Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

CARVILLE Re: DEAN - "I would describe his leadership as Rumsfeldian in its competence."

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:30 PM
Original message
CARVILLE Re: DEAN - "I would describe his leadership as Rumsfeldian in its competence."
Bonus Quote of the Day
"I would describe his leadership as Rumsfeldian in its competence."

-- James Carville, quoted by the Atlanta Journal Constitution, on DNC Chairman Howard Dean. Carville "likened the Democratic takeover of Congress to the civil war battle at Gettysburg, which the Union army won but failed to pursue the Confederate army when it retreated."

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/11/15/bonus_quot...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LizW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. Good lord. I am speechless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. WTF?
Carville needs to STFU and save that conversation for the harpy he married.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
3. I am sharpening my pitchfork and lighting my torch as I speak
this miscreant needs to be driven down to the depths of the hell from which he slithered from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
94. Bastard can't even pick a decent WIFE but he's gonna judge other people?
F&$%&^ YOU, JAMES, and your drunkei war-criminal wife, too.

Poor kids. Mama goin' to prison and Daddy unhinged.

Call CPS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #94
127. With a wife who is a WAR CRIMINAL, of course they want the anti-corruption, open government Dems
marginalized in the party.

I guess it's becoming clearer for more people every day now that Carville is in urgent mode and dropping all pretense and games like they employed with their "Kerry" problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #3
118. You and I seem to fully agree on an awful lot lately...
MISCREANT- perfect word choice. I want the vile pitbull to take his treasonous hag and get the hell out of our party. IMO, he can keep his vulgar opinions to himself. I truly don't GIVE A RAT'S ASS what Carville thinks. He's a useless piece of crap...

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. Jesus fucking Kee-rist, Carville has finally jumped the shark. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deutsey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
133. I thought he jumped the shark before the 1st Clinton term ended n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
5. I suspected Carville wasn't on our side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
springhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #5
17. I'm telling you...........
I have suspected for a long time he's more of a mole than anything. Anyone married to someone like Mary Matalin cannot possibly be able to live with someone like that unless he shared many of her beliefs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #17
28. you are so right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #17
32. I just had visions of mary matlin
serving mr matlin pig's blood for breakfast, sticking pins in him when he's asleep and withholding everything unless he does her bidding. I may be being too kind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #32
97. Waaaay too kind. She's a war criminal. He doesn't want to raise their kids alone.
Do "the math".

That couple's been walking both sides of the street for too long.

Upside: she'll finally dry out in prison. Can't keep boozing like that forever, you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #5
75. You got that right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chimichurri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
6. Carville is the Intellivision of video game consoles -
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 12:35 PM by Chimichurri
Obsolete.



**edited to include photograph
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
7. Just perfect. We have a huge "I hate Rahm" movement at DU, and now this.
Some people don't know when to shut up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #7
22. Well, where is Rahm? Why doesn't he back Dean up?
because he agrees with Carville, that's why.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #22
60. You know that?
Or are you just joining the ranks of the I Hate Rahm Club?

This bullshit helps no one but the GOP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #60
124. Yes, I know that
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 02:53 PM by jgraz
I've heard three interviews with him, including his Monday appearance on the Rachel Maddow show. He not only quietly accepts all credit for the election win, he also explicitely takes credit for wins like Jerry McNerny and Zack Space, both of which got no funding until the final couple weeks of the campaign. When confronted with candidates that he completely ignored, like Carol Shea-Porter, he just says "yeah, we missed that one" rather than giving proper credit to Dean's 50-state strategy for helping in races like hers.

And I don't think this helps the GOP. Letting pro-NAFTA, pro-war, pro-corporate Dems continue to run the party helps the GOP.

ETA: He'll be on Ring of Fire this weekend. Listen to the interview and see if he shares credit with anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #124
135. Great attitude.
So, we have a bunch here frothing at the mouth looking for Carville's head over a tiny article in one newspaper. We have folks like you telling us that Rahm is shit because ... hell, I can't even figure out why. Something to do with not banging a drum and singing the praises of Howard Dean every time there's a live microphone around.

Sorry, but I'm not buying this. I've seen Emanuel interviewed a few times, and he was great. Positive, team oriented, and willing to give all his efforts. I like Dean, too. Carville's a freak, but he's always been a freak -- and totally dedicated to the cause.

If you want to crap all over Democrats for strange reasons, that's your choice. Thus far, I cannot accept a single word of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #135
145. Strange reasons? We in the reality-based community call it "evidence"
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 05:31 PM by jgraz
Just because someone has a 'D' after their name does not make them immune from criticism. If you vote for the torture bill, for the war, against habeus corpus or for the bankruptcy bill, I don't care what party you belong to -- I want you out of office. And if you denegrate the progressive values of the new people in congress, I will crap all over you and I hope other people do as well.

It's too bad you can't accept evidence against people who share your chosen party affiliation. If you truly feel that way, I hear there's a website called the Free Republic where you might be a bit more comfortable.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #7
39. Who hates Rahm here? Certainly not me.
I think Dean's 50-state strategy was brilliant, but Rahm was definitely an asset for this election. He is the sole reason Harry Mitchell entered the race in AZ-05 (among other people), and Harry won.

We won seats in Indiana, North Carolina, Kansas, and maybe even Wyoming. Tell me with a straight face the 50-state strategy doesn't work.

It's people like Carville who are now a liability for us. This guy makes Emanuel look like Dennis Kucinich.

"Some people don't know when to shut up."

Yeah, like Carville.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #39
51. Who hates Rahm? Here's a clue ... well, seven clues
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 12:59 PM by Buzz Clik
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #39
99. Serpenthead and S'cram are cut from the same cloth...
Very stretchy and imprinted w/ "DLC".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #99
101. Ok. So, I need to hate them now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #101
115. Was I talking to you?
You make a lot of assumptions for someone who makes so many assumptions.

Feel free to type pro-DLC 'til your carpal tunnels shrink away. Ain't gonna change any minds here, hon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #115
117. Were you? Were you not?
If you have private comments to make, don't post them in open forums. (Why has this suddenly become a difficult concept?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #117
123. WTF do you think you are? The Boss of DU?
Shove off!


You can't even navigate this freaking thread, toots. LMAO


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #123
132. Nice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #132
142. WHy is this all about YOU? It's "DU", not "D YOU".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #142
148. LOL
Stop it elehhhna!

I'll send you to your rooms!
I don't care WHO started it!

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crankie Avalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
8. I guess he'd prefer his friend Terry McCaulliff (sp?) back. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #8
46. McAuliffe did exactly what he was told to do - collapse party infrastructure in
the red and swing states and put all money into the shiny new building in DC, so Bush can have his two terms and Hillary can take over in 2008 and cover up for Bush2 the same way Bill covered up for Bush1.

Plus, Carville is married to a war criminal who would go to jail if the anti-corruption, open government wing of the party got into the White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #46
58. Holy Crap, blm....
I'm really starting to LIKE you!

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #58
65. You like that kind of screed? Why?
This thread is dedicated to bashing Carville for his self-serving insults of Dean's hard work, and you compliment blm for his trashing of the Clintons?

The hypocrisy is thick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #65
71. Her, and I go a LONG way back.
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 01:19 PM by PassingFair
We have had our disagreements in the past.
We are having our AGREEMENTS now.

You are not a factor.

Thank you for your concern.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #71
82. LOL! Pardon me for intruding on your social interaction.
I was under the impression you thought you were making a point. My bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #82
85. I was.
To HER.

What part of "I'm really starting to LIKE you"
did you think was directed at



you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #85
100. Boy. These Rahm and Carville lovers keep us all alert lately, huh?
Rude and full of baloney, just like their idols.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #100
103. And now the insults.
It's like being back on Rightwing knuckledragger boards.

"We hate Carville. If you don't, you're rude and full of baloney."

God I love the Democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #103
143. But when Carville hates on Democrats it's cool, eh? Especially if it continues the coverup
for BushInc that Clinton needs to take charge of once again.

Democrats, the Truth Still Matters!
By Robert Parry
(First Posted May 11, 2006)

Editor's Note: With the Democratic victories in the House and Senate, there is finally the opportunity to demand answers from the Bush administration about important questions, ranging from Dick Cheney's secret energy policies to George W. Bush's Iraq War deceptions. But the Democrats are sure to be tempted to put the goal of "bipartisanship" ahead of the imperative for truth.

Democrats, being Democrats, always want to put governance, such as enacting legislation and building coalitions, ahead of oversight, which often involves confrontation and hard feelings. Democrats have a difficult time understanding why facts about past events matter when there are problems in the present and challenges in the future.

Given that proclivity, we are re-posting a story from last May that examined why President Bill Clinton and the last Democratic congressional majority (in 1993-94) shied away from a fight over key historical scandals from the Reagan-Bush-I years -- and the high price the Democrats paid for that decision:

My book, Secrecy & Privilege, opens with a scene in spring 1994 when a guest at a White House social event asks Bill Clinton why his administration didnt pursue unresolved scandals from the Reagan-Bush era, such as the Iraqgate secret support for Saddam Husseins government and clandestine arms shipments to Iran.

Clinton responds to the questions from the guest, documentary filmmaker Stuart Sender, by saying, in effect, that those historical questions had to take a back seat to Clintons domestic agenda and his desire for greater bipartisanship with the Republicans.

Clinton didnt feel that it was a good idea to pursue these investigations because he was going to have to work with these people, Sender told me in an interview. He was going to try to work with these guys, compromise, build working relationships.

Clintons relatively low regard for the value of truth and accountability is relevant again today because other centrist Democrats are urging their party to give George W. Bushs administration a similar pass if the Democrats win one or both houses of Congress.

Reporting about a booklet issued by the Progressive Policy Institute, a think tank of the Democratic Leadership Council, the Washington Post wrote, these centrist Democrats warned against calls to launch investigations into past administration decisions if Democrats gain control of the House or Senate in the November elections.

These Democrats also called on the party to reject its non-interventionist left wing, which opposed the Iraq War and which wants Bush held accountable for the deceptions that surrounded it.

Many of us are disturbed by the calls for investigations or even impeachment as the defining vision for our party for what we would do if we get back into office, said pollster Jeremy Rosner, calling such an approach backward-looking.

Yet, before Democrats endorse the DLCs dont-look-back advice, they might want to examine the consequences of Clintons decision in 1993-94 to help the Republicans sweep the Reagan-Bush scandals under the rug. Most of what Clinton hoped for bipartisanship and support for his domestic policies never materialized.

Politicized CIA

After winning Election 1992, Clinton also rebuffed appeals from members of the U.S. intelligence community to reverse the Reagan-Bush politicization of the CIAs analytical division by rebuilding the ethos of objective analysis even when it goes against a Presidents desires.

Instead, in another accommodating gesture, Clinton gave the CIA directors job to right-wing Democrat, James Woolsey, who had close ties to the Reagan-Bush administration and especially to its neoconservatives.

One senior Democrat told me Clinton picked Woolsey as a reward to the neocon-leaning editors of the New Republic for backing Clinton in Election 1992.

I told that the New Republic hadnt brought them enough votes to win a single precinct, the senior Democrat said. But they kept saying that they owed this to the editors of the New Republic.

During his tenure at the CIA, Woolsey did next to nothing to address the CIAs politicization issue, intelligence analysts said. Woolsey also never gained Clintons confidence and after several CIA scandals was out of the job by January 1995.

At the time of that White House chat with Stuart Sender, Clinton thought that his see-no-evil approach toward the Reagan-Bush era would give him an edge in fulfilling his campaign promise to focus like a laser beam on the economy.

He was taking on other major domestic challenges, too, like cutting the federal deficit and pushing a national health insurance plan developed by First Lady Hillary Clinton.

So for Clinton, learning the truth about controversial deals between the Reagan-Bush crowd and the autocratic governments of Iraq and Iran just wasnt on the White House radar screen. Clinton also wanted to grant President George H.W. Bush a gracious exit.

I wanted the country to be more united, not more divided, Clinton explained in his 2004 memoir, My Life. President Bush had given decades of service to our country, and I thought we should allow him to retire in peace, leaving the (Iran-Contra) matter between him and his conscience.

Unexpected Results

Clintons generosity to George H.W. Bush and the Republicans, of course, didnt turn out as he had hoped. Instead of bipartisanship and reciprocity, he was confronted with eight years of unrelenting GOP hostility, attacks on both his programs and his personal reputation.

Later, as tensions grew in the Middle East, the American people and even U.S. policymakers were flying partially blind, denied anything close to the full truth about the history of clandestine relationships between the Reagan-Bush team and hostile nations in the Middle East.

Clintons failure to expose that real history also led indirectly to the restoration of Bush Family control of the White House in 2001. Despite George W. Bushs inexperience as a national leader, he drew support from many Americans who remembered his fathers presidency fondly.

If the full story of George H.W. Bushs role in secret deals with Iraq and Iran had ever been made public, the Bush Familys reputation would have been damaged to such a degree that George W. Bushs candidacy would not have been conceivable.

Not only did Clinton inadvertently clear the way for the Bush restoration, but the Rights political ascendancy wiped away much of the Clinton legacy, including a balanced federal budget and progress on income inequality. A poorly informed American public also was easily misled on what to do about U.S. relations with Iraq and Iran.

In retrospect, Clintons tolerance of Reagan-Bush cover-ups was a lose-lose-lose the public was denied information it needed to understand dangerous complexities in the Middle East, George W. Bush built his presidential ambitions on the nations fuzzy memories of his dad, and Republicans got to enact a conservative agenda.

Clintons approach also reflected a lack of appreciation for the importance of truth in a democratic Republic. If the American people are expected to do their part in making sure democracy works, they need to be given at least a chance of being an informed electorate.

Yet, Clinton and now some pro-Iraq War Democrats view truth as an expendable trade-off when measured against political tactics or government policies. In reality, accurate information about important events is the lifeblood of democracy.

Though sometimes the truth can hurt, Clinton and the Democrats should understand that covering up the truth can hurt even more. As Clintons folly with the Reagan-Bush scandals should have taught, the Democrats may hurt themselves worst of all when helping the Republicans cover up the truth.

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at Amazon.com, as is his 1999 book, Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth.'

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #85
102. There's a personal messenger on this board.
If you don't want your comments subjected to scrutiny, make them private.

That's your fault, not mine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #102
147. We're OPEN BOOKS - unlike the coverup wing of the Democratic party and their
apologists and messengers.

Democrats, the Truth Still Matters!
By Robert Parry
(First Posted May 11, 2006)

Editor's Note: With the Democratic victories in the House and Senate, there is finally the opportunity to demand answers from the Bush administration about important questions, ranging from Dick Cheney's secret energy policies to George W. Bush's Iraq War deceptions. But the Democrats are sure to be tempted to put the goal of "bipartisanship" ahead of the imperative for truth.

Democrats, being Democrats, always want to put governance, such as enacting legislation and building coalitions, ahead of oversight, which often involves confrontation and hard feelings. Democrats have a difficult time understanding why facts about past events matter when there are problems in the present and challenges in the future.

Given that proclivity, we are re-posting a story from last May that examined why President Bill Clinton and the last Democratic congressional majority (in 1993-94) shied away from a fight over key historical scandals from the Reagan-Bush-I years -- and the high price the Democrats paid for that decision:

My book, Secrecy & Privilege, opens with a scene in spring 1994 when a guest at a White House social event asks Bill Clinton why his administration didnt pursue unresolved scandals from the Reagan-Bush era, such as the Iraqgate secret support for Saddam Husseins government and clandestine arms shipments to Iran.

Clinton responds to the questions from the guest, documentary filmmaker Stuart Sender, by saying, in effect, that those historical questions had to take a back seat to Clintons domestic agenda and his desire for greater bipartisanship with the Republicans.

Clinton didnt feel that it was a good idea to pursue these investigations because he was going to have to work with these people, Sender told me in an interview. He was going to try to work with these guys, compromise, build working relationships.

Clintons relatively low regard for the value of truth and accountability is relevant again today because other centrist Democrats are urging their party to give George W. Bushs administration a similar pass if the Democrats win one or both houses of Congress.

Reporting about a booklet issued by the Progressive Policy Institute, a think tank of the Democratic Leadership Council, the Washington Post wrote, these centrist Democrats warned against calls to launch investigations into past administration decisions if Democrats gain control of the House or Senate in the November elections.

These Democrats also called on the party to reject its non-interventionist left wing, which opposed the Iraq War and which wants Bush held accountable for the deceptions that surrounded it.

Many of us are disturbed by the calls for investigations or even impeachment as the defining vision for our party for what we would do if we get back into office, said pollster Jeremy Rosner, calling such an approach backward-looking.

Yet, before Democrats endorse the DLCs dont-look-back advice, they might want to examine the consequences of Clintons decision in 1993-94 to help the Republicans sweep the Reagan-Bush scandals under the rug. Most of what Clinton hoped for bipartisanship and support for his domestic policies never materialized.

Politicized CIA

After winning Election 1992, Clinton also rebuffed appeals from members of the U.S. intelligence community to reverse the Reagan-Bush politicization of the CIAs analytical division by rebuilding the ethos of objective analysis even when it goes against a Presidents desires.

Instead, in another accommodating gesture, Clinton gave the CIA directors job to right-wing Democrat, James Woolsey, who had close ties to the Reagan-Bush administration and especially to its neoconservatives.

One senior Democrat told me Clinton picked Woolsey as a reward to the neocon-leaning editors of the New Republic for backing Clinton in Election 1992.

I told that the New Republic hadnt brought them enough votes to win a single precinct, the senior Democrat said. But they kept saying that they owed this to the editors of the New Republic.

During his tenure at the CIA, Woolsey did next to nothing to address the CIAs politicization issue, intelligence analysts said. Woolsey also never gained Clintons confidence and after several CIA scandals was out of the job by January 1995.

At the time of that White House chat with Stuart Sender, Clinton thought that his see-no-evil approach toward the Reagan-Bush era would give him an edge in fulfilling his campaign promise to focus like a laser beam on the economy.

He was taking on other major domestic challenges, too, like cutting the federal deficit and pushing a national health insurance plan developed by First Lady Hillary Clinton.

So for Clinton, learning the truth about controversial deals between the Reagan-Bush crowd and the autocratic governments of Iraq and Iran just wasnt on the White House radar screen. Clinton also wanted to grant President George H.W. Bush a gracious exit.

I wanted the country to be more united, not more divided, Clinton explained in his 2004 memoir, My Life. President Bush had given decades of service to our country, and I thought we should allow him to retire in peace, leaving the (Iran-Contra) matter between him and his conscience.

Unexpected Results

Clintons generosity to George H.W. Bush and the Republicans, of course, didnt turn out as he had hoped. Instead of bipartisanship and reciprocity, he was confronted with eight years of unrelenting GOP hostility, attacks on both his programs and his personal reputation.

Later, as tensions grew in the Middle East, the American people and even U.S. policymakers were flying partially blind, denied anything close to the full truth about the history of clandestine relationships between the Reagan-Bush team and hostile nations in the Middle East.

Clintons failure to expose that real history also led indirectly to the restoration of Bush Family control of the White House in 2001. Despite George W. Bushs inexperience as a national leader, he drew support from many Americans who remembered his fathers presidency fondly.

If the full story of George H.W. Bushs role in secret deals with Iraq and Iran had ever been made public, the Bush Familys reputation would have been damaged to such a degree that George W. Bushs candidacy would not have been conceivable.

Not only did Clinton inadvertently clear the way for the Bush restoration, but the Rights political ascendancy wiped away much of the Clinton legacy, including a balanced federal budget and progress on income inequality. A poorly informed American public also was easily misled on what to do about U.S. relations with Iraq and Iran.

In retrospect, Clintons tolerance of Reagan-Bush cover-ups was a lose-lose-lose the public was denied information it needed to understand dangerous complexities in the Middle East, George W. Bush built his presidential ambitions on the nations fuzzy memories of his dad, and Republicans got to enact a conservative agenda.

Clintons approach also reflected a lack of appreciation for the importance of truth in a democratic Republic. If the American people are expected to do their part in making sure democracy works, they need to be given at least a chance of being an informed electorate.

Yet, Clinton and now some pro-Iraq War Democrats view truth as an expendable trade-off when measured against political tactics or government policies. In reality, accurate information about important events is the lifeblood of democracy.

