Karl Rove's Repulsive Allegation About Hillary Clinton Shows His Dark Genius Again

Fox "news" consultant and former (and probably current) political guru Karl Rove sucks at math. That can be said without fear of contradiction. When it comes to numbers, he's sitting hunched in a corner with his filthy fingers jabbing at an abacus while the rest of the world has moved on to iPad apps. We saw that in 2006, when he predicted on NPR that Republicans would hold the House and Senate. He was very clear to host Robert Siegel that it all added up to a win: "You may end up with a different math but you are entitled to your math and I'm entitled to THE math." He repeated, "I said THE math" when Siegel disputed him. And the Republicans lost both the Congress. His inability to do math was on view again in 2012 when he insisted on election night that he had the math that showed Romney was going to win Ohio and the presidency, even after Fox had called it for Obama. In 2011, he had written in the Wall Street Journal that "2012 Electoral Math Looks Good For the GOP."

Basically, the motherfucker shouldn't be allowed near a number.

However, when it comes to smearing a candidate until his lies morph into the general public's "truth," Karl Rove is some kind of mad genius, as if he's cackling while sitting and sweating at a computer in his filthy tighty-whities, insanely masturbating his festering herpes sore-coated dick while trawling the grimy corners of right-wing message boards, yanking each time he sees some bit of mental detritus from another professional onanist, yowling into the air and jizzing onto his belly when he discovers a demented conspiracy or shitball of an allegation that will become his newest tale to tell to the slavering whores of the 24-hour news cycle. Karl Rove's belly is very smooth.

Oh, children who know Rove only as that big-headed jerk on Fox, look him up and you will discover that Rove's stock-in-trade is to paint opposing candidates as gay, miscegenous, traitorous, or whatever the voters in a particular race demand as dirt, ensuring that the narrative tilts in the direction he desires. He is a jolly ambassador of dirty tricks, perfecting what his dead mentor, Lee Atwater, taught him. Politics is pornography to Rove, the dirtier the better.

Of course, of course, he would come up with the perfect attack on Hillary Clinton, the presumptive leading Democratic candidate for president. Rove can keep spouting the Benghazi line, but he knows that, barring the smoking corpse of Christopher Stevens walking into a House hearing room and saying, "Hillary burned down the compound," the public doesn't give a shit. There's gotta be something else, something that merges hate and love, something that would make even people who care about a pretty beloved figure pause and wonder if everything is okay.

So Rove's assertion that Clinton might have suffered a "traumatic brain injury" is goddamn, motherfucking, cunt-punting, cocksucking genius. It's breathtaking in its abject evil. It is awe-inspiring in its immorality. Rove first made the comment at a conference a little over a week ago, saying that when Clinton fell and hit her head in 2012, she might have given herself permanent brain damage. Now, so soon after, CNN is already asking, "How strong is Hillary?" From lie to permanent storyline, lickety-split.

Rove did not back down, despite being condemned across the political spectrum for what he said. On Fox "news" Sunday with Mike Wallace's litter runt, Rove explained that he didn't think she was physically unable to run for president. He just cares so fucking much: "But it would not be human if you were sitting there to say, I had a serious brain injury and I had a -- I had a -- her husband the other day told us something we didn't know. Took her six months, he said, to get back."

A couple of amazing moments happened in that panel discussion. Rove said, "I did not say she had brain damage, which is what the headline writers said."

Juan Williams responded, "Karl, I hate to break this to you, but what you said and what the people heard may be different," which is pretty much a description of Rove's modus operandi. "Hey, I just said she wore glasses that people with a brain injury wear," he can respond. "Maybe it was a fashion statement."

Except what Rove really said was absolutely direct: "I said she had a traumatic brain injury." Which is somehow totally different from brain damage in the nuance-ready public's imagination.

At another moment, Chris Wallace was giving examples of whisper campaigns and he said, "I remember John McCain's opponents raising the issue as whether or not he had gone a little bit nuts when he was in that Vietnam prison." Guess who did that? He was sitting across the fuckin' table from Wallace, who didn't call him by name because if you name the Devil, he will drag you down to Hell and rape you while wearing a skin mask of your father's face.

A good lie creates a narrative. Rove is well aware of this, too, and he's proud of his work. Williams said, "Karl, doesn't this remind everybody that you, your past as a very effective political operative, have gone after people with swift boating of John Kerry."

Obviously, Rove said, "Which was entirely legitimate" because what the fuck else was he gonna say? That he was wrong?

No, he's only wrong when it comes to math. When it comes to knowing the ugly hearts of huddled masses, he knows that they want a story that, to them, makes sense and allows them to vote against someone. So now, whenever Hillary Clinton stumbles over words, takes too long to answer a question, wobbles slightly when she walks, nods off during a speech, smiles too big, smiles too little, becomes agitated, stays too calm, whenever she does anything that is not exactly right, the first thing those masses, especially those on the fence, will think is "Oh, that might be the brain damage. Do I want someone who is brain damaged as president?"

Karl Rove, that giddy ghoul of garish gossip, is back in his element. We should all be afraid because if you think it won't work, you haven't paid attention.