Fiddytree

I think he is a valuable asset to any media organization for his analysis. The problem is he is not disinterested enough for the job. Another strike against Fox News.

Also note the funny line at the bottom of the quoted text.

"LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Former White House aide Karl Rove denied on Monday that his close ties with Republican politics and John McCain's presidential campaign undermine his credibility as an election analyst for the Fox News Channel.

Appearing at a gathering of television critics in Beverly Hills, Rove and network executive John Moody brushed aside suggestions that Rove's continued involvement in the presidential race, informal or not, might pose a conflict in his capacity as a Fox News contributor.

Rove, the chief strategist for U.S. President George W. Bush's 2000 and 2004 election victories and former deputy chief of staff in his administration, left the White House last August and joined the Fox News team in February 2008.

"I do talk to people in politics all across the country, some of whom are very active in the campaign (but) I play no official role, or ongoing role," he said in answer to a question about whether he works for the McCain operation in any way.

"I do get phone calls," he added. "I'm having dinner later this week with a great friend of mine who just happens to be the Republican state chairman of a battleground state. He's going to be in Washington, and it's not just the quality of steak I'm going to fix him that's caused him to stop by the house and pick my brain. So that's just a reality."

Asked whether Rove was on "the honor system" regarding his contacts with top McCain campaign operatives such as Steve Schmidt, Moody replied: "He's always on the honor system. All of our employees are."

"We get most of our information about the McCain campaign from our correspondents," Moody added. "I don't think Karl would cross an ethical line like that."
Karl Rove denies political ties taint Fox News role | U.S. | Reuters

Hatuey

Ahahahahahahahahaha. Oh man - kids say the darnest things.

__________________
Wasilla : Population 7,000 - Alaska : Population : San Bernadino.

galenrox

Hey man, Karl Rove is a genius, whether or not you think it's misapplied is entirely up to you. His analysis on Fox News is a million times more valuable than damn near anyone else they have on that channel and anyone any other cable news channel has (in terms of the electoral politics aspect - I couldn't really give a **** what his opinions on the issues are). When it comes to analyzing current events on television, I'm yet to see someone who isn't just a ****ing hack trying to sell their POV, that goes for all three cable news networks. When it comes to analysis of what's going to happen electorally most people on the 3 channels are still just ****ing hacks trying to sell their POV in hopes people forget that ad populum is a logical fallacy, but I haven't seen Rove do that, which is why I find his analysis worthwhile.

__________________

Fiddytree

I do agree with you on how valuable he is to any institution that wants to educate on political science.

The problem is I can't quite allow myself to be taken with him.

galenrox

There's nothing wrong with that, I abstain from judgment as I can see how he could possibly be a good guy with a Machiavellian philosophy and I can see how he could possibly just be a soulless dickhole, and I'm not sure which is the real Rove or if it's a combination of the two or what. He's done some pretty scummy **** though, the South Carolina McCain thing in 2000 springs to mind, so I can definitely understand not liking him as a person.

Befuddled_Stoner

Haven't people to the left of Fox's target audience always complained about Fox being the mouthpiece of the Bush administration? And isn't Karl Rove widely acknowledged as "Bush's Brain"?

I'd imagine that Fox coming out and hiring Rove as an analyst is tantamount to them screaming "WE HAVE A STRONG NEOCON BIAS!!!" at the top of their lungs.

And considering this is the news channel that touts themselves as "Fair and Balanced," screaming their bias at the top of their lungs doesn't seem like a move that will increase their credibility. Does this mean that Fox is dropping the bull**** about their neutrality? Perhaps they've totally stopped giving a **** about viewers who aren't calcified republicans?

galenrox

I always find complaints about Fox News to be disingenuous just because of the implicit disregard for the massive amounts of left wing bias in most every other aspect of the mainstream media. It's like complaining about someone being rude to your mother while someone else is in the process of violently raping her.

I also don't see how hiring the most prominent political strategist in the country as a political analyst is demonstrative of bias. If they were, say, insinuating that Barack Obama, based on unnamed sources, is having an affair as a major part of their news cycle, or if they ceased to report on the war when things were going poorly (in case you've forgotten the New York Times running a front page story suggesting McCain might be having an affair based on unnamed sources, or noting how coverage of what's going on on the ground has dropped off almost entirely since the surge started to work, and only focuses on dead troops ignoring every single story indicative of progress) then you might have a point, but come on, hiring an extraordinarily qualified job candidate for a job, what bias does that demonstrate?

Befuddled_Stoner

I find complaints about the left wing bias trite due to the accusation being bandied about by the likes of NP every time Bush makes a rightfully criticized mistake. It's like the story of the boy who cried wolf, except this boy and his legions of mindless lackeys all have megaphones.

Karl Rove is the man who got and kept Bush in office using machiavellian tactics; he's the Republicans' freaking MVP! Hiring him as a political analyst is about as unbiased as hiring...well, who's the closest thing the democrats have...Bill Clinton?

Other news stations have their biases, but they lack that extra bit of hypocrisy that comes from claiming to be neutral at least once per commercial break.

bhkad

"darndest"

__________________
But, when all is said and done, Senator McCain has not spent decades aiding and abetting people who hate America. http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell060508.php3

bhkad

I gather you mean to say he isn't sufficiently unbiased, not that he isn't disinterested enough. After all, who wants to listen to a disinterested political pundit?

If you actually watched enough of his stints you might change your tune.

I've heard him provide solid criticism of the McCain campaign and offer solid, helpful advice to the Obama campaign while working as a Fox analyst.

I suggest some viewers may be too biased to comment on this matter. In fact, some people may be so biased against the former Bush adviser that they might even try to pass judgment on him based not on his actual performance but on his reputation.