Though sometimes the truth can hurt, Clinton and the Democrats should understand that covering up the truth can hurt even more. As Clintons folly with the Reagan-Bush scandals should have taught, the Democrats may hurt themselves worst of all when helping the Republicans cover up the truth.

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at Amazon.com, as is his 1999 book, Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth.'

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #85
111. Really! I started to "like
her" a long time ago. :)

I've liked you ever since you posted that reply in the Scottish forum when I was writing about "The Proclaimers"! :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #111
112. We were opposite forces working for the same
goals!

We're still 'haverin to true democratic representation!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #112
136. And you weren't
cowerin' Cap N Hand!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #65
83. You'd be wrong about the pronoun "his trashing of the Clintons"
and you'd be wrong not to understand her point. Carville is a Clinton loyalist. Bill, as much as I love the guy, does have skeletons in his closet that he wants to have the door kept shut. He and Bush , Sr. have a MAD treaty going, IMHO. Part of Hillary's 2008 plan is to control the whole Democratic infrastructure. Get everyone on the same page, so to speak. Obviously, Hillary won't do a direct assault, so Jim is doing the hatchet work. I think it will backfire, big time, on him and Clinton, though. Big mistake trying to take out Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #83
129. They've been getting away with it for some time against Kerry, but now that Dean wants
to stay as head of the DNC they don't have the luxury of time to engineer the fostering of antiDean smears and rumors, so Carville is going full bore against Dean and doing it OPENLY.

More people are now seeing publicly what many of us have seen going on for some time now in behind the scenes fashion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #58
69. Well, we've all been watching it go down now the last 4 years, and it's a lot easier
to see the Dems who are working FOR BushInc and which Dems work to counter BushInc.

Notice the ones who work AGAINST BushInc are the ones always targeted for blame and ridicule by the coverup wing of the party. The way it's shaking out is the Clinton team is always the one behind the scenes tearing at the anti-corruption, open government Democrats.


Parry reposted this at consortiumnews Nov 12:

Democrats, the Truth Still Matters!
By Robert Parry
(First Posted May 11, 2006)

Editor's Note: With the Democratic victories in the House and Senate, there is finally the opportunity to demand answers from the Bush administration about important questions, ranging from Dick Cheney's secret energy policies to George W. Bush's Iraq War deceptions. But the Democrats are sure to be tempted to put the goal of "bipartisanship" ahead of the imperative for truth.

Democrats, being Democrats, always want to put governance, such as enacting legislation and building coalitions, ahead of oversight, which often involves confrontation and hard feelings. Democrats have a difficult time understanding why facts about past events matter when there are problems in the present and challenges in the future.

Given that proclivity, we are re-posting a story from last May that examined why President Bill Clinton and the last Democratic congressional majority (in 1993-94) shied away from a fight over key historical scandals from the Reagan-Bush-I years -- and the high price the Democrats paid for that decision:

My book, Secrecy & Privilege, opens with a scene in spring 1994 when a guest at a White House social event asks Bill Clinton why his administration didnt pursue unresolved scandals from the Reagan-Bush era, such as the Iraqgate secret support for Saddam Husseins government and clandestine arms shipments to Iran.

Clinton responds to the questions from the guest, documentary filmmaker Stuart Sender, by saying, in effect, that those historical questions had to take a back seat to Clintons domestic agenda and his desire for greater bipartisanship with the Republicans.

Clinton didnt feel that it was a good idea to pursue these investigations because he was going to have to work with these people, Sender told me in an interview. He was going to try to work with these guys, compromise, build working relationships.

Clintons relatively low regard for the value of truth and accountability is relevant again today because other centrist Democrats are urging their party to give George W. Bushs administration a similar pass if the Democrats win one or both houses of Congress.

Reporting about a booklet issued by the Progressive Policy Institute, a think tank of the Democratic Leadership Council, the Washington Post wrote, these centrist Democrats warned against calls to launch investigations into past administration decisions if Democrats gain control of the House or Senate in the November elections.

These Democrats also called on the party to reject its non-interventionist left wing, which opposed the Iraq War and which wants Bush held accountable for the deceptions that surrounded it.

Many of us are disturbed by the calls for investigations or even impeachment as the defining vision for our party for what we would do if we get back into office, said pollster Jeremy Rosner, calling such an approach backward-looking.

Yet, before Democrats endorse the DLCs dont-look-back advice, they might want to examine the consequences of Clintons decision in 1993-94 to help the Republicans sweep the Reagan-Bush scandals under the rug. Most of what Clinton hoped for bipartisanship and support for his domestic policies never materialized.

Politicized CIA

After winning Election 1992, Clinton also rebuffed appeals from members of the U.S. intelligence community to reverse the Reagan-Bush politicization of the CIAs analytical division by rebuilding the ethos of objective analysis even when it goes against a Presidents desires.

Instead, in another accommodating gesture, Clinton gave the CIA directors job to right-wing Democrat, James Woolsey, who had close ties to the Reagan-Bush administration and especially to its neoconservatives.

One senior Democrat told me Clinton picked Woolsey as a reward to the neocon-leaning editors of the New Republic for backing Clinton in Election 1992.

I told that the New Republic hadnt brought them enough votes to win a single precinct, the senior Democrat said. But they kept saying that they owed this to the editors of the New Republic.

During his tenure at the CIA, Woolsey did next to nothing to address the CIAs politicization issue, intelligence analysts said. Woolsey also never gained Clintons confidence and after several CIA scandals was out of the job by January 1995.

At the time of that White House chat with Stuart Sender, Clinton thought that his see-no-evil approach toward the Reagan-Bush era would give him an edge in fulfilling his campaign promise to focus like a laser beam on the economy.

He was taking on other major domestic challenges, too, like cutting the federal deficit and pushing a national health insurance plan developed by First Lady Hillary Clinton.

So for Clinton, learning the truth about controversial deals between the Reagan-Bush crowd and the autocratic governments of Iraq and Iran just wasnt on the White House radar screen. Clinton also wanted to grant President George H.W. Bush a gracious exit.

I wanted the country to be more united, not more divided, Clinton explained in his 2004 memoir, My Life. President Bush had given decades of service to our country, and I thought we should allow him to retire in peace, leaving the (Iran-Contra) matter between him and his conscience.

Unexpected Results

Clintons generosity to George H.W. Bush and the Republicans, of course, didnt turn out as he had hoped. Instead of bipartisanship and reciprocity, he was confronted with eight years of unrelenting GOP hostility, attacks on both his programs and his personal reputation.

Later, as tensions grew in the Middle East, the American people and even U.S. policymakers were flying partially blind, denied anything close to the full truth about the history of clandestine relationships between the Reagan-Bush team and hostile nations in the Middle East.

Clintons failure to expose that real history also led indirectly to the restoration of Bush Family control of the White House in 2001. Despite George W. Bushs inexperience as a national leader, he drew support from many Americans who remembered his fathers presidency fondly.

