I said yesterday that I was struck by the fact that Rove and Hannity were on opposite sides of the fence when it came to O'Donnell's victory. Now, the right wing have turned on Rove - never thought I'd live to see the day that this happened - and are dubbing him "an effete sore loser".
Malkin: "Rove came across as an effete sore loser." In a September 14 post, Malkin wrote that Rove "trash[ed]" O'Donnell during the Hannity segment and he "[m]ight as well have been [Keith] Olbermann on MSNBC." Malkin later wrote that "Rove came across as an effete sore loser instead of the supposedly brilliant and grounded GOP strategist that he's supposed to be." Malkin, citing The Freedomist blog, also wrote that "Rove had met with Delaware 9/12-ers and Tea Party folks to try and convince them to back the 'more electable' candidate."
Warner Todd Huston: "The Veracity of Karl Rove's Political Analysis is Suddenly Suspect." In a September 14 Gateway Pundit post titled, "The Veracity of Karl Rove's Political Analysis is Suddenly Suspect," Huston cited the Freedomist post and wrote: "Rove is certainly entitled to his opinion and if he truly believes that O'Donnell cannot win in the general, then he should feel free to say so and we should accept it as such. But in this case we have a problem believing that Rove's analysis is simply his honest opinion when we find out from The Freedomist that Rove was trying to cut a pre-primary deal to help Mike Castle to win the primary." Huston further wrote that "Fox News should require Rove to answer to this charge":
Fox News should require Rove to answer to this charge. If he really did act as a helpmate for Rep. Mike Castle this damages Rove's veracity as an analyst. He has just made himself suspect. You can't be both a political player and an autonomous, disinterested analyst. Will Fox suspend Rove over this? They certainly should if he really did work to help Castle, in any case.
Dan Riehl: "Fox Should Suspend Rove And Investigate." In a September 14 post on his blog, Dan Riehl called Rove's comments "disgraceful" and also cited the Freedomist post to claim that "Fox should suspend him and investigate" and that "it seems impossible to trust Rove as an objective analyst." From Riehl's post:
Michelle Malkin has a very solid reaction to Karl Rove's disgraceful behavior on Fox News tonight. That is not why Fox should suspend him and investigate. According to this report, Rove was working behind the scenes on behalf of the Castle campaign to negotiate a deal that would have led to some Delaware Tea Party groups not supporting Christine O'Donnell, while giving Mike Castle a pass.
Especially given his comments on Fox News tonight, until this is resolved, it seems impossible to trust Rove as an objective analyst. In terms of the conservative movement, we should not simply ignore him, but proactively work to undermine Rove in whatever ways we can, given his obvious willingness to undermine us.
And I really love the notion that Rove's impartiality is "suddenly suspect". On what planet was he ever suspected of impartiality in the first place?