Carville Didn’t Want Bush to Succeed
Such is the speed of the Internet that one can stumble across a great story at noon, post it around 9 p.m. — and the story is old news. Still, I can’t very well fail to post this delicious bit of irony:
James Carville, February 25, 2009:
As I point out the most influential Republican in the United States today Mr. Rush Limbaugh said he did not want President Obama to succeed. So at the very top of the Republican Party, he’s not being wished well here.
James Carville, September 11, 2001 (just before hearing about the attacks):
I certainly hope [President Bush] doesn’t succeed.
Heh.
Allah’s analysis here, including what Carville said after the attacks.
but we don’t dare question their patriotism…….
redc1c4 (9c4f4a) — 3/11/2009 @ 9:58 pmI am sure that Carville’s quote was just laced with nuance because the Dems would never ever ever be hypocrites.
JD (7558c8) — 3/11/2009 @ 10:02 pmThe same old story, told over and over again.
Carville is a smart and an articulate man. But, he has assumed a viewpoint that either he believes in — or one that advances his career. I won’t judge him on that.
Nonetheless, it keeps him employed and it makes him money.
He may deny it, but that makes him a conservative. Just saying.
Ag80 (3e2c59) — 3/11/2009 @ 10:05 pmCarville is a mendoucheous traitor. Mary Matalin must feel very dirty being around him all the time.
Joe (17aeff) — 3/11/2009 @ 10:12 pmAnd Carville’s hypocrisy shows calling the left on their double standards and lies is the correct strategy.
Joe (17aeff) — 3/11/2009 @ 10:13 pmAllah makes a point that some of us observed during this week’s kerfuffle: Rush has been and is ever consistent with his view. He has not wavered, backed away from, nor attempted to change it as the outcry from the left and a portion of conservatives, erupted.
Carville chickened out, revealing himself to be weak and more concerned with political gain rather than maintaining consistency of principle. How does one respect that?
Dana (137151) — 3/11/2009 @ 10:18 pmMary Matalin must feel very dirty being around him all the time.
I think it just must be a really serious case of true love.
Dana (137151) — 3/11/2009 @ 10:20 pmHow many people called for Carville’s death after this quote of his? How much time did the MSM devote in airtime and column inches for Carville’s quote?
JD (7558c8) — 3/11/2009 @ 10:33 pmJD – The press covered up for him and necer reported his remarks, not that there was any ideological bias in their actions or anything.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 3/11/2009 @ 10:44 pmOf course there was an ideological bias in their actions, daleyrocks. Otherwise, they would just report a random collection of facts.
Steverino (b12c49) — 3/11/2009 @ 10:49 pmWe were in NYC on 9/11 and I had been a lefty until 1998. As we were scrambling to get out of the city (4 hours of a nightmare that felt like 4 days), all I could think was how this was totally, totally screwing up all the Left’s plans. (Well, that and that we were now At War and there would be hell to pay, finally.) Carville’s words both before and after the attacks prove I was right.
I know the Left was royally peeved about the attacks and not in any of the ways the rest of us were. The terrorist attacks to start the destruction of America totally messed up the Left’s ongoing efforts to destroy America (which are back and stronger than ever, 7.5 years later).
Looks like we will be going through all of this all over again, at some point in the probably not too distant future. Those who do not learn from history…
Peg C. (48175e) — 3/12/2009 @ 4:03 amThe difference here is that Rush ia a private citizen with very little sway in the Republican Party. Carville is a Political Operative who develops strategies directly with the Democrats. Carville should be excommunicated from the Democratic Party and not be allowed into any of their circles. We will do the same for Rush.
TomT (ce2d63) — 3/12/2009 @ 5:02 amTomT,
Not a fair trade, nor one I will honor. There are RINOs that should be expelled from the GOP long before any debate about Mr. Limbaugh even starts.
PCD (ed31e3) — 3/12/2009 @ 6:07 amCarville is a mendoucheous traitor.
Eh, both Carville and his wife are paid political hacks – did you ever catch their two – man dumb team media appearances during the Clinton years? Asinine, even for the low bar that’s political theatre.
Dmac (49b16c) — 3/12/2009 @ 7:01 am“The difference between Carville and his ilk and me is that I care about what happens to my country,” Limbaugh said. “I am not saying what I say for political advantage. I oppose actions, such as Obama’s socialist agenda, that hurt my country.
“I deal in principles, not polls,” Limbaugh added. “Carville and people like him live and breathe political exploitation. This is all a game to them. It’s not a game to me. I am concerned about the well-being and survival of our nation. When has Carville ever advocated anything that would benefit the country at the expense of his party?”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/11/carville-lashes-limbaugh/
Joe (17aeff) — 3/12/2009 @ 7:40 amI just want to point out that you guys are being unkind when you call Carville a mendoucheous traitor.
Unkind to mendoucheous traitors, that is.
CW Desiato (614aa7) — 3/12/2009 @ 8:03 amMendoucheous. Awesome new word of the week.
We can scream all we like about the unfairness of the MSM, people who only listen to it will never hear our screams. The whole problem makes me twitchy.
Vivian Louise (eeeb3a) — 3/12/2009 @ 8:53 amVivian Louise – All credit for mendoucheous goes to Dan Collins at proteinwisdom. It is a perfectly descriptive word.
JD (546b71) — 3/12/2009 @ 8:58 am