump them up (again look at their schedule they are doing hearing for more than this speaker) is not shocking
I don’t know how Rove and Abramoff play into this election cycle. Its even less relevant than pointing out convicted Tony Rezko and the sweetheart real estate deal he gave Obama.
Obama also voted for the bill that increased minimum wages. That is except for America Somoa which it seems Democrat Nancy Pelosi had reasons for exempting. Wow, Obama and Pelosi encouraging sub-minimum wage, sweatshop conditions in AMERICA SOMOA!!!!!!
“House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), dogged by Republican charges of a double standard, said yesterday that American Samoa may join the Northern Mariana Islands as U.S. territories that would have to comply with a higher federal minimum wage.
Under the minimum-wage increase approved by the House this week, employers on the Northern Marianas would for the first time have to pay their workers the minimum wage, which would rise from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour. For years, Republicans — with the help of convicted lobbyist Jack A. Abramoff — have fended off efforts to bring the islands under federal labor laws.
The bill would leave American Samoa as the only territory not covered by the $7.25 rate, and because Samoa is represented by a Democrat, Del. Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, Republicans cried foul.
Faleomavaega’s campaign coffers have been well stocked by the tuna industry that dominates his island economy, but Republicans picked up on another issue: StarKist owns one of the largest canneries on the island, and Del Monte Foods, StarKist’s parent company, is based in San Francisco, which Pelosi represents.”
Liberals don’t need proof. You’re just supposed to believe their allegations, they’re smarter than you after all. On the contrary, you must provide evidence for everything you say. You are not to be trusted.
How do you know a conservative is lying? He’s talking. Seriously, if you can say that conservatives have provided any evidence for the crap they’ve been flinging for the last twenty years, you don’t understand what “evidence” means.
Just to let you know also how bad things are in America Samoa and how Pelosi and Obama voted to continue this abuse there is this:
“While Samoa is certainly nowhere near as corrupt as the Marianas Islands, they’re not exactly clean. The Post report adds that a Korean sweatshop owner’s conviction for holding 17 garment workers in involuntary servitude was recently upheld in US District Court. And the other thing is that American Samoa is actually a comparatively expensive place to live. It’s hard to find exact cost of living statistics for the territory, but this report (PDF) claims it’s gone up by about 3.8% annually since 1982.
Coupled with low-income levels is the ever-increasing cost of living. .Since 1982, the current index registered at 153.8 index points as of the fourth quarter of 1996. This means that the cost of living has increased by close to 54 percent, or an annual average of about 3.8 percent. A single household in American Samoa spent an average of about $18,318 in 1988 compared to $12,235 in 1982. More than 50 percent of average spending went to food and housing. Special expenditures such as church donations, customary gifts, and fa’alavelave (family affairs, such as funerals, weddings and title investitures) remained a significant portion of Samoan household spending.
A significant source of spending associated with fa’alavelave is the necessity for uniforms. Uniforms are needed for many occasions, ranging from church functions to civic organizations, as well as primary and secondary school uniforms. The uniforms cost from $10.00 to $30.00 at local sewing shops, not including the fabric and notions. For low-income families, these costs can be difficult to manage. The ability to sew can save the average family hundreds of dollars in sewing costs per year.
Unemployment in American Samoa is estimated at about 5.2%. There are few economic opportunities outside of the local government and the tuna canneries. Emigration to the mainland in search of jobs is common; for those left behind, there is a great need to offer ways to supplement family income.”
So Pelosi and Obama are not pro-life. But we already knew that.
Even those most in the thrall of Planned Parenthood are against forced abortion, I would assume. Rove and Abramoff, not so much.
I don’t know if Rove or Abramoff are in favor of forced abortion. I don’t know what their public statements are in the matter. Certainly Obama publicly is in favor of killing babies even after being born.
“He started out with fairly low approval numbers due to the contested 2000 election.”
Here’s the polling data for 8 years; form 90% right after 9-11 to 28% now. Also, he is now 40% lower in popularity right after the invasion. He staked his entire Presidency with Rove’s support, on Iraq and failed. Victims will include the unborn as Obama takes his turn atop the greasy pole. Which is what makes Rove’s appearance before the NRTL bizzare.
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob1.htm
Kevin you could have had Larry Flynt of Hustler Magazine as President of the US in the days after 9/11 and he would have had huge approval numbers. There is of course a natural rally effect when.
I am not hearing IRaq on everyones lips right now as for reasons of sicontent. I hear a lot of general unease about gas prices and the state of the economy. THis is all natural.
PLus Iraq is not exactly played out and it is especially not played out as many predicted just a year ago. Looking at Iraq through a purely American political lens for a second it will be interesting to see what happens when American “Tune in” in the last months of the elections as to that issue. IF progress continues there and especially with the current operation that the IRaqi forces are conducting the change could be ceome overwhelming evident
MM,
A taste of what your man Obama would okay:
http://www.operationrescue.org/?p=977
Jh,
The verdict is in on Iraq and it is overwhelming; thr American people do not want to reward the Party that took us there. Assuming your scenario plays out all Bush will have done is contained the damage to it’s already cataclysmic level. I say that without holding out much hope for your scenario.
it is very open minded of the National Republicans for Life to invite an atheist raised by a gay daddy to speak to them.