Dick Morris, FOX News' Favorite "Democrat" Analyzes The Supreme Court and Karl Rove From The GOP Standpoint Only
Reported by Ellen - July 15, 2005
Was Dick Morris supposed to be the "balance" for discussing the Supreme Court after three Republican-only segments this week on Hannity & Colmes? Introducing him only as "former Clinton advisor Dick Morris," Sean Hannity conveniently overlooked his primarily Republican leanings. Nevertheless, Morris wasted no time proving he's just as fair and balanced as FOX News. He began his remarks about Chief Justice Rehnquist's announcement that he's not retiring by saying, "Rehnquist has to go... If he has any sense of responsibility to the Republican party, he has got to give George Bush some wiggle room."
Morris explained that Bush "needs two appointments and the Chief Justice appointment and with those three he can finesse this. He could make Scalia the chief judge, he could put a right winger on to replace Rehnquist and he could put a moderate on to replace O'Connor and he gets through this OK."
When it was Colmes' turn, he immediately asked, "Since when does a Supreme Court justice have a responsibility to a particular political party? That's not what the Supreme Court is about."
Morris, smiling like he was having his toes sucked, said condescendingly, "Well, Virginia, they do sometimes (unintelligible) a Santa Claus."
Morris recommended Alberto Gonzales as a good choice because he's a moderate (so long as you think torture is a moderate activity).
Colmes then abruptly changed the topic to Rove and Plamegate. He said "I think the Republicans are lying about Wilson. I think they're smearing him, they're calling him a liar which he's not. He said all along his wife recommended him but did not ultimately approve the trip. They're smearing the guy."
Morris said Rove is his predecessor (doesn't he mean successor?) and "when you sit in that seat and you win an election, they all come after you." (Comment: Then why have the Democrats not gone after him in the previous five and a half years?) Morris added that there is NO evidence that Rove did anything wrong, that the whole thing is just "payback" by Democrats for Bush having won the election. He called Valerie Plame "a clerk."
Colmes: She wasn't a clerk. You're demeaning her position... Why did the CIA say that if she was not undercover, we would have no reason to file a criminal referral? Why did they say that?
Morris obviously had no answer for that so he gave the lame response that Rove never mentioned her name.
Colmes corrected him, saying that the governing term is "identify."
Morris said he thinks it's a matter for the courts to decide (comment: maybe because he had botched his own attempt to do so) but then added the following "fair and balanced" observation: "The point is the Democratic party is howling like a stuck pig right now because they know that they don't have a case."
Colmes, not to be deterred, said if Plame was not undercover, there would be no reason to have an ongoing investigation and a criminal referral to the Justice Dept.
Morris claimed that the only reason there's an investigation "is because Bush was embarrassed by the WMD's not being in Iraq and then he had to cover himself by naming a special counsel over this so-called scandal and now this so-called scandal doesn't exist any more... It's boring, even for Washington."
Oh, yeah? So boring and non-existent that it's the second top story on Google News right now with 2700 articles on the topic.
