Electric Transmission Property Depreciation

ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION PROPERTY DEPRECIATION -- (Senate - June 23, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

KARL ROVE

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise to join many of my colleagues to express my dismay concerning the deplorable comments by Karl Rove that suggest that--indeed states that Democrats did not respond to the attack on this country on 9/11, that they did not join in with other Americans who not only recognized the consequences but came together to work together to attack those who attacked us and to bring to justice those who had callously attacked and killed thousands of Americans. Such a statement is beyond the pale.

Mr. President, 9/11 is a moment in which the Nation was attacked, and we all came together, not as Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives, but as Americans. We all came together.

The record itself clearly undercuts this contention of Mr. Rove. Within days of the attack of 9/11, we passed in this Senate an authorization for the use of military force. The vote was 98 to nothing. Every Republican and every Democratic Senator voting cast his or her vote to give the President of the United States the authority and the power to go forward, seek our enemies, and destroy them.

I can recall going up to Providence, RI, my State capital, that afternoon, and standing with every one of the elected officials in the State, Republican and Democrat, before a crowd of 25,000 people. My message was very simple. The Senate unanimously has authorized the President to seek out and destroy those who attacked us. That is what happened on 9/11. It was not as Mr. Rove tries to distort, to spin some situation in which we did not recognize the consequences or respond to the responsibilities of that dreadful moment.

Mr. Rove suggests that our response was simply to suggest therapy, to understand our attackers. That is a misstatement of the fact. In fact, following that authorization of the use of force, we succeeded in this Senate, acting with virtual unanimity on measure after measure, to give the President and this Nation what we all needed to defend ourselves and to inflict upon our adversaries the justice which they so richly deserved.

We passed the Aviation Transportation Security Act. We passed the fiscal year Intelligence Authorization Act--unanimously, the fiscal year Defense Authorization Act, the fiscal year Defense Appropriations Act, on and on and on, with virtual unanimity.

We did this because we recognized that we are Americans. Today, Mr. Rove seeks to distort this historic record, to suggest we did not come together as Americans, but that there were those who knew the way and took it and those who tried to ignore the reality. That is a gross misstatement of history, of the facts, and he should apologize for it. It is inappropriate that an individual who works in the White House should make such callous and clearly erroneous statements for political effect.

Mr. Rove suggests, in the article I have seen in the newspaper describing his speech, that our response was one of moderation and restraint. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our response was one voice authorizing the President to attack, giving him the tools to carry out the attack. Mr. Rove suggested that conservatives saw 9/11 and said we will defeat our enemies. That is exactly what all Americans said or did.

He goes on to suggest that what liberals saw prompted liberals to say: We must understand our enemies.

Again, that is not the reality. I hope Mr. Rove is not suggesting unwittingly that we should go about without respecting and understanding our enemies. He should look back at Sun Tzu, the Chinese philosopher whose ``Art of War'' speaks to us today as it did centuries ago. As Sun Tzu said:

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the results of 100 battles.

In fact, some might suggest we are learning about our enemy too late in Iraq today.

The point I make is this type of attack has no place, it does not conform to history, it undercuts the spirit of that moment, a moment in which every American came together as one people, indeed, as the world responded to us. That unanimity may have lessened over the last several months, but it was there. To view September 11 any other way is a gross distortion. Mr. Rove should apologize for it.

He went on to attack my colleague, the Senator from Illinois, Mr. Durbin. Senator Durbin has apologized for his comments, and that apology is appropriate. But to continue to attack this individual does nothing to advance any of the ideals or aspirations or policies that we must be engaged with. What it does is distort a person, someone I have come to know, respect, and admire. Someone who is caring and concerned for people, whose thoughtfulness, whose intense commitment to doing what is appropriate for all Americans, and who is particularly sensitive to the needs of our military forces has impressed me.

Like anyone who has had the privilege of serving and understanding in the U.S. Army or any uniformed service, I had the privilege of commanding paratroopers of the 82nd Airborne Division. We understand the extraordinary courage and bravery and valor of those individuals.

I have been impressed many times with Senator Durbin's commitment to help those individuals in meaningful ways by providing the equipment they need, by ensuring that our veterans who have served with distinction are not ignored. The attacks on him are without correlation to the person and to the service of this individual.

I hope Mr. Rove would apologize for these remarks and would refrain in the future from distorting the historial record. I don't think that is too much to ask of someone who is in such a position of power in the White House.

At this point, it is sufficient to conclude by saying I hope, indeed, that we can avoid this kind of personalized attack, this gross distortion, which is untrue, misleading, and divides a nation and does not unite it. I hope we move on to substantive policy as we face real problems that face this Nation.

I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov