But that’s not what you get. First off, the aesthetics aren’t quite right: up close, Rove’s seemingly babyish face has an intimidating quality — sharp nose, intense gaze — that photographs never capture. Beyond that, the moment Rove begins to speak it’s clear that his oratorical style is eerily similar to Bush’s. All the constituent parts are the same: the sprinkles of frat-house humor, the doses of angry didacticism — even the hand gestures and taps on the podium.
Who picked up whose mannerisms from whom? It’s impossible to say. But in one key area — the nimbleness with which Rove tackles big ideas — the aide easily exceeds his boss. When the intellectual going gets tough, Bush often looks like a nervous schoolboy shakily reciting a memorized script. But Rove oozes intelligence, which makes the script he delivers all the more compelling.
In that script — which, almost inevitably, will serve as the Republican Party’s mantra as this fall’s midterm elections draw closer — there will be plenty of references to the GOP’s alleged superiority on economic issues, including claims that the Bush administration’s tax cuts saved the country from financial disaster following 9/11. But it’s the “Global War on Terror” (surprise!) that’s going to play a starring role. And it was Rove’s musings on this subject that marked the high point of his speech in Manchester. Some highlights:
In the days leading up to the decision [to invade Iraq], there were some voices that were strong and powerful in their support for the administration. I’d like to share a few quotes with you from one of those advocates. Quote: “I agree completely with this administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq. Saddam Hussein is a renegade and an outlaw . . .” Quote: “In the wake of September 11, who can say that this master of miscalculation has not developed a weapon of mass destruction even greater — a nuclear weapon?” And finally, quote: “I believe the record of Saddam Hussein’s ruthless, reckless breach of international values and standards of behavior . . . is cause enough for the world community to hold him accountable, by use of force if necessary. The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new.” Now, who made these comments? Was it Secretary of State Powell? Was it Vice-President Cheney? Was it the president himself? Was it Laura Bush? No. This was Senator John Kerry, D-Massachusetts. . . . [Hoots and applause]
[After citing calls by Kerry and Congressman John Murtha (D-Ohio) for troop withdrawals in Iraq] I’m not questioning the patriotism of Senator Kerry or Congressman Murtha. But let’s examine, for a moment, how appropriate and correct their policy recommendations are. Like too many Democrats, it strikes me that they are ready to give the green light to go to war, but when it gets tough, when it gets difficult, they fall back on that party’s old pattern of cutting and running. They may be with you at the first shots. But they’re not going to be there for the last tough battles . . . If Murtha had his way, American troops would’ve been gone by the end of April. And we wouldn’t have gotten Zarqawi. . . .
