Oh, you thought that he was only Bush’s brain? Nope, Karl Rove weeps, or nearly so, when he appeared with Bush to resign yesterday. The article in the New York Times about that event paints it, at least with the photo of Rove wheeling his carryon into the sunset at the Waco airport, as a bittersweet moment. Rove all of a sudden stands as a sympathetic character? Oh, authors Jim Rutenburg and Steven Lee Myers don’t quite pull off that sort of magic. They are clear to point out that Rove’s brand of “bare knuckle politics” don’t fit the current situation where Bush must negotiate with Congress, but nevertheless the authors fail to account for the fact that Rove and his advice put Bush into that position. Rove’s tenure in office might have been best characterized by John Kerry: “proved the politics of division may win some elections but cannot govern America.” Perhaps we should hear candidly from all the politicians Rove buried with his brand of blitzkrieg politics?

Not for the first time I’m about to agree with Dick Polman, who traces Rove’s failure to his trotting out Bush to advance the cause of privatizing social security. Polman’s article in the Philadelphia Inquirer this morning includes a set-up whereby he details Karl Rove’s optimism (which is totally whack):

Karl Rove is upbeat and unbowed as he heads for the exit with his head held high.

He insists that “Iraq will be a better place,” thanks to the surge; that President Bush “will move back up in the polls”; that the 2006 Republican wipeout was “a really close election”; and that he did not screw up big time in 2005 when he drained Bush’s political capital by putting his boss on the road to stump in vain for the partial privatization of Social Security.

So says the political guru better known by the nickname “Bush’s Brain,” in his de facto resignation announcement, which appeared yesterday in a predictably sycophantic column nestled in the friendly confines of the Wall Street Journal commentary page. Clearly, he will continue to dwell within the reality-challenged Bush bubble long after he departs at the end of this month, purportedly to spend more time with his family.

Polman doesn’t pull punches here. “Reality-challenged Bush bubble” is extreme for a columnist like Polman. Sure, Polman only identifies the Bush’s stumble on the social security issue. I’m willing to bet Bush had heavy influence from Karl Rove on a great number of issues where he has failed. Iraq, Katrina, No Child Left Behind, the Prescription Drug Benefit. . . I’m willing to bet that history will show that Bush’s failures, all of them, have certainly included a leavening of advice from Karl Rove. Yeah, even the military decisions. To that end, Patrick Leahy may never get Rove to testify concerning the Bush failures in the Justice Department. By the standards of executive privelege, Rove probably qualifies on every single issue, as his advice has been that widespread. His personal challenge is to escape the judgement history is going to make of the Bush Administration, that it is the biggest failure of a Presidency in history.

The Republican candidates, whether for President or for Congress, have not cottoned on to the fact that Rove ushered in the failure of the Bush Administration that is now threatening their jobs. Those jobs are threatened because of a Republican electorate, scared at being on the outside and looking in, is lashing out ar Republicans who aren’t conservatiuve enough, so says Ronald Brownstein of the LA Times. Republicans scared? They’re not scared of using Rove’s tactics, I’m thinking. I’m sure as I can be that Republicans all over this country, including the top Presidential candidates, will be using the tactics of divisiveness in the coming elections, and Adam Nagourney of the New York Times, without decrying those tactics, mind you, is reporting that those who learned political strategy from Rove himself are inside all of those campaigns.

The question here is whether this is a good idea for those candidates. Our own Daniel DiRito was right to write an epitaph for Karl Rove in one sense. Rove’s time, by all rights, should be past. None but extremists Republicans are going to be spurred to vote based on the politics of divisiveness and hate this time around. Oh, sure, I think the religious nut wing of the Republican Party will still be swayed by such divisive tactics. They may even come out to vote based on threats to the traditional family, and we can expect attacks on Hillary or Obama based in anti-feminist tactics or in outright racism. We’ve all seen Lindsey Graham and Mitt Romney posed with the Obama Osama sign, and we shouldn’t kid ourselves that the sign originated with a simple supporter. It was used to excite the base, and used by those who learned from Rove — I’ll bet a bunch on that. I’ll also bet that sign will backfire among all but the most blind Republicans.

I started this little commentary by referencing the weepy Karl Rove from yesterday’s Press Op. Karl Rove looking human? I’m saying now that Karl Rove ought to be painted instead as a bitter and divisive man who won two elections but ended up a failure in every single way afterwards, betraying American ideals and contributing mightily to the biggest failure of a Presidency our country has seen. Forget any notion of Karl Rove as a human. He’s already risen like a zombie in that those who learned his tactics are advising Republican politicians all over this country. An army of Rovians is out there, and the humanizing of Rove will legitimize their tactics if we don’t exercize vigilance. Of course, I’ve got great faith in the left flank of the blogzome in providing that vigilance, and not a whole lot of faith in traditional media.

Good riddance, Karl. You’ve got no sympathy from me for your tears, just as you showed no sympathy for ideals of fairness in America over the years you worked.