If the full story of George H.W. Bushs role in secret deals with Iraq and Iran had ever been made public, the Bush Familys reputation would have been damaged to such a degree that George W. Bushs candidacy would not have been conceivable.

Not only did Clinton inadvertently clear the way for the Bush restoration, but the Rights political ascendancy wiped away much of the Clinton legacy, including a balanced federal budget and progress on income inequality. A poorly informed American public also was easily misled on what to do about U.S. relations with Iraq and Iran.

In retrospect, Clintons tolerance of Reagan-Bush cover-ups was a lose-lose-lose the public was denied information it needed to understand dangerous complexities in the Middle East, George W. Bush built his presidential ambitions on the nations fuzzy memories of his dad, and Republicans got to enact a conservative agenda.

Clintons approach also reflected a lack of appreciation for the importance of truth in a democratic Republic. If the American people are expected to do their part in making sure democracy works, they need to be given at least a chance of being an informed electorate.

Yet, Clinton and now some pro-Iraq War Democrats view truth as an expendable trade-off when measured against political tactics or government policies. In reality, accurate information about important events is the lifeblood of democracy.

Though sometimes the truth can hurt, Clinton and the Democrats should understand that covering up the truth can hurt even more. As Clintons folly with the Reagan-Bush scandals should have taught, the Democrats may hurt themselves worst of all when helping the Republicans cover up the truth.

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at Amazon.com, as is his 1999 book, Lost History: Contras, C
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
9. So when will the Carvillian Carville get his FauxNews show? Must
be in the works with BS like that coming out of his mouth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
10. carville's an overworn hack
His loyalties lie between 2 republican pillows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
11. GREAT RESPONSE from leftcoastjane:
http://letters.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/11/10/d... /

Take that guy Dick Morris for example, an in-with-the-in-crowd Clintonista back in that era, who now appears regularly on the Fox News Channel and has emerged as a harsh critic of the Clintons & Dems. Wasn't he always a mole? I don't want to sow paranoia, BUT, how do we know we aren't dealing with a whole stratum of damn moles, these self-appointed DLC/beltway "centrists" who want to tell us all what positions are safe for us to espouse, and what candidates are safe for us to nominate in our primaries? And who try to denigrate Dean's brilliant but obviously necessary return to the grassroots as the way of saving what they turned into a 16-state regional party? WE knew Dean was exactly right, and now we have to continue pointing out and supporting his work, so everybody can see how weakened the party infrastructure was before Dean came along. It's up to us to redirect our thanks from Rahm's side to Howard's side, and to make sure our party "leadership" "spokespersons" give the grassroots equal credit for the successes reaped already in this election. (And we need to shine a grateful spotlight on such as the MoveOn folks, DFAers, bloggers and others who will no longer submit to the DLCers' talking points, while we're at it).

And what we need to examine quietly and rationally for ourselves is the question: Why should we put past the Rove/Cheney/Rumsfeldians the very obvious espionage tactic of infiltration and subversion from within our own ranks???

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nabia2004 Donating Member (566 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #11
30. long been thinking the same
thanks for the post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #30
37. It was exactly what I was wondering about
and she writes much better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #11
57. Thanks for that FLDEM!
It parallells this I read from Paul Lukasiak yesterday..

"HOW RAHM EMANUEL LOST THE HOUSE FOR THE DEMOCRATS-- AND HOW ACTBLUE, MOVEON, MARKOS, JANE, DUNCAN, HOWARD DEAN AND A HOST OF OTHERS SAVED THE DAY"

"Despite all the praise being heaped upon Rahm Emanuel for the Democratic Party takeover of the House of Representatives, his strategy was a failure. The simple fact is that Emanuel's plan was to target 21 Republican seats as part of his Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's "Red to Blue" strategy, and as of right now, while Democrats needed to take 15 seats to regain control, only nine of those 21 DCCC picked seats have changed hands (three are still in contention). Most of these candidates were "hand-picked" by Emanuel, based on his perception of their prospects to win election---and most of them failed, often by significant margins-- and at great financial cost."

more>
http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2006/11/how-rahm-em...

I'm not saying I agree that rahm "lost" it for us..but it makes for an interesting view point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #57
68. Interesting, as in pointless assigning of blame during a smashing success.
I don't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #68
110. Because the media is giving
rahm all the credit? And there are other people to give credit to and maybe just maybe rahm shouldn't be getting soooooooooooooo much credit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #110
121. This again. Okay, I'll ask you: can you give even one example?
Give me an example where the MSM (not some dippy blogger) has given Emanuel ALL the credit for the Democratic victory. Just one. I'd love to see it and join you in your outrage.

It certainly won't be hard to find hundreds of examples quoting the dozens of other hard working Dems who made this a team effort.

But let's say for just a moment that every story -- every damned one of them -- gave Rahm 100% credit for the victory. Is that reason for me to hate or dislike or even think twice about him? Do you let the media think for you? Do you distrust them so much that you reject everything they say out of hand? (Clearly not -- the feeding frenzy on Carville from a 100 word article in a single newspaper has been amazing and amusing)

This group-think, blood in the water garbage makes me really nervous...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #121
138. Okay..I'll put it this way..
Fuck mr mary matlin and fuck the people he works for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #57
70. "only nine of those 21 DCCC picked seats have changed hands"
interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #70
89. That's not exactly a true picture though of what happened
While I'm not defending Emmanuel here, I do have some serious problems with his selective giving program, I believe the whole picture is more convoluted that this.

For example, my district was IL CD#6, Tammy Duckworth V Pete Roskam for Henry Hyde's seat in RED, RED, RED Dupage Co (look it up if you don't know how red this district is).

Tammy only lost by 4000 votes. She (and Emmanuel) singlehandedly took this County and turned it solidly purple. My ballot did not contain one single other Dem candidate to vote for besides Blagojevich and Duckworth. Every single other seat was an uncontested rethug. But NOW there is a much more credible, solid, grass roots Dem base in Dupage County. I will bet $$ that more Dems will finally have the nerve (and $$ and grass roots support) to finally run for local office. This will only serve to expand our base.

I know that most can't understand the $3 mill that went into this race but I swear, it will be the best $3 mill, in the long haul, that the DNC has ever invested. Denny Hastert's district is right next door and he has to be watching with some alarm at the big blue wave that is rolling out from Chicago and lapping at his front door.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #89
108. thank you for that extra information
I hope the blue wave laps at this Florida shore someday.

