Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential
Moore, James, and Wayne Slater
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Hoboken, 2003
I obtained this book for the purpose of finding out how the New World Order advocates duped the Christian Right into supporting George W. Bush for president.
I already knew a few relevant facts: 1. President Bush's father and grandfather are/were thoroughgoing members of the establishment (1), even members of the infamous Skull and Bones, and that George W. is a chip off the old block; 2. Karl Rove is a master of dirty tricks, and even taught it to Republican students (2); and 3. Actually the Christian Right almost inducted itself into the New World Order establishment, needing very little encouragement.
This is such a disgrace that it is sometimes difficult to admit to anyone I am a Christian. I will say it as I really don't have much choice in the matter, but will follow it quickly with the caveat that I most certainly do not support the Bush administration in any way, shape, or form. Rather, I oppose it with everything I have.
Back to the book, Bush and Rove were more than just candidate and political consultant. They were the best of friends. They were a mutual admiration society, two peas in a pod, or whatever metaphor you want to use (3).
I have spent the last six years being appalled on a daily basis by the Bush administration but, as I write this, the all-time low of Bush's admiration of dirty-tricks Rove hits hard.
Is there any chance for the restoration of liberty and the reining in of government corruption in my lifetime? We are moving further away from that as I continue to get older, so it's questionable at best. I will forge through the book, braced for some really sleazy stuff. Actually, sleazy describes a Harlequin romance or Clinton's escapades. It does not begin to describe what is destroying America and hurting the Christian Church. My only comfort is the knowledge that God will deal with it when He is ready to do so (4). My greatest discomfort is realizing that once the establishment wakes up to the fact that most of the brains of the Bush opposition (and opposition to any future establishment administration) are in the libertarian movement, the movement, to which I am so proudly devoted, may be in for some nasty surprises other than the mere attempts to censor dissent.
According to the author, Rove thinks it and Bush does it (5). This bodes very poorly, as the grueling two-term Bush presidency is only 75% complete. The author mentioned that everyone thinks Rove is really smart; brainy is the word used. I agree.
A good mind is a terrible thing to waste ... or misuse ... I sigh as I rest my head on the back of the easy chair. It's a shame.
Rove ran into Lee Atwater, another dirty tricks man who went to work for Richard Nixon. According to the author, Atwater read Machiavelli’s The Prince every year (6) which, as you can imagine if you read my last year's essay, does not surprise me very much. It gives him some common ground with Mussolini, who, as I pointed out in 2006, kept The Prince on his nightstand. Quite honestly, I think those establishment people have more than that in common with Mussolini. Many of them genuflect at the mention of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and as you may recall I did point out with whom he traded policy ideas.
And, while on the subject of the establishment, I might as well throw in here a reminder that while George W. Bush was governor of Texas, although hidden behind the scenes, he was instrumental in the sales tax hike and eminent domain theft of property for a pork barrel new stadium for the Texas Rangers (7). Despite Bush's and Rove's cultivation of a businessman image for Bush, there was always government involvement.
Bush's Brain, written about Karl Rove, was interesting, but I was halfway through it before I found any sign of a Christian connection. There was a lot about Rove's dirty tricks and that, of course, is worth knowing about because of the extent that it sullies the campaigns and administrations of both Bushes. Finally, Karl Rove, in an effort to groom Bush for the office of governor of Texas, called in many experts to tutor Bush on how the state government was run. Once that was done, Rove created policy teams. For the policy team on welfare, Rove called in Marvin Olasky who eventually helped build the concept of compassionate conservatism. These policy teams came up with the campaign issues.
Olasky (8) believed that religious-based Christian charity was superior to the liberal welfare system. He had a history of Communism/atheism and apparently had been born again, and had then participated in much voluntary Christian charity. He was concerned with education and juvenile crime, the same issues that were on the minds of Texas voters. Rove called Olasky into the picture because Bush was concerned about the lax morality of the 1960s that seemed to linger into the 1990s, and Bush wanted a compassionate conservative image.
As an aside, there was a passage in the book (9) that made me laugh and actually sympathize (minimally!) with the 2000 Bush campaign. That was the meeting of the American Political Science Association where they were sure that there was no way Bush could win the election. (Of course, many people are not sure he actually did win in 2000 or 2004, but that is another subject.) The liberal bias of the Association is screamingly obvious as members went over all these numbers, statistics, historic election numbers and trends, and a number of other things to show scientifically that Al Gore would win. Just like the liberal establishment: mathematics, formulas, all this science, are shown, as though human beings were automatons, controlled by environment and heredity, or Brownian movement perhaps, with no free will at all. This is the same liberal establishment that wants to teach in the schools as fact the bizarre notion that the evolution of human beings just happened with no guidance from a supreme being. They don't seem to know that human beings put thought into their actions and act according to what they believe is in their rational self-interest. This is why free market (and I mean really free market, not the tightly regulated and taxed market Bush calls free market) economics works and central planning does not.
