The difference between Durbin and Rove

Peter Daou over at Salon clearly explains the difference between what Sen. Durbin stated last week about the FBI reported torture in Guantanamo and what Karl Rove said this week about Liberals after 9/11.

I'll keep it simple: I challenge any of those outraged by Durbin to demonstrate that the senator, in his heart of hearts, thinks our troops are Nazis. It's painfully obvious that he was illustrating a point and used a hyperbolic analogy. In Durbin's case the outrage is feigned, and a political tool. It defies common sense to think Durbin actually believes "all US troops are Nazis." Now the same reasoning doesn't hold true for Rove, who expressed a thought that actually is widely held on the right: that liberals can't or won't defend America. Despite the sheer imbecility of it, many on the right really believe it to be true

If there ever was a clear reason to remove the Republicans from political office everywhere, the two faces that should be placed on that reason are Karl Rove and James Dobson.

Of course, I would also add Congressmen Bob Ney, Randy "Duke"Cunningham, and Tom DeLay together with Dick Cheney. John Bolton seems to fit the same mold. Then there is Ralph Reed, and Newt Gingrich. Oh, and let's not forget Senators Rick Santorum and Trent Lott. Senator John Cornyn is the least liked Senator of the 100 Senators in the U.S. Senate, but that is merely being unlikable. He has no record of accomplishment, either favorable or unfavorable.

Where do they get these people??