Karl Rove Divorced - Lefty Blogs See Hypocrisy

Via Memeorandum

Politico reports Karl Rove and his wife of 24 years Darby obtained a divorce in Texas according to spokesperson Dana Perino:

“Karl Rove and his wife, Darby, were granted a divorce last week," said Perino. "The couple came to the decision mutually and amicably, and they maintain a close relationship and a strong friendship. There will be no further comment, and the family requests that its privacy be respected.”

The Roves were married in January 1986.

Stress and strain of the White House years was cited as a reason for the divorce according to a family friend. Naturally the lefty blogs went wild with the news. Rove, after all, is one of their favorite targets. Andrew Sullivan writes "The Marriage Defender ...gets a divorce." Sullivan tries to be fair(?) of course noting Rove's opposition to gay marriage was politically driven. Rove is not a homophobe in private according to Sullivan. Sullivan links to Glenn Greenwald's dissertation on Rove's apparent hypocrisy while suggesting that Greenwald's fury is in part provoked by the fact that his own partner can not reside in the US. I think I am missing the relevance of that point and have absolutely no clue how that relates to Rove, but I digress.

To be sure, Rove has defended traditional marriage and as Greenwald argues that certainly has included the idea of permanence depending on your religious background.  Greenwald's suggests that if Rove, Rush Limbaugh and others who oppose gay marriage were forced to stay married to their wives they would change their tunes on "traditional marriage" quickly and give Greenwald and Sullivan the gay marriages they so desire.  This argument is absurd.  First, neither Rove nor Limbaugh have the power to stop the country from legalizing gay marriage.  Gay marriage was overturned in California and Maine, two very liberal states, Rove and Limbaugh had nothing to do with it.

Second, here's a newsflash for Mr. Greenwald, gays divorce too.  He best be prepared to force those in the gay community into permanent marriage once they are legally allowed to marry.   Greenwald also presumes that it is Rove, not his wife, who wanted the divorce.  Would forcing her to remain married give Greenwald some odd sense of satisfaction?  If it does, he is not a rational human being.  Blaming Rove and Limbaugh for the exile of Greenwald's partner is as irrational as demanding that anyone who believes marriage is between a man and woman be forced to stay married.  The bottom line, Rove's divorce has nothing to do with gay marriage.  Greenwald and Sullivan need better arguments.

Thanks to Dahlhalla at POWIP for linking!

Now the Gay Community is "Fringe"

Interesting news at the top of Memeorandum right now. John Aravosis Americablog has a headline with breaking news from NBC on today's gay rights protest in Washington. Here is the video that has inspired the wrath of the left:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Here are the quotes from NBC Correspondent John Harwood reflecting the attitude of the White House towards the protesters:

Barack Obama is doing well with 90% or more of Democrats so the White House views this opposition as really part of the Internet left fringe.

For a sign of how seriously the White House does or doesn't take this opposition, one adviser told me those bloggers need to take off the pajamas, get dressed, and realize that governing a closely divided country is complicated and difficult.

What a surprise this White House doesn't take seriously the concerns of protesters!  Of course anyone who protests this White House is going to be characterized as fringe, although considering the support the gay community has given this administration they are justifiably enraged.  This administration would sell any group out that can give them a bit of bad press.

While I thought it was ridiculous for Pelosi, Reid and yes even the President to disregard the protests of the right, calling the gay protesters fringe who need to take off the pajamas etc., was flat out stupid.  I will admit it would have rankled a bit had the administration treated this protest differently, but when you describe a supportive part of your base as fringe you've got some serious problems. Who are they going to write off next?

I have good friends and neighbors who are gay.  We have had the discussion  often whether this White House was going to do anything substantial for their cause.   My position initially was that nothing would happen until well into the 2nd term if there was one.  It has been said a few times the administration considers the Clinton's tackling of social issues early on as what led to major losses in the midterms in 94, Harwood reiterated that point in the clip.  That may have been a breaking point but it wasn't the whole picture. There was far less risk for this administration to have tackled the social issues than to have alienated the independents with government expanding programs.  The moderates and independents wouldn't have been as inclined to vote against the Democrats in the midterms solely on the basis of social issues.

As it stands now, the Dems are looking to lose a good number of seats in the midterms anyway.  The best chance for making good on any promises real or implied to the gay community would have been early but the Administration chose stimulus and is trying to pass a health care plan that barely gains  the votes of the moderates in their own party.   Add cap and tax on that and there won't be anywhere near enough votes to address social issues. 

As Dan Riehl mentioned earlier Obama "played the Centrist before the election, giving his base a wink and a nod at every turn. And the media never bothered to expose it."  The only ones who actually believed it were the moderates.   As I said to my friends here why would you think if Obama has to lie about his position on gay marriage to get elected, he will suddenly have political courage when he is in office?  Even his decision to veer to the left on economic policies wasn't born out of courage, it came from a grandiose sense that he could continue bamboozle the middle with speeches and continue to wink at his base on social issues.  The gay community decided to call him out on it and was thrown under the Obama bus.  I wonder which group will be next.

For More on this topic see:
American Power " No Blackface for Lady Gaga's 'Imagine' Gig at National Equality Event
Legal Insurrection "Bloggers in Pajamas Unite
Pundit & Pundette  "Obama's Bipartisan Scorn for Dissent"

H/T Memeorandum For the latest posts from the right and left see this topic at Memeorandum

Rick Santorum Testing the 2012 Presidential Waters in Iowa

Rick Santorum appears to be adding his name to the growing list of GOP hopefuls for 2012. Politico reports:

POLITICO has learned Santorum will visit first-in-the-nation Iowa this fall for a series of appearances before the sort of conservative activists who dominate the state GOP’s key presidential caucuses.

As a former Pennsylvania Senator losing in landslide bid for re-election in 2006 to Bob Casey, Santorum is not committing to a run in 2012 but his scheduled actions in the State of Iowa have all the hallmarks of a presidential hopeful:

The Pennsylvanian, who lost his 2006 re-election bid, will visit Iowa on October 1st, appearing on a Des Moines radio talk show and speaking to a luncheon and workshop of Iowa’s Right to Life group before heading east to Dubuque, where he’ll headline a fundraiser for the conservative America’s Future Fund PAC and then speak about the future of the GOP to a public audience in the Mississippi River city.

Santorum expressed his concern over the current state of government and wants to lend his voice to conservative causes:

“Your voice becomes more amplified when you go to a place like Iowa or New Hampshire,” Santorum explained in an interview Tuesday about the visit.

Santorum is known for his passionate pro-life stance and advocacy for Terri Schiavo. Santorum is widely criticized in the LGBT community for his statements on homosexuality in 2003. While Iowa has always favored conservative candidates in Presidential elections, it is also one of a few states to legalize gay marriage. Santorum's reception in Iowa is likely to be interesting to watch.