*sigh*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #11
90. Indeed. This is a long game they've been playing, they'd be fools to ignore the
fifth column option. They are corrupt, but they are not fools.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Last Stand Donating Member (379 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #11
146. Maybe some insiders set Dean up in the primaries, too.
I was never convinced that "the scream" had much to do with why Dean didn't advance. He's as credible as anyone out there. I have to believe the Repukes are afraid of him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
12. Wow, he isn't even trying to hide his real republican agenda anymore!
Asshole doesn't come close to describing this irrelevant, yesterday's news creep, imo. The only thing I can think is that after it became public that he clued in his repub wife on the impending Kerry challenge in Ohio in 04, carville was persona non grata to the Democratic leadership in this recent election and carville is trying, pitifully, to get petty revenge and, instead, showing his true traitorous roots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiviaOlivia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
13. The AJC article
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 12:43 PM by LiviaOlivia
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.

~snip~

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.

~snip~

http://www.ajc.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/washingto...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulfcoastliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
21. I think that's more the fault of R Emmanuel
Dumping $3 million in the Duckworth campaign rather than support other candidates could've netted more seats. As it was, he couldn't even score in his own backyard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #21
62. Perfect -- you're doing the flipside of Carville. Feel better?
You're certainly not helping the cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
14. It's only been a week
The Dems haven't even taken over yet. It's yet to be seen what they will pursue. There will be investigations and if the findings warrant vigorous action I don't doubt the Dems will pursue it.

Dean did a terrific job. THe Dems won big. Rummy just made a mess of things. I see no comparison.

Mz Pip
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marnieworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
15. Get this man a paper
He is clearly behind in current events.

Dean had a success not matched in 30 years.

Dean should send him a dagger saying he found it in his back. What the fuck is he talking about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
16. Good god, will you stop this shit Carville!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #16
66. I thought it was all in our imagination, rinsd.....
we are NOT making this up.

We weren't making up the Rahm crap, either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #66
84. WTF are you talking about?
I think this is Carville trying to get himself a piece of the power pie and happens to be doing it in a shitty way.

You think he's some deep cover mole.

Big difference.

"We weren't making up the Rahm crap, either."

Uh yes you were. Some progressives are trying to assert power the old tried and true way of stepping on the heads of others to be more bouyant.

Rahm did alright. In fact much of what he did fit in with Dean's 50 state strategy of expanding areas where Democrats are competitive. Dean deserves most of the credit but the slamming of Rahm by certain progressives is so much partisan bullshit.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #84
88. Rahm is stirring the pot by himself
so is Carville, the only question is --
is it for their personal benefit, or the
aggrandizement
of the house of Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #88
150. imo rahm is shilling for HC, Carv is trying to save his warcriminal wife's ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #16
67. Can you imagine if we didn't have
Grassy NetRoots? This shit of mr mary matlin's might be served up as gospel instead of the ramblings of a bitter ol' mopin' mole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JetCityLiberal Donating Member (706 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
18. Shut up James, you are over
Dean brought this blue wave, cry all you want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
19. MM burrowed into his skull and sucked the brains out a long time ago. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:53 PM
Original message
lol's....plus Matalin could go down in prosecutions of how we went to war
since she was part of the Iraq Group who was helping cherry pick info and spread it to the media for Dick Cheney.

Carville's wife could be and should be in deep doo doo. Whatever comes out of his mouth is because he has to save his wife's butt.

Your description of Matalin was :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
20. Man, I really liked Carville once... now, I'm just disappointed
I wish he would stop attacking Dean. Dean's strategy paid off big time and Carville knows that. Other than personal gain, I can't think of a reason he's doing this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #20
73. Well, he definitely helps the republicans. How do we get rid of him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HaggardsMethDealer Donating Member (109 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
23. You can count on hearing more of this kind of garbage
The DLC and the Hillary Whores are freaking out over Dean's popularity so they are trying to kneecap him right now. They know that if he holds too much power in the Democratic Party that Hillary won't have a chance in hell in the primaries.

He's just a Hillary Whore and Dean needs to call him out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #23
78.  Good Post , I love your user-name..
Now we need a NuggetsMethDealer to post here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
24. Oh, now Carville thinks the Dems could have picked up 50 seats?
I'd certainly like to see where he was predicting this before November 7. You've certainly got a huge log of TV appearances and writings, Mr. Carville. Where did you say that you thought the Democrats could/would/should pick up 50 House seats? Whispering it to the north wall of the bathroom doesn't count; a public pronouncement to that effect, if you please.

Otherwise, this is Monday morning quarterbacking at its worst.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
25. Fuck you Agin' Cajun!
mr matlin sounds like he needs some attention. :freak: :cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoosier Dem Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
26. The Swift-Boating of Howard Dean has begun...
I for one am not surprised. The Clintons and their DLC vultures have had bile in their mouths ever since Dean took the DNC Chairmanship away from them. They are just itching to get it back.

I'm sure they're also pissed that Dean was able to get BOTH houses of Congress back while their lapdog McAuliffe failed miserably at every chance. Just makes McAuliffe look more like a bigger boob.

They will make it thier mission to drive Howard Dean out. As an outsider not controlled by the DLC, he is a threat to their plans for 2008. They want to control the DNC to make it easier for the "Succubus of Chappaqua" to get the nomination in 2008.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
27. Carville is only making Dean look BETTER
Aside from the Ragin' Cajun getting some whoops from his tight-lipped automaton old lady, he is not only NOT making sense but he's also nailing himself as someone not to trust as a campaign advisor.

I'm still quite pissed at how he whispered into the enemy's ear on Election night and help stop a Kerry administration in its tracks... that's already unforgiveble.

But this smarmy buffoonery on dissing Dean after what was an OBVIOUS success on Dean's part...is just childish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beelzebud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
29. It's official. He's a Republican plant.
I'm not joking. Look at who he's married to. Think about Bob Woodward's revelation about how Carville called his wife, Mary Matlin, to inform her on what the Kerry campaign was thinking about doing.

This guy is, for lack of a better term, a Republican spy.

We need to purge this motherfucker, and everyone like him, from the party now. Not next election cycle, but NOW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Le Taz Hot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #29
91. He's not a plant.
He's whoring for Hillary. One more reason NOT to support Hillary in the primary, like we needed another one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #29
96. he's not a plant . . . plants have higher IQs . . . n/t
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patcox2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #29
116. He's not a rep. plant, he's a Hillary plant.
If you can't see that, you are blind. Carville is the Clinton's creature. They are centrist, pro-corporate DLC types. Dean, and this election, have moved the Democratic party leftward, and Hillary is trying to regain control by attacking Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SeattleGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
31. Carville is REALLY pissing me off!
:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
33. What is with this guy lately? Can't he find it in himself to say ANYTHING remotely congratulatory
about the democratic wins last week?? Whether he likes it or not, this win was accomplished with Dean's leadership. This sniping is really unprofessional and, IMO, speaks volumes about his agenda.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
34. No he didn't! Carville is BRAIN DEAD!
he is a pod person. :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

Evil James Carville brings SHAME to honorable democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
35. I don't trust anyone who sells centrism and is married to a RW pig
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 12:50 PM by ComerPerro
He doesn't believe in progressive causes or Democratic or liberal ideals.

