Karl Rove Likes What He Sees
GQ interviews "Bush's Brain" on life after the White House.
April 2, 2008— -- I can see Karl Rove standing outside the restaurant, on the phone, yakking, pacing, occasionally peering at me through the etched-glass window and sticking a stubby finger in the air to indicate that he'll just be just one more minute.
Eighteen minutes pass. He enters brusquely, with apologies and a crack about my "bright red purse" but also with the clear message that he is in control. Uncomfortable in this position, somewhat wary, constantly checking his watch ("Gotta go soon.… Gotta go.… Couple more minutes.…"), not diggin' it, but always in control.
Karl Rove is not a guy who kicks back with a drink -- even coffee's a stretch ("I'm a decaf guy," he says) -- and shoots the s- - - for a few hours.
This isn't about a charm offensive -- he gives the impression that he's not even sure why he's doing this. But: To be with Rove is to listen to a man who is utterly articulate and insightful and at the same time utterly...what's the word? Plain? Normal? Caucasian?
If you didn't know he used to be Bush''s Brain, if you didn't know he is widely credited/blamed with leading the Republican Party to an era of total world domination, if you didn't recognize him (as numerous gawkers inside the Muse hotel restaurant do) as the man W. famously dubbed "Turd Blossom," you'd think he was a middle-management sales lackey in town to sell Ginsu knives or something.
The nondescript gray suit and overcoat, the geeky glasses and bald-on-the-top-with-peach-fuzz do, the briefcase (in middle school, he was the only kid with a briefcase, which pretty much sums it up). In what ways is he cool? We can't help but ask.
"None," he says. "I am the antithesis of cool."
We should also point out that Rove is exceedingly polite and well-mannered and, at moments, as prickly as the little cactuses on his tie. He has the demeanor of a man who had more power than he'll ever admit but is never really far from the 9-year-old who once got into a schoolyard fight over Richard Nixon, and lost. To a girl.
Karl Rove: Sorry to be late. I have a lunch with the Big Boss shortly.
GQ: The Big Boss?Mr. Murdoch.
Ah, that big boss. Does that mean you'll be getting more money out of Fox? No, it doesn't.
Do you like being a TV analyst? Uh, it's odd. You know, it's weird for me. But it's interesting.
Do you think Fox News is fair and balanced?I do. I think they go out of their way to be fair and tough in questioning. I'm really impressed with the people I've gotten to know. Brit Hume is a very bright person; Chris Wallace has got a lot of integrity.
You also sold a book recently. I did.
What'd ya get? A lot.
And you're doing speeches, too, right? I read that you just gave one at Penn --I like speaking to the college campuses.
And the first question, someone called you a cancer. Right. Oh, sure.
You must get that all the time.Uh, I get it some. When I go to campuses. But did you hear what I did? I just let him rant. And when he was finished, he had no question, he just wanted to accuse me of undermining the Constitution and blah-blah-blah-blah-blah. And I said, "Thanks for your thoughtful rant." And he sat down. And I said, "Now do you feel better about yourself?" And he said, "Yeah." And I said, "Well, I want you to feel better about yourself." And everybody laughed, and we went on.
Want more politics from GQ? Click Here
But is it hard when people--No. No. Look, everywhere I go, people say nice things to me. I don't live for that. I appreciate it, and I'm grateful for their kind words, but I don't live for it. And similarly, when people say ugly things? It doesn't affect me. They want their words to affect me. And as a result, I'm not gonna let 'em.But when people say, "You've created this climate of fear—"I laugh.
You laugh?Yeah. I laugh. Sure. How? What, exactly? I'm not apologetic about what this administration has done. It's protecting America. It has won important battles in a war that we as a nation better win or we will leave the future to our kids, a much darker and dangerous future.
What's the biggest misconception about your role in the Bush White House?That it was all about politics.
If that's the misconception, what's the overlooked truth?Look, I'm a policy geek. What I've most enjoyed about my job was the substantive policy discussions. Being able to dig in deeply and, you know, learn about something, ask questions, listen to smart people, and form a judgment about something that was from a policy perspective.
When you look back at your career, especially in the Bush administration, what's the worst thing you did?I'm not gonna be good at answering that.
But is there anything you feel guilty about? Or wish you did differently?[exasperated laugh] Off the record?
No! Don't go off the record. Off the record.
Okay, let's look back, to the very beginning of the Karl Rove story, when you got handed the keys [from Bush the father, to deliver to Bush the son] until now. And you look at where the president's approval ratings are today--Yeah.
What did you do wrong?Oh, look, I did a lot of things wrong. But the main thing is, we're fighting an important but unpopular war.
You still think it was the right thing to do?Absolutely. Absolutely. And you know, one of our biggest mistakes was, the first time Harry Reid got up and said, "You lied and you deliberately misled the country," we should have gone back immediately and hit back hard, and we didn't. We let that story line develop. In reality, you go back and look at what Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Al Gore -- I'd be happy to supply you the quotes -- what they said about Saddam Hussein possessing weapons of mass destruction.
What are you most proud of?Being part of a group of people I have a great deal of respect and admiration for in service of the country.
If you had to make a bet, can Hillary pull it off?The odds are long, but improbable things have happened almost every month in this race. She wasn't supposed to win New Hampshire, and she did. So we'll see. You know, she's got a lot of strengths, and he does, too. We got two well-matched opponents going at each other hammer and tongs. It's fun to watch.
If it's mathematically impossible for either of them to get enough delegates, how will this get resolved?Somebody can get to a majority, but they're gonna have to get to a majority with superdelegates. Neither of them can win enough delegates to win it on just simply the elected delegates.
So if it comes down to superdelegates, doesn't that become a question of who can be more ruthless?Well, you know, people will have to decide whether they're going to act as reflectors of the popular vote in their districts or states, or whether they're going to exercise independent judgment. I think this is the big dilemma the Democrats face: Are they going to choose a nominee who essentially is chosen, validated, by a minor aristocracy, by essentially an undemocratic group? Because, look. Does anybody think that Patrick Deval [sic], governor of Massachusetts, and Senator Ted Kennedy are gonna respect the wishes of their home-state crowd and go for Hillary Clinton, who won their state? No.
It Isn't All About Politics. Check out the latest from GQ here.
Related Stories
ABC News Live