While I expect surrogates and supporters of the Democratic presidential candidates to be passionate, if a little ideological, about their candidate, the name-calling and malicious criticism has reached the turn-the-TV-off proportions. It’s no longer party partisanship that is making me want to hurl handy inanimate objects at the screen – it’s the ridiculous sandlot insults flung back and forth between the Obama and Clinton camps, though it is undeniable the majority are emanating from the Clinton side. They’re experienced in demonizing opponents and their experience is showing true in this election.
James Carville has always been one of these Clinton-loyalists. On the front line, ready to spout truths or untruths – whichever might advance his candidate more successfully. I’ve always found him entertaining and exciting. The War Room is one of my favorite documentaries. Lately, on Larry King and Meet The Press, his opinions have bordered on fictional and he has resorted to repeating the same view over and over when no other lies about the vibrancy of the Clinton campaign are readily available. Click on the links to the shows if you’d like to read the transcripts.
Carville, however, has outdone himself with his recent opinion of the Bill Richardson endorsement of Obama. “Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic,” he said, according the The New York Times.
How immature. How bitter and sinister and ridiculous. To compare Richardson to Judas, giving Mrs. Clinton the role of Jesus. Only a political filthy degenerate would make such an association.
Such a statement infers that the Clinton appointments are given out with the expectation of returned favors – not because of the credibility of the appointee and belief that they will serve that position well. The statement plays politics at such a schoolyard level – on a tit-for-tat, back-scratching, sex-for-money jaundiced playing field leaving no room for healthy progress and debate.
The political atmosphere James Carville seeks to create is one of corruption and collusion. Candidate loyalty above all else. Above party loyalty. Above political ethics. And above the will of the people.
I think it is not Bill Richardson who is irrelevant, as Mark Penn tried to assert. It is James Carville and his nasty brethren who have forgotten what political leadership is all about and that the rest of us “citizens” wish to hell these people whom we elect would do the right the thing simply because it is right and not because they will benefit from it.
It’s time someone gave James Carville his pink slip and sent him out the back door. Or at least stuffed some boