Hey BC!

How's it going?

Sum Off, BC - At the risk of inviting your ire, my own thoughts on this are closer to Mansions than either of yours. Karl Rove was what James Carville was to Bill Clinton: a place to bounce political ideas off (at a minimum in the case of Clinton) or a place, seemingly, to be guided from (in the case of Rove and Bush). In either of the cases, I feel we can only judge the ramifications of their advice in the long run. Most of the signs in Iraq seem to point to failure - at least in the short run - but we will not know for another 10 -15 years, IMO, whether invading Iraq will turn out to be beneficial or not. Also, Karl Rove was certainly the architect of Bush domestic policy but not necessarily of his Iraq one.

Dont get me wrong - I've never cared much for Rove. But I think it would be premature to dismiss his contributions to politics altogether. As a domestic political advisor, many would argue he was quite successful on the front that he was supposed to advise about.

Am I glad to see him go? I guess at this stage I could care less. Bush is a lame duck and my interest on this subject doesn't go beyond guessing of the name of Rove's TV show and which channel it might appear on - Fox or MSNBC?