Its just a product, he just happes to work for Coke, his wife for Pepsi.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Count Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
36. He's right, cuz look at the quagmire Dems are in ---Oh, wait, silly - we won!
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
38. Your lame old Donkey just won the Triple Crown, so what do you do....
Fire the trainer.

Yup, makes perfect sense to me. :sarcasm:

My feeling is that this has more to do with the Clintonistas wanting a Chairman who will back Hillary than anything having to do with Dean's competence or lack thereof.

I'm interested in seeing where the Big Dawg comes down on this one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
40. DLC hates progressives
Carville is an ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beelzebud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #40
41. Don't run from it. The correct word is Liberals.
I'm done being a "Progressive".

I am a Liberal, and proud of it. Liberalism founded this country!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #41
50. Did I say I was ashamed of being described as "liberal"?
No. Unless I'm mistaken, Dean describes himself as a progressive, and Dean is who we're talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beelzebud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. Dr Dean needs to take back the word Liberal!
My post wasn't meant to denigrate or offend you. If you took it that way, I apologize. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #54
63. I agree with you,
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 01:11 PM by notsodumbhillbilly
but our elected officials seem to be afraid of the liberal description. Maybe when they assume the majority in January, they'll stop running from it. One of the things I've always admired about Ted Kennedy is that he is a proud liberal. Apology accepted. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terrya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
42. Carville is a Republican now, right?
That's what I'm picking from comments like this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
43. Ah yes, the Dean-hating is in full swing by the right wing of the DLC.
They'd rather the Democrats lose elections than have a grass-roots progressive at the helm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
A-Schwarzenegger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
44. Just another hired gun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
45. General Carville's army would have its supply lines cut off,
would be surrounded deep in enemy territory and, after taking a long series of losses from bullet and disease, would surrender whole to the enemy and beg for mercy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wicket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
47. Fuck Carville
He's such a sell-out hack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
48. How does a guy that is for public financing of campaigns not agree
with Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tatiana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
49. OK, that's it. I'm officially *OVER* Carville, period.
This alone, is such a LOUSY, petulant, jealous comment to make. But given the state of this country right now, given that the American public is looking to the Democratic party for guidance and true leadership, to go public with such bull$hit is unforgiveable.

I respect what he and Begala did to help get Clinton elected. I respect Carville's right to his own opinions, including the obvious personal dislike of Dean. But I can't countenance this attack on party unity or cavalier dismissal of a strategy implemented that was, overall, successful.

F him and I don't think we should pay him anymore attention. That's obviously what he wants. He's no better than Lieberman or Dick Morris, in my book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Botany Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
52. What a snake!
"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."

Maybe because Jimmy told his wife who told Rove that Kerry was going to contest Ohio
because of the # of provisional ballots. Rove then called Blackwell and the # of provisional
ballots suddenly became less then the # bush "margin of victory."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PVnRT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
53. Yeah, kiss my ass, redneck
I am done with listening to this southern-fried jackass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
55. I don't think it was Dean who failed to support Lamont in CT
I think that was Schumer. And I don't think it was Dean who had Democrats obsequiously applauding Traitor Joe in the chamber this week. I think that was also Schumer. Talk about failing to pursue the enemy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
56. So Carville has declared 'failure' 2 months before Dems even take office?
SNIP:
"Carville "likened the Democratic takeover of Congress
to the civil war battle at Gettysburg, which the Union army won
but failed to pursue the Confederate army when it retreated."


Hey, Jimmy, 2 points:

1: Gettysburg is generally considered to be
the TURNING POINT of that war; Confederate
defeat was INEVITABLE afterward. It was a VICTORY, get it?

2: FUCK YOU, you smug little sack of rancid weasel-shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David Zephyr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
59. Don't get mad at Carville, he's just doing the Clinton's biddding.
It's the Billary Corporation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #59
72. I agree with you . Carville's working for Hillary. Hillary doesn't trust Dean.
Would you want a guy who believes that your husband helped screw up his presidential bid to be running the party just when you are ready to go for the big prize?

Would you want someone who was not only supported by Al Gore, but who has several key former Gore staff members working for him at DNC?

The motivation for this otherwise inexplicable attack is very clear.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #72
76. And I don't trust HIllary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #76
104. Me neither. Never did. Never will. Opportunistic triangulator, she.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
61. It's the election, stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Elidor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
64. Oh, where's that thread from last week?
"Carville didn't REALLY call for Dean to step down. He was just thinking out loud about Harold Ford." Yeah, right. :eyes:

I want to see all those DUers who apologized for him last week come back and do it again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shrub chipper Donating Member (622 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #64
128. That's what I said earlier in this thread.
They do owe us an apology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smoogatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
74. DLC=Democrats Lose Continually
Honestly, I wonder sometimes if it isn't their strategy to lose unless the Dem candidate(s) in question are sufficiently corporatist to satisfy their big-money donors. Dean's 50-state strategy made those first and second-tier races competetive--and put the 3rd-tier races in play. He didn't lose a Dem-hled seat, and he won in places like Montana, Indiana and Missouri where less than a year ago the DLC had completely bailed. They sneered at Dean for sending people to places like Montana, and now they're saying he didn't do enough? Christ on a soda fucking cracker. The DLC and their corporate masters are a cancer on the Democratic Party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
77. Why is everyone pissed at Carville?
I don't understand. He was obviously insulting Cons more than Dems in the OPs quote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
79. Interesting that he thinks Democrats are still interested in his opinions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
80. Me Re: Carville: I would describe his statements as DLC drivel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunny planet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
81. That does it. Carville = Mole
He even looks like one with those slitty little eyes that look like they are just blinking and getting used to the sunshine.
STFU Ragin' Cajun', more like Raygun Cajun if you ask me.
Dean's success makes you even more irrelevant than you are already James. If it walks, talks and quacks like a Republican, it is a Republican.
The James Carville of 'The War Room' is no more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
86. Carville can go suck an egg, far away from Democratic consulting positions. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rateyes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
87. Screw you, Carville....
and the horse you rode in on!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:44 PM
Response to Original message
92. HIS WIFE IS A WAR CRIMINAL. Has he no shame? NO! He has not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patiod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
93. I always liked Carville
He sponsored a Bartcop event, let us use his restaurant, and spoke to us, back in the day when a lot of us at Bartcop felt like an awfully small minority. Plus he nailed Pennsylvania ("Pittsburgh and Philadelphia with Alabama inbetween") and used to do a great job on Crossfire.

But screw him. Does he think the 50 state policy was some sort of mis-step? And taking the SENATE was a screw-up?

Yikes. What are you smokin' there, JC?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
95. Carville is as *green* as Kermit the Frog.
It ain't easy for him, I'm guessing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
98. I'd describe James Carville, as....Matilianlike
in his devotion to Karl Rove
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcking Donating Member (47 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
105. As I said after his last anti-Dean quote:
I want some of HIS drugs!

He's hallucinating even more this week than last.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllexxisF1 Donating Member (559 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #105
107. I am just shocked.
WTF! Carville, holy Jesus why can't people in our party beat the shit out of each other in the back room instead of the front page.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillrockin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
106. Excuse me ????
:dunce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
109. No surprise to me.
If you`ve followed Carville`s statements in the past (like those of his buddy Paul Begala) you won`t be surprised that he is (again) attacking Howard Dean.

James Carville is an insider. Dean, (like liberal, populist and progressive Democrats) is an outsider. The outsiders are used only for their donations and votes since their ideas and principles are meaningless to corporate beltway Democrats.

Since the election, I have yet to hear any House or Senate Democrat so much as mention Howard Dean when the credits are being rolled. Dean is synonymous with anti-Iraq War Democrats, the lepers of the Democratic Party. That`s why over the next few weeks we`ll wait for Jim Baker. Then we`ll wait for some commission to study that report. Then we`ll wait another few months while we have a few more hearings. Then we`ll wait while we negotiate with the all-powerful Senator Lieberman. Then we`ll wait for a few more polls. Then we`ll wait to prove we can change the tone in Washington and work with "our friends across the aisle." In the meantime, more legs will get blown off, more caskets will get sent home under the cover of darkness, more billions will get charged to our grandchildren and more soldiers will be on their fourth or fifth tour.

Go ahead and throw the tomatoes. I`ve been through this before, listening to General Westmoreland`s BS at the same time I was watching the television camera`s lying eyes. It was called the Vietnam War.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JaneQPublic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
113. Carville needs to put the trashcan back on his head.
And never take it off.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patcox2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
114. This is Hillary's work, not Mary's. Don't be deluded.
This is just Hillary's first machiavellian move towards the 2008 nomination. Her brand of centrism and DLC politics was completely refuted by Dean in this election. She is desperate to put the Carville kind back in power so they will support her.

Carville never won shit for the democratic party, all of our worst losses were all when he was in his ascendency, and like GW, Clinton never could win a majority of the vote either. Hillary will destroy the party to ensure her victory with this kind of savage backstabbing campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
119. James Carville=Zell Miller
Both blow-hards, full of poop, and just frothing at the mouth for attention.... And both secretly working for the other side, oh wait, Zell said he was, Carville has been the coward....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ceile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
120. What is his problem?
No body else to pick on, so let's get the guy that helped win us both houses? Does this make sense to anyone??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
122. Some people really should STFU, like Carville.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
125. Carville is a Giant Douche

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Major Hogwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #125
152. Quote of the day!
That is funnier than hell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
126. PIECE OF SHIT!
Carville must be completely marginalized. He's sold out to the dark side. :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
d_b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
130. Ignore that goofy fuck
His time is past.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StraightDope Donating Member (716 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
131. Will someone please kick Carville's ass?
All the way across the aisle where he apparently belongs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
134. Marching orders from the Hillary/Big Dog camp?
I haven't seen Bill Clinton with Howard Dean in recent rallies...is Carville trying to derail Dean to set the stage for the Repig landslide in 2008 if Hillary gets the nomination?

First of all, she won't make it through the primaries, but yunno...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #134
137. wow -- snark on the half-shell
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 03:36 PM by AtomicKitten
First of all, to discount HRC is just ludicrous, and that's coming from someone who won't vote for her in the primary. Her monster lead in the polls and in fund raising is of epic proportions; to deny that is almost certainly wishful thinking on behalf of another potential candidate that isn't faring so well in the polling consistently perhaps?

I am constantly amazed at the jostling that goes on politically, in the real world and especially here at DU. Reminds me of the block wars in Our Gang and just about as mature. The declarations made regarding motivation and alliances and the like is pretty breathtaking and, no offense, I find it really funny.

I'm standing back allowing it to unfold. May the best Democrat win.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
139. That is such a Mary Matalin response. Obvious who's so worried about Dean.
And shouldn't mary mary quite contrary be sporting a pin-striped jumper cracking some rocks by now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alarimer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
140. His leadership won back Congress
Carville can go Cheney himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaPera Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
141. Fucking Carville...GET laid dude, by someone that's alive & warm and will actually move!!
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 03:45 PM by LaPera
You henpecked, republican shill!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mhatrw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
144. War is Peace. Ignorance is Strength. Victory is Incompetence.
Edited on Wed Nov-15-06 04:23 PM by mhatrw
Or more precisely, Dem Victory = DLC Loss.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 06:16 PM
Response to Original message
149. Here ya go:
:D



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Christian30 Donating Member (341 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #149
151. Here's the DNC/Dean response
Democrats Stand Behind Dean; Carville "Got The Facts Wrong"

November 15, 2006 5:27 p.m. EST

Matthew Borghese - All Headline News Staff Writer

Washington, D.C. (AHN) - The Democratic National Committee (DNC) says it "gladly" spent millions to finance its victory over Republicans this November.

In an interview with All Headline News (AHN) DNC Communications director Karen Finney says strategist and pundit James Carville "got the facts wrong" when he said Democrats could have won more races if they had put more money into the fight.

Finney says the DNC knew 2006 would be "very important" and spent $30 million on campaigns, up from the $9.8 million they spent in 2002.

Carville, one of the leading Democratic strategists and a sharp voice within the party says Democrats could have won as many as 50 seats in the House, yet Howard Dean, the chairman of the Democratic Party, never authorized the necessary campaign spending.

Yet, Finney contends Carville "simply doesn't know the facts about what the DNC did in this election. In addition to the $30 million we put into the '06 races, the DNC happily did take out a <$10 million> loan because Governor Dean is committed to helping Democrats win."

Finney adds that Democrats were fundraising "to the wire" and spent half of the $10 million loan on Congressional races.

Carville, on the other hand, tells the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, if he thinks Dean should resign; "In a word, do I think? Yes... I think he should be held accountable. I would describe his leadership as Rumsfeldian in its competence."

According to the paper, Carville likened the Democratic takeover of Congress to the civil war battle at Gettysburg, which the Union army won but failed to pursue the Confederate army when it retreated. Carville believes, "We should have chased them down."

Yet, after a big win, Democrats see no reason to abandon Dean. Former DNC Chair Don Fowler says, "This is is nonsense... Democrats won a great victory on November 7; control of the United States House of Representatives, control of the United States Senate, majority of Governors, and majority of state legislative bodies. Governor Dean deserves to continue as DNC Chair."

Nebraska's Democratic Chair Steve Achelpohl, in an open letter to Carville, adds, "From my perspective, Governor Howard Dean's 50 State Strategy is the best thing to happen to the Democratic Party in many years... Our Party is well-served by Howard Dean. He gives Democrats hope and opportunity in all parts of the country, many far too long ignored by the National Party... I strongly supported Governor Dean for DNC Chair."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Oct 20th 2014, 09:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC