TPM's Horse's Mouth wonders about Carville on MTP Sunday with Matalin, Shrum.

[madfloridian]

TPM's Horse's Mouth has asked NBC if he will be disclosed as being close to the Hillary campaign. The post points out that no other candidate is represented.

Hillary-Backer Carville Set To Appear On Sunday's Meet The Press

One of the stranger media phenomenons of Campaign 2008 has been the odd race to the bottom we've been seeing between Tim Russert and CNN. First Russert asked his typical "gotcha" questions at his debate. Then CNN's Wolf Blitzer praised Russert's performance as "tough." Then Wolf proceeded to deliver an equally unproductive performance as the moderator of CNN's debate.

Now there's more of this. As you recall, CNN put Hillary supporter James Carville on its debate roundup -- prompting critics to point out that the network failed to identify her sufficiently as a Hillary supporter and that the network has been giving a platform to Hillary-backing "independent" analysts for way too long.

Well, guess who is now set to appear on Meet the Press this coming weekend? Hillary supporter James Carville, of course. The network has just confirmed to me that Carville is one of the guests set to appear this Sunday. The other guests, as of now, are Bob Shrum, Mary Matalin and Mike Murphy -- which is to say, no backer of any of the other Dem candidates.

What gives here? Aren't there any other Dems out there -- you know, neutral ones -- who are qualified to comment on this race? Given the criticism that hit CNN over this -- criticism that came from rival Dem campaigns as well as from other observers -- did Meet the Press really have to follow suit? And if the network really can't imagine a discussion of presidential politics without Carville, what about backers of the other Dems? This just gets weirder and weirder

..."I've checked in with an NBC spokesperson and asked whether Carville will be clearly and repeatedly identified as a Hillary partisan, whether other Dem candidates will be represented, and if not, what the reason for this is. If I hear anything back I'll let you know.

James has been a busy guy lately. He is becoming visible even more as the primary comes closer. This interview was interesting. He says Hillary will win, and talks about how exciting and sassy Mary Matalin is.

Carville Q&A from Georgia

CARVILLE: Yow. You'll have to see me out there (during my speech). On the Republican side I haven't the foggiest idea, and I don't think anybody else does. On the Democratic side I'd say, probably Hillary. ... I think that she's gonna get tested before, but I think she'll be fine in the end.

..."TELEGRAPH: Who's the biggest jerk in Washington?

CARVILLE: Lot of people say me. (Laughs.) Oh, the biggest jerk. I'll let that go. ... That's probably the most competitive title in the world today.

TELEGRAPH: What advice would you give couples that don't always agree, whether it be politics or not?

CARVILLE: Well, that would be every couple in America. (Laughs.) I don't know any couple that always agrees. I'd say, know what ... it's like anything else. You know what causes grief, and you feel the pain and you tend to try to avoid it. I think every marriage is a kind of search for ground that you're both comfortable with. And I know in our marriage sometimes there are things I know if I bring them up, they're going to end up in an explosion or unpleasantness. And over the years, even as slow as I am, I've learned to try to avoid 'em. I mean sometimes you just say something and you pay the price for it and you learn why you're so stupid. But I think that people, if they've been married, or if they got married, there must have been something there that caused them to do it. And you gotta keep searching for what that is. And we'll be 14 years this month.

TELEGRAPH: What was it that connected for you guys?

CARVILLE: She was a very - my wife is a very kind of exciting, kind of sassy, really kind of good looking. She's a physically attractive woman. She's mentally sharp. She's kind of bossy and brassy, and I never was much for the kind of magnolia and moonlight type, you know. And I still find her exciting.

I seldom call anyone a jerk, but after all he called himself one didn't he?

I really don't like him, and I refuse to watch any show he is on. He took all the joy out of winning in November 2006, when a few days later he called for Dean to be fired and replaced with Harold Ford.

He made a lot of people angry, and he even got a not so nice letter from several state chairmen. One of the best was from the NC Democratic chairman.

I think it gave a lot of us a look of the problems in the party. To me he is an epitome of the battles going on now in the party.

At least his buddy and fellow CNN analyst, Paul Begala, apologized for the nose-picking comment.

Carville hasn't apologized for anything.

[goclark]

1. He must think we are stupid to believe his BS

I am absolutely sick of him and the people that he "supports."

He is a Republican folks, a snake in the Republican grass.

[spotbird]

21. He screwed Kerry in Ohio

On page 344, Woodward describes the doings at the White House in the early morning hours of Wednesday, the day after the '04 election.

Apparently, Kerry had decided not to concede. There were 250,000 outstanding ballots in Ohio.

So Kerry decides to fight. In fact, he considers going to Ohio to camp out with his voters until there is a recount. This is the last thing the White House needs, especially after Florida 2000.

So what happened?

James Carville gets on the phone with his wife, Mary Matalin, who is at the White House with Bush.

"Carville told her he had some inside news. The Kerry campaign was going to challenge the provisional ballots in Ohio -- perhaps up to 250,000 of them. 'I don't agree with it, Carville said. I'm just telling you that's what they're talking about.'

"Matalin went to Cheney to report...You better tell the President Cheney told her."

Matalin does, advising Bush that "somebody in authority needed to get in touch with J. Kenneth Blackwell, the Republican Secretary of State in Ohio who would be in charge of any challenge to the provisional votes." An SOS goes out to Blackwell.

The rest is history.

Does something about this story stink to high heaven!

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did...

[flordehinojos]

2. DUMP CARVILLE. HE NEEDS TO TEND TO HIS RESTAURANT.

[madfloridian]

3. A restaurant?

I don't think I knew that. Yes, that should be a full time job.

[flordehinojos]

6. i may well be disinformed but i read somewhere that he has a restaurant somewhere in DC.

[madfloridian]

8. I did a search and found this....from 2002....looks like you are right.

http://www.nicholaskralev.com/FT-carville.html

"He is already sitting at the bar, a scotch on the rocks in hand, when I enter the West 24 restaurant close to Washington’s Georgetown district, and instinctively turns around as I close the door. It’s easy to notice him from afar -- he is tall and bold, and casually dressed in a red-blue shirt, blue jeans and sneakers, unlike most of the business-attired lunch-time clientele. In fact, he is not just a client, but also a co-owner of the restaurant, along with five investors, including his wife.

“We like to eat and it’s a lot of fun” to own such a place, he says, as we take our seats at a table for two in a quiet corner. The restaurant offers a menu inspired by the American South, with dishes such as roast pork loin with a hash of sweet potatoes. It has a soothing collection of French country landscapes on its dark yellow walls, as well as purplish dividers between some of the tables."

[flordehinojos]

10. thanks ...

i appreciate the post.

[madfloridian]

11. "dark yellow walls, as well as purplish dividers between some of the tables."

I don't think I like that color scheme.

[madfloridian]

24. Looks like that restaurant closed soon after that article...

http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2002/07/0...

"restaurant at 24th and M streets NW, which opened in 2000 amid great excitement. Within four blocks there were thousands of hotel rooms, a slew of office workers and a growing residential base from which the restaurant could pull business. Some, however, say the 8,000-square-foot location was not a good one for a restaurant.

Carville and Matalin were limited partners in the venture. Joining them as general partners were Henry Amoroso, a New York attorney who owns three Italian restaurants in New York and New Jersey, and Todd DeLorenzo, who runs Carville's Alexandria office.

Officials with the landlord, World Wildlife Fund, declined comment. DeLorenzo didn't return calls seeking comment."

[flordehinojos]

35. oh, after making a big deal about carville and his restaurant (as i read or head some writing or

saying) now ... after the restaurant (which was close to hotels, and a slew of office workers plus a growing residential base) failed ... they say, "Carville and Matalin were limited partners in the venture."

I just wonder if people were tired of their politics and for that reason did not really care to go to that restaurant ... and i wonder if people were more tired of the one than they were of the other.

however that was ... thanks for pointing out that the restaurant closed. i appreciate it.

[JDPriestly]

71. To dump Carville, you need to dump Clinton.

The Clintons and Carville go back to the Bill Clinton administration. Carville talks folksy (as does Rove), but his heart is not really in the right place. Were the American people empowered during the Clinton/Carville presidency. Not really. Carville is about talking the right talk, not about getting things like health insurance, stronger unions, better OSHA compliance, anti-trust enforcement in media and other industries, renegotiating trade agreements, getting big business out of government, getting more government financial support for education, rebuilding American industry and economy, etc. Carville is a waste of time. He is just a troublemaker. He certainly does not represent my interests.

[antiimperialist]

4. I don't get why TPM is complaining

Russert is being accused, with good reason, of relentlessly attacking Hillary Clinton.
Now that he invites a Clinton fan, TPM complains.
What's the issue here?

[madfloridian]

5. They are asking for CNN and NBC and every other to declare Carville's ties to the Clintons

That is the gist of it. I wrote the rest because I just plain don't like Carville. He has hurt this party in many ways, but the worst thing he ever did was to go right on CNN and declare Dean a "Rumfeldian" incompetent....and ask that he go as party chair. Right after the election.

I seldom really despise anyone, but I despise Carville. He hurt our party at a moment we should have been celebrating.

I hate seeing Carville represent Democrats, I really do.

[blm]

7. Wake up Dems. Carville was planted to be OUR spokesperson from 2001-2007 on media outlets

because we were SUPPPOSED to have weak representation in the mainstream media from someone who most people can barely even understand when he speaks and that move was INTENTIONAL.

It kept Clintons protected and gave every other Democrat to emerge during that time a media mouthpiece UNINTERESTED in their success against BushInc.

Plus - he had more of a vested interest in protecting his war criminal wife than he did our Democratic party and its candidates the last 3 elections.

[beachmom]

17. And also he gave confidential info to the Bush campaign on Ohio

provisional ballots.

[MonkeyFunk]

32. How do you know it was confidential?

And if it was confidential, why was it given to Carville? He had no connection to the Kerry campaign.

Nobody has ever shown that Carville had any effect on what happened in Ohio, nor has anybody explained Carville was given the information.

Just a one-sentence quote from a Bob Woodward book, but there's a LOT of blanks to be filled in to conclude that he gave confidential information to the White House, and that it had an effect on the Ohio ballots.

[neutron]

46. this sounds like a pile of bs

[madfloridian]

19. And ask yourself...why was he encouraged to do that tirade on CNN

that day after the election when he attacked Dean on the air, with the encouragement of Wolf Blitzer to keep on explaining and clarifying.

That was a dark day for our party's Clinton wing and a dark day for our country. We had just won an election after 5 dark gloomy years....and Carville was apparently sent out to be the messenger.

He was passing stuff about the election with impunity.

MTP is recycling the loser wing of the party.

[blm]

23. They needed to get rid of every Dem who HAD been opposing BushInc for 5yrs so

they could replace all those Dems with the Clinton machine who wanted to jump in front of that parade and convince Dem voters that they had been leading opposition to Bush all along.

[MonkeyFunk]

63. I think Carville

can spout off on a variety of topics without having to be "encouraged" to do so.

[Gman]

37. I WANT Carville front and center

Carville's a damn good Democrat. He ran the campaign for the only Democratic president in the last 27 years (i.e. before most of you were born). Sounds like he's pretty damn good to me.

[madfloridian]

40. He will be front and center. He is appointed face of the party still.

All people do good things now and then in their lives. You want him, you got him.

[Gman]

66. The party did not appoint Carville

nor does the party appoint anyone like Carville to do what he does. Do you honestly thing Howard Dean as party chair would actually appoint Carville especially considering how Carville led the charge to get rid of Dean as chair after the election last year? Carville is a colorful and funny guy as well as being one helluva good Democrat. Mary Matilin is funny in her own right. I love to watch her role her eyes and make faces on MTP as any wife does when she thinks her husband says something stupid. Only, of course, Carville is right on the money. Carville's main attraction is his personality along with his political astuteness.

Contrary to a lot of opinions around here, everything is not a hidden conspiracy.

[madfloridian]

67. My post brought out even the Mary Matalin fans.

I guess I accomplished something.

[Gman]

69. Those of us with more experience and depth of thought

appreciate the strengths of our opponents and learn from them. Then there are those that think they are brilliantly associating people with opponents because they don't comprehend nor can they apply good politics.

[madfloridian]

70. Good put down.....you say I lack depth and thought while saying

you respect Mary Matalin.

I don't know what to say to that.

I am eternally amazed at the people here who are so enthralled with the deadly duo's wit and humor that they can not see the harm they do.

[JDPriestly]

72. Clinton ran against Bush I (who messed up on the economy and is scatterbrained)

and Bob Dole. That was like no contest both times. Dole is a dour, ugly, slow-witted guy. He got where he is because he was a war hero. All my respect goes to war heroes, but it wasn't enough to elect Dole in a national contest. Dole could not have won against any Democrat every nominated as Democratic candidate ever. Dole was weak. It did not take much expertise much less magic to get Clinton elected against Bush I in the middle of a recession or Dole. Carville is no genius. He does not even have much talent.

[wisteria]

41. I think you are right to suggest that Carvelle really doesn't represent all Democrats, just a select

few. I too think he should not be trusted.

[underpants]

9. Will they ask Shrum about his connections to failure?

Why are any of these people on TV? Don't they know it appears to give them credibility...oh I see. As long they don't bring up corn Archer Daniels Midland doesn't care what is on Russert's show.

[madfloridian]

12. Just found out something about Shrum I never knew. Gep, Kerry, and Edwards all 3 his clients in 04

"Tumble forward into 2004, where three of the four leading Democratic presidential contenders—Gephardt, Kerry, and Edwards—were all Shrum clients. What’s more, on the most important moral and political issue of the day, they all broke the wrong way, supporting the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Shrum concedes that he urged his clients to do this, going so far as to say that he prevailed upon Kerry and Edwards to opportunistically endorse a war they knew was wrong. Most astoundingly, he clearly regards this claim as something that will be helpful to the politicians in question, a misjudgment that would seem to speak volumes about the difficulty his clients have had in winning presidential elections. The “Shrum primary,” in the end, went to Kerry over Edwards for reasons that go unexplained save for two facts: Kennedy advocated (but what did he say?) on Kerry’s behalf, and Shrum set about the difficult task of winning an election dominated by national security in which one candidate was running as a supporter of a war that neither he nor his chief strategist thought was a good idea."

http://www2.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2007/0706.yg...

[wisteria]

44. I highly doubt Senator Kerry voted for the IWR simply because

Shrum suggested he should. The decision to vote for this resolution was a difficult and well researched one that Senator Kerry made only after believing that it was in the best interests of this country. I think it is outrageous to even suggest that he would only think in political terms when making this decision.

[madfloridian]

47. I did not suggest that nor do I think that. Shrum said it.

Not me.

[madfloridian]

57. I want to be clear I don't believe that about Kerry at all.

I think Shrum was boasting and puffing himself up.

[wisteria]

76. That is good to know. n/t

[progdog]

13. No trust for Carville or his wife.

I don't talk much around here but I had to ask if anyone else noticed Hillary using the infamous Mary Matilin finger brackets when she was making a point about an issue? It's something she might want to stop doing.

[madfloridian]

14. Air quotes? Heh heh

[progdog]

15. Sort of.

Hi. They look more like brackets. < > It's a real Mary Matilin thing. Which makes me think she's been talking to her a lot.

[mrfixit]

16. The fix is in, all right.

[Donna Zen]

18. Choices?

Plan A or Plan B

Plan "People" is not on the menu.

[Carrieyazel]

20. Please don't tell me the dreaded duo of Carville and Matalin are on MTP.

I will not be watching MTP this Sunday.

[Carrieyazel]

73. Mary and James really make my blood boil.

[natrat]

22. man he is one slezey wierdo like half the rest of the dems

[mtnsnake]

25. Thank God for Democratic mouthpieces like James Carville

Over the decades, I have never heard anyone voice stronger opposition to the neocons than Carville has on MSM, despite the ongoing witch hunt orchestrated against him on DU by you.

[madfloridian]

27. Whoa there. He is the one who asked for the chairman to be fired

right after a successful election. He called him incompetent, and he knew it would anger the grassroots.

Carville goes on college campuses and makes fun of Dean and the DNC. And you are saying I am causing it.

Witch hunt? How about his witch hunt against Dean and others he dissed on CNN's Crossfire in 2004?

He and Begala and Tucker and Novak launched the "Dean is crazy" Gore is a zombie" campaign from that show.

[mtnsnake]

29. He didn't ask for him to be fired, although you tried to force feed that down everyone's throats.

[madfloridian]

30. Yes, he did. He wanted Harold Ford in his place.

Which is a joke. However, probably Carville will be the next chairman. That way he can have air time galore and diss all of us.

[mtnsnake]

31. He never asked for his firing. Never, despite your claims that he did.

Even if Carville implied that Ford would make a good DNC chairman at that time, he never called for anyone's firing. This is only the spin that all the anti-Carville afficionadoes love to place on it, and most of it stems from their hatred of the Clintons and from the past relationships that Carville had with the Clintons.

[madfloridian]

33. I like Hillary Clinton, I just don't like Carville...

or Shrum or Penn. That is possible, you know. Carville did go on TV and say Harold Ford should replace Dean. Do not say I am not telling the truth when the video is available as well as transcripts.

[mtnsnake]

34. If you can show me where Carville called for Dean's firing, I'll cheerfully eat my crow

I read the transcripts when we went around and around on this before, and no where did I see him ever call for Dean to be fired.

[madfloridian]

36. Take your pick.

CNN took the videos off You Tube. How convenient for Carville. I had posted one in the video forum...and it says video no longer available. CNN did not post the video at the website, so lucky for Carville again.

But here are 3 sources, I have more. If you REPLACE someone with someone else....first you have to get rid of the someone whom you are replacing. Just that simple. Let's go with the way it started. Carville right after the election called the NYT unsolicited to diss Howard Dean.

James Carville makes an unsolicited call to the NYT to diss Dean
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/...

Then TNR reports a conversation:

Busy busy Carville.... Dean out, Harold Ford in at the DNC ?
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/...

A voice then speaks out for Dean, one I respect.

Robert Reich: Why are they gunning for Howard Dean?
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/...

And The New Donkey goes after Carville. This is an important post, and a centrist voice much appreciated.

A defense of Dean and criticism of Carville from unexpected source.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/...

Please feel free to believe what you wish. When facts no longer matter, we are in trouble.

[mtnsnake]

38. It's time for you to apologize to Carville, madfloridian. None of those links backs up your claim.

Not one of those links said Carville called for Dean's firing. Anyway, I know I'll be waiting a long time for you to own up. When facts no longer matter, we are in trouble, is right.

Own up and stop with misleading everyone.

[madfloridian]

39. No apology. No forgetting.

None.

I will not forget what Carville did, ever.

It was insensitive, it was hurtful to those in the party who were happy about the win.

He as much as said he had the blessing of Rahm and the Clintons in saying it, which makes it more pathetic.

Just put me on ignore if I bother you with my honesty.

He said Dean should be replaced with Harold Ford. In my world that means getting rid of someone. Some of you have focused on the word "fired". That is what you do when "replace" someone.

It took all the joy out of winning the election.

Carville still gets airtime. He will because he is the spokesman the party wants. He and his wife are not funny and cute anymore. It is time for them to go.

But of course, they need them around to keep outsiders from getting in the door.

And more, after he continued to mislead (lie) about the funding (the bloggers debunked him very quickly)....about the candidates...he has the nerve to say that Newt Gingrich agrees with him. He brags about having lunch with Gingrich. Unbelievable.

From the CNN transcript via Crooks and Liars (can't use the video cause CNN took it down from everywhere...wonder the hell why?

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/11/15/carville-goes-... /

"CARVILLE: I had lunch with Speaker Gingrich today. And he's observing these things very carefully. He didn't say whether he was going to run…He didn't say whether he was going to explore. But let's say this. He's activity engaged. He's mentally engaged in restoring on — in American politics. I had a delightful lunch with the speaker…"

James Carville gets a whole free segment on CNN being encouraged by Wolf and backed up by Buchanan....to diss his own party's chairman by using data that the bloggers caught right away as being wrong....then he bestows more praise on Gingrich while using damning words against his own party.

It is not over, it is just beginning. Look what he did to Kerry, look what he is doing to Dean. He still goes on college campuses and insults him.

No apology none. On edit, the video at C & L still works, but there was another I am still looking for. I posted it in the video forum here, and the video is no longer available.

[madfloridian]

42. Carville said Dean should be "dumped". Proof from Hotline via MSNBC Carville was wrong.

I wonder if this word is acceptable to you. I have pointed out that "replace" means to get rid of. But this is better. It also shows how often Carville did this. He is quoted at the NYT, TNR, and others as trying to discredit the party chairman. Now the Austin American gives us this:

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/was...

Carville Says Dems Should Dump Dean over “Rumsfeldian” Incompetence
By Scott Shepard | Wednesday, November 15, 2006, 12:00 PM

Democratic strategist James Carville says his party should dump Howard Dean as chairman of the Democratic Party because of incompetence.

Carville, during coffee and rolls with political reporters today, said Democrats could have picked up as many as 50 House seats, instead of the nearly 30 they have so far.

The reason they didn’t, he said, is the Democratic National Committee did not spend some $6 million it could have put into so-called “third tier” House races against vulnerable Republicans.

Carville said the other Democratic campaign committees had borrowed to the hilt.

He said he tried to meet with Dean to argue for additional spending for Democrats in the final days of the campaign, but Dean declined and gave no reason why.

Asked by a reporter whether Dean should be dumped, Carville replied, “In a word, do I think? Yes.”

He added, “I think he should be held accountable.” He added, “I would describe his leadership as Rumsfeldian in its competence.”

I think the "in a word, do I think? Yes." qualifies as saying they should "get rid of" "fire" Dean.

Here is the Hotline summary via MSNBC's first read that Carville's figures were way way off base, and he was trying to make Dean look bad undeservedly.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2006/11/17/15142...

James Carville has been generating a wave of publicity in criticizing DNC Chair Howard Dean for not sufficiently funding competitive House races. He’s claimed the Democrats could have won another dozen seats if the DNC allocated more money in the campaign’s final weeks. The DNC has pushed back on Carville’s charges. Who’s right?

Fourteen Democratic candidates lost by two points or less, but many of the campaigns were funded to the hilt by the Democratic House campaign committee (DCCC). Lois Murphy certainly can’t blame her loss in PA 06 on inadequate funding; the DCCC spent over $3 million on her behalf. Patricia Madrid (NM 01) also had plenty of money – her razor-thin loss came because of an embarrassing gaffe at a debate. Mary Jo Kilroy (OH 15), Darcy Burner (WA 08), Phil Kellam (VA 02), Christine Jennings, and Tammy Duckworth (IL 06) were all among the top-funded candidates by the DCCC. (In Jennings’ case, the money was funneled through the Florida Democratic party.)

And in some conservative districts, the DCCC strategically declined to spend money because they felt national advertising from Democrats would hurt their candidates. Gary Trauner, who narrowly lost to Rep. Barbara Cubin (R-WY AL), was the “victim” of such thinking.

That leaves six other races where more money could potentially have made a difference. Larry Kissell, who lost by less than 1 percent to GOP Rep. Robin Hayes (R-NC 08), certainly would have benefited from some cash; the DCCC didn’t give his campaign a dime. But it wasn’t a lack of DCCC funds, it was a lack of strategic foresight in this case.

There is more explanation...but here is their summary.

There’s realistically only four -- certainly no more than six seats -- that perhaps could have been won with extra cash. Extra money could have made a small difference, but certainly not to the degree that Carville has been suggesting. Dean may have made strategic blunders in the past, but his fiscal responsibility here seems like the wiser course.

One of those disputed seats was Tammy Duckworth, on whom Rahm spent half a million in the primaries against Cegelis and I think 3 million in the general.

I don't respond well to being told I am not telling the truth. You said I was not telling the truth.

I resent that very much. I will not let you destroy my reputation without a fight, so be sure you are right before you come out swinging again.

[mtnsnake]

53. You know as well as I that that was debunked. The headline was the author's words, not Carville's.

That was debunked last year when we went over the same thing again. I guess you conveniently forgot, eh?

Until you show an actual quote from Carville himself that backs up your claim that he said Dean should be fired, your claim doesn't hold a drop of water. For chrise sakes, you can't even show me a quote where he says Dean should be "replaced", let alone "fired". The headline was the author's quote and you know it.

BTW, don't go trying to turn this on me by saying I'm out to ruin your reputation or any of that other nonsense. I'm only trying to clear Carville's record on this, period. Carville never said he called for Dean's firing or, for that matter, his replacement.

Show me a direct quote of Carville's where he says that and I'll eat my crow. If you can't back up your claim, then just leave it at that. I'm done with this unless you post again that he said something he didn't.

[madfloridian]

54. Reporter: Should Dean be dumped. Carville: In a word, YES.

You are in a serious state of denial, and you are saying I am not credible. I will not let that happen.

YOU prove what I posted was wrong. Read the whole article.

I don't mind honest criticism, but this kind is meant to "protect" Dem spokesmen and make me look bad.

Read the article.

[mtnsnake]

55. Fair enough. If you insist your basing it on what some anonymous reporter said then so be it

In that case I can understand where you're coming from. At the same token, I remember from last year when we were discussing this that nobody could come up with this "reporter" who supposedly heard Carville say this. It's just like something Novak does, where he says he heard his gossip from some source, but doesn't ever give the name.

While there is still no proof of Carville saying this, other than some article that says an anonymous reporter said he heard him, I'll let it go at that.

[madfloridian]

56. The Austin American Statesman is a very reputable paper.

Just "letting it go" may be ok with you, but you tried to discredit me.

That was wrong. I have given source after source. Carville thought it was his role to declare Dean incompetent and us a cult.....it was not ok, it will never be ok.

You can just let it go...fine with me. I backed up everything I said.

You are letting it go by making it sound like the Austin American is not trustworthy either.

Something is wrong with that picture.

[mtnsnake]

58. I didn't say they weren't reputable. I said the reporter is "anonymous"

I am trying to set the record clear that Carville never said he wanted Dean fired. There is no direct quote by a named source that proves this, but I already implied that I can see where you're coming from by reading those articles. In retrospect, I think it was an honest mistake on your part to accept what some "anonymous" reporter said as gospel.

BTW, be careful about insisting over and over how I'm trying to make this about you and not about Carville...and the other things you said about my motives. That just isn't right, and that kind of stuff always backfires..

[madfloridian]

59. I won't let you do that either.

I have presented link after link about the many times Carville did this to Dean right after the election.

You are still trying to make it sound like I accepted and presented less than truth.

You said:

"BTW, be careful about insisting over and over how I'm trying to make this about you and not about Carville...and the other things you said about my motives. That just isn't right, and that kind of stuff always backfires.."

You ARE trying to make it sound like I am not telling the truth. I will fight that very hard. I really will.

I was right, 100% in what I said. What you are doing is protecting the man many have loved through the years but who is now attacking the chairman and the netroots who supported him, even the DNC members who voted for him.

I am right. I did not "misread" or "misinterpret."

[mtnsnake]

60. Nor will I let you. nt

[madfloridian]

61. Let me do what? I am telling the complete truth.

And I won't be intimidated about it.

[mtnsnake]

62. Turn the tables

which your are proving by the minute that that's all you're interested in doing. Stop playing games.

[madfloridian]

64. So you are still accusing me.

After all I have presented, you accuse me of playing games.

I don't think Carville should continue to be able to call people like me a cultist, and call Howard Dean incompetent.

I will check back tomorrow. I intend to present my case to someone here that I am right and being accused of playing games and not being honest.

Tomorrow I will check back. You just do not give up. The more facts I present the more you accuse me. NO more.

[mtnsnake]

65. I'm not "still accusing" you of anything, but nice try with the sympathy routine. Good night.

[madfloridian]

28. He referred to people like me as a "cult". Very insulting.

CNN has allowed him to spew this hate stuff toward us. I resent it, and I can not forgive or forget it.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/...

"Appearing on CNN's The Situation Room with host Wolf Blitzer and alongside conservative commentator Bay Buchanan, Democratic political consultant James Carville once again targeted Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean.

Describing a "cult" within the DNC surrounding Dean and his national campaign strategy, Carville continued what has been a steady stream of criticism against the former presidential candidate, often regarded as a populist outsider among "old money" Democrats.

Earlier today, Carville described Dean's leadership as "Rumsfeldian in its competence," while Dean, who has remained largely silent about Carville's unusual theatrics, dismissed the attacks on him as "inside the beltway silliness."

It is stupid. Carville is a messenger telling the activists who supported Dean we are no longer welcome.

I don't have a voice on TV, but I will speak out where I can.

[wisteria]

48. It is all a game for him and his wife. He stirs the pot ,denounces them and then dines with them.

He burns both ends of the political spectrum. He is no true Democratic spokesperson.

[pattmarty]

26. I have always questioned the Matalin/Carville relationship regarding politics.

[neutron]

43. Carville is terrific

I didn't agree with him about Dean, but he's one of the best speakers we have.
Why the left wing is killing off its best?
why don't we just give up and hand the country over to the neocons?

[madfloridian]

45. Ok, let's do that.

We might as well.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madfloridian]

50. I consider that a personal attack.

I just pointed that out to someone.

If Carville has the media stage to talk about people who supported Dean as a cult, then I should have the right to be critical. If he thinks he gets to pick the chairman, then I have a right to be critical.

Headlice???????

[madfloridian]

52. Head lice? You mean this kind of headlice? Oh, BTW welcome to DU

[wisteria]

51. He speaks for no Democrats except for the Clintons. n/t

[Karmadillo]

68. Neat. The Horse's Mouth blogging about the Horse's Ass. The panel should be more balanced, but

the balance should take into account Russert's Clinton hatred.

[mmonk]

74. Don't Carville and Matalin

have lies to tell or plans for help covering for outing CIA agents or something?

[polichick]

75. Who would trust Carville now that he's married to that nasty woman...

imo only someone who doesn't think she or her employers are nasty ~ and how could ANY Dem not have a problem with Matalin & Co?? I don't get it.