Posted by Frank James at 5:11 pm CST
The thing about blogging is that there will be certain postings that upon reflection make you wish you had taken the day off. My posting "The 'Honorable' Karl Rove" is an example.
A Swamp reader who goes by "Bruce" wrote: "I did a google search (took me all of 2 minutes) for the phrase 'The honorable Karl Rove' and found that that phrase had been used since at least Nov. 2001 (see pulseonline), had been used on pbs June 14, 2002, and had been used on the White House Fellowship website Nov. 2002. In all, there were 770 hits on the phrase. In other words, the word 'honorable' has been used for years."
Well Bruce, I googled too (although later than I should have) and you are exactly right. There are plenty of instances of senior White House staff being referred to as "honorable," in this and previous administrations. Evidently, it's perfectly proper and typical to address any senior White House official with the honorific "honorable." My apologies. Nothing dishonorable was intended.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Glad you came to work yesterday.
You see sometimes people go along with something not knowing that hidden beneth the surface is a wider defination or explanation for certain subject matter.
Is the H(h)onorable Karl Rove what this title claims him to be? I don't know since I've never met the man. I read a lot of bad things about him in the media. Were Ted Sorrenson (Kennedy) or Bill Moyers (Johnson) honorable? Most people seem to thing so.
We all learned something from your piece yesterday. For that alone you should have come to work and we're glad you did. We swampers appreciate your effort.
Posted by: Taz | January 24, 2006 8:09 AM
The term, honorable, is merely an honorary title. As a committeeman in my district, my political mail comes to me emblazoned with that moniker. Be neither impressed nor put off by it. My wife and kids always know better.
Posted by: DAG | January 24, 2006 10:52 AM
just because they call him "Honorable" doesn't make it so. Rove has done more damage to Bush's "uniter not a divider" claim than Bush himself. He is, in fact, the architect of this country's division.
It's okay, go ahead, call him "dishonorable." It fits.
Posted by: Danny | January 24, 2006 1:19 PM
This was a very annoying article. You click on the link, and after waiting for the (most likely an Apple IIe) overloaded server to FINALLY serve up the page, you get one single sentence with a link "click to read more."
It may increase your advertising revenue in the short term, but it will make me a damned sight more hesitant to click on any more "Swamp" links.
What idiot designed this mess, anyway? You don't have to parrot the Google blogs, K5, or slashdot, you know.
When I click a link, I want to read the damned page. Don't ask me, it's STUPID. Just serve the damned page. If I don't want to read it, I have a "back" button on my browser.
Posted by: no name, dimwits | January 24, 2006 2:18 PM