Eschewing factual argument, Sunday's lead editorial "The  Rovian Era ," a hatchet job on you-know-who, channels partisan liberal columnist Frank Rich  down to the out-of-nowhere pop-culture references no one but Rich understands.
"Turn over a scandal in Washington these days and the chances are you'll find Karl Rove. His tracks are everywhere: whether it's helping to purge United States attorneys, coaching bureaucrats on how to spend taxpayers' money to promote Republican candidates, hijacking the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives for partisan politics, or helping to organize a hit on the character of one of the first people to publicly reveal the twisting of intelligence reports on Iraq.
"Whatever the immediate objective, Mr. Rove seems focused on one overarching goal: creating a permanent Republican majority, even if that means politicizing every aspect of the White House and subverting the governmental functions of the executive branch. This is not the Clinton administration's permanent campaign. The Clinton people had difficulty distinguishing between the spin cycle of a campaign and the tone of governing. That seems quaint compared with the Bush administration's far more menacing failure to distinguish the Republican Party from the government, or the state itself.
"This was, perhaps, the inevitable result of taking the chief operative of a presidential campaign, one famous for his scorched-earth style, and ensconcing him in the White House - not in a political role, but as a key player in the formation of policy. Mr. Rove never had to submit to Senate confirmation hearings. Yet, from the very start, photographs of cabinet meetings showed him in the background, keeping an enforcer's eye on the proceedings. After his re-election in 2004, President Bush formally put Mr. Rove in charge of all domestic policy."
The editorial advanced this paranoid liberal argument:
"This sort of behavior should not be all that surprising. It was not that long ago that the Bush White House embraced the priorities of the Republican governor of Mississippi and virtually ignored the far greater needs of Louisiana's Democratic governor after Hurricane Katrina."
Arguing that Louisiana has been underfunded is fairly ludicrous . And, given that Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco announced last month that she will not run for another term, perhaps it was her failure after Katrina, rather than Bush Administration mendacity, that's to blame for Louisiana's struggles - and that Louisianans recognize that fact, even if the Times doesn't.
And though it was learned back in June of 2006 that Rove would not be indicted in the Valerie Plame case, the editorial writer still managed, Rich- style , to link that to, get this: Rove's parody rap performance at the Annual Radio TV-Correspondents Dinner in D.C. last week.
"Mr. Rove retreated a bit from the public eye in the heat of the Lewis Libby trial, but after avoiding indictment, he seems to have regained his confidence. Take a look at YouTube to see his bizarre, humor-challenged gyrations as 'MC Rove' at an annual media dinner in Washington the other night."
What purpose does that paragraph serve, except perhaps to confirm the Times'own lack of a sense of humor or proportion when bad Republicans are involved?
The Times ended by vaguely laying out the outlines of a vast right-wing conspiracy: "The investigation of the firings of the United States attorneys seems to be closing in on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who should have been fired weeks ago. But Congress should bring equal scrutiny to the more powerful Mr. Rove. If it does, especially by forcing him to testify in public, it will find that he has been at the vortex of many of the biggest issues they are now investigating."