|
||
James Carville on Gov. Richardson's Endorsement of Barack Obama
I just read that James Carville called New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson's endorsement of Barack Obama yesterday: "An act of betrayal." I guess when Carville isn't out offering his consulting services to right-wing political parties in Latin America or having deep philosophical discussions with his reactionary wife, Mary Matalin, an extreme right-wing ideologue who served as Dick Cheney's hatchet woman, or counting up all that cash he rakes in as a "strategist" and pundit, he casts himself in the role of a lord who determines what's best for the Democratic Party.
I always thought that the James Carville-Mary Matalin team represented everything that is wrong with American politics. The definitive Washington "power couple," one of them advises the Democrats about how they can better mimic the Republicans and hit up the same A-list of corporations for campaign donations, while the other one spews slander at anyone to the left of Joe Lieberman, pontificates on TV and radio, and advises Dick Cheney how best to fool the electorate so his long-term project of destroying everything we thought was good about America can continue.
Their pillow talk might sound something like this:
James: "How's Dick Cheney's project coming along honey?"
Mary: "Swimmingly, we're about to launch another war."
James: "Oh, that's wonderful sweetheart."
Mary: "How's the neutering of the Democratic Party going?"
James: "Oh, we just had a set back. That traitor Bill Richardson endorsed Obama."
Mary: "You poor baby, do you want a foot massage?"
The New York Times quotes Carville today: "Mr. Richardson's endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing if appropriate is ironic."
In Carville's analogy, Richardson is "Judas," which means Hillary Clinton is? (And Obama?)
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
carville is the past just as hillary is the past - they're gonna go screaming and clawing just like some old badger(no offense to badgers or UW) they're done and they know it deep down, but they are so destructive that they want to ensure mccain gets in until 2012 - it's a generational struggle more than anything else - even though for some reason the pundits dont want to frame it in those terms. More than anything its about younger v. older for the most part - the interesting thing to watch is the reactionary politics of the old clintonites laid bare against the backdrop of the youth, energy and optimism of obama and his movement - hill and bill and their cronies wanna suck the life, power, and money out of the party no matter what the long term cost to america. in the end hill, bill, and mccain arent that far off are they?
Great Comments! I'm glad my short post sparked some intelligent discussion which is always my goal -- thank you all. I cannot come to grips with a couple where one supports a bloodbath in the Middle East and the other supposedly supports the party of FDR -- their pillow talk must be as weird as George and Laura's -- how do you have a relationship with a person who disagrees with you on all of the fundamental issues? It's just a game to them, but the dead Americans and Iraqis don't see it as a game.
Carville is calling someone Judas !!! I have NOT forgotten this:
It's funny how nobody else that endorsed Obama is a "Judas" according to Carville except Bill Richardson. When Clinton appointed Richardson, was he doing so with an eye toward "payback" or did he want someone who would do a great job? Richardson, by all accounts, performed exceptionally well. He's also a great governor and Bill Clinton did not appoint him the governorship of New Mexico, he earned it and was elected by the people. He is not bound to the Clintons unless they think that because he is Mexican, that somehow they "own" him? I find the Judas remark reprehensible and indefensible.
My personal feeling is that there are political operatives, who are utterly amoral, and care only about
What I want to know is what Carville thinks Lieberman is.
a friend?
Memo to Bill and Hillary: it appears you do not own Bill Richardson. You keep calling me a part or your demographic, but you do not own me, either. Owning other people went out of practice a while back; just thought I would mention it since you seem to have missed the announcement.
Carville and Matalin are a political hack hedge fund. No matter which party is up, THEY win.
What a silly "story."
I agree, I just think Obama people just want to be mad about something. Carville spoke his mind, to him Richardson betrayed two people who have done so much for him. Richardson has been a part of the Clinton's lives and been treated as a friend. What's so surprising to think Richardson's endorsement of Obama is a betrayal? I guess the Obama people are just mad Carville's comment didn't contain an arguably racial or anti-patriotic tinge because then they could really make something of it. I think Richardson made the endorsement because he believes Obama will win the primary nomination and if he wins the Presidency, Richardson's resume will be one of the first placed on Obama's desk. If that's not selling out your friends for a nice job (or a few pieces of silver), I don't know what is.
LIKE BUSH'S LOYALTY! FRIEND OVER COUNTRY!
HuffPost's Pick
Why did it take so long for Democrats and Independents to learn the truth about the Clintons, when Republicans have been trying to expose them for 15 years?
Are republicans that much smarter than the rest of us (me included).
I used to defend the Clintons at every turn. Now I cringe at their lust for power.
I thought Carville nailed it in a clever way. Richardson's instant reaction proved it.
Richardson is making this all about him. He's just using Obama, and Obama should have the good judgment to see it. This isn't Richardson's show, but he's turning it into one.
That's the problem with endorsements of this type. They have an edge that's tricky.
Richardson is not helping.
James Carville's record on betrayal is enough to make Judas blush.
If we went with what we're told by the Obama supporters so often, that supers should vote the way their state voted, shouldn't Richardson have supported Hillary? His electorate did. My point in making this remark is that the bullshit claim that Obama is some kind of "new" politician or that his supporters are "tired" of the same old politics is disngenious. When push comes to shove, they're all the same, Folks; you have to win before you get to govern - this is why campaigns often don't match what we see once the election is over.
Hilary's team are slowly coming to the realization that their side lost and they are being bad sports about it.
I know this analogy has been used before but maybe worth repeating here. It is like team Hillary are the New England Patriots and Obama's team are the NY Giants and we are now in the last 30 seconds of the fourth quarter on Super Bowl day.
Loading comments…
Related Blog Posts
|
||
Posted March 22, 2008 | 02:04 PM (EST)