Of course, all that does beg the question, Why didn't more voters choose the Libertarian or some other candidate besides Bush or Gore? I can only answer that by pointing out it is not in the rational self-interest of the fat cats to allow the lamestream, lapdog news media to say much about candidates who have not sold out to the fat cats.
During the 2000 campaign, Karl Rove brought Ralph Reed on board. Until 1997, Reed had been head of the Christian Coalition (10) and was now a corporate consultant. He didn't have a lot of scruples, apparently, judging from the Web site article as he supported causes that were contrary to his beliefs in order to rake in the money. Rove and Bush wanted the fundamentalists, so taking on Reed was (for them) a good move.
Now, we need to remember that the religious right had been complaining for a very long time about how the size and scope of government had grown and how taxes were crowding out the private sector, impoverishing people. They almost sound libertarian, even almost Rothbardian, as exemplified by Tim La Haye way back in 1982 (11).
I have to notice a few things on the La Haye chapter on government (Chapter 3). First, it advocated economic liberty only, not civil liberty. (In fact, by the time I finished the book I was not sure he advocated any liberty at all.) Actually, at the end of the day, all civil liberty is economic liberty and property rights are human rights, and vice versa. But La Haye did have a handle on free market economics. But what he is missing by missing civil liberty is the responsibility for one's own self in the lifestyle department. You really cannot have one without the other, as big government in one area is bound to spill out into the other. I had to realize that all the government bureaucracy and paperwork has to adversely impact the environment (12). Even with computers today this is still true, though Al Gore and his followers are missing in action on that front.
Of course, Bush wanted the evangelical vote so he talked the small-government talk along with the morality talk. The religious leaders picked up the ball and carried it. Whether this was the result of Karl Rove’s bringing people like Olasky and Reed on board I don't know. I do know that Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson (after he was convinced he could not run himself), James Dobson, Tim La Haye, and others fiercely supported Bush, their followers in tow, in 2000, and were foolish enough to repeat the error in 2004. They are strangely silent about the runaway spending and the government micromanagement of just about everything (including in the economy) by the Bush administration. They do trumpet the Bush tax cut (except those in the faith-based office) as a great achievement that is saving families and the economy. They just cannot see the bull in the china shop; all this government spending has to be paid for by somebody, and that somebody is in your mirror. Some tax cut.
The more I learn about Bush and Rove, the more I have to wonder, just how does morality fit into the picture (aside from an excuse to micromanage individuals' lives)? Or, does it at all? Take for example, the U.S. embargo of Cuba. We are not allowed to travel there (don't kid yourself; the U.S. does have restrictions on citizen travel) and there is no trade between the two countries. Many realize that this embargo helps the Castro regime rather than hurting it. If we were to trade and travel there, people would see how much better off we are and get the urge to rebel and possibly install a market economy there. But, would Bush lift the embargo? No way, at least not as the 2004 election drew near and the votes of misled Cuban Americans in Florida would be important (13). The reason the administration gave? It is the responsibility of the Cuban people to decide and implement their government.
Would that this were applied to Iraq.
Of course, there are important differences between Cuba and Iraq. Cuba has no oil; Iraq has lots (14). Cuba is not threatening Israel; Iraq was, or at least that is the Bush line. And that is not to mention that Iraq is strategically located for a buildup of U.S. military for the purpose of spreading empire throughout the region. So, we invaded.
It is all politics. People are suffering and dying in Iraq, and people are suffering and starving in Cuba, and for what? Politics. The aggrandizement of Bush and the establishment.
I did not finish the Moore book. The season is drawing to a close and vacation is nigh. Bush is running the show, but Karl Rove, Mr. Dirty Tricks, is right there. It is like good-cop-bad-cop or, in this case, bad-cop-worse-cop.
Now, in the spring of 2007, I am wondering if Karl Rove will go to work for Bush Rerun, Rudy Giuliani.
(1) Drummey, James J.: The Establishment's Man, Western Islands, Appleton, Wis., 1991.
(2) I'll have the Web page URL soon. AL
(3) Moore, James, and Wayne Slater: Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Hoboken, 2003 P. 11.
(4) He...She...It; a Spirit has no gender. But I will say He or Him when referring to God.
(5) Moore, P. 11.
(6) Ibid. P. 138.
(7) Ibid. P. 160 and 199-201. Also see Hatfield, J.H.: Fortunate Son, Soft Skull Press, New York, 2001, P. 117-118. (Some people believe Hatfield lost his life over this unauthorized Bush biography.)
(8) Moore, P. 202.
(9) Ibid. P. 261-262.
(10) Hatfield. P.231. Also see
(11) La Haye, Tim: Battle for the Family, Fleming H. Revell Co., Old Tappan, N.J., 1982, P. 54-65. We must remember that all figures presented there are 1982 dollars.
(12) Ibid. P. 61.
(13) Moore, P. 283-286.
(14) As this is being posted, plans for offshore oil drilling near Cuba are being laid by Venezuela President Hugo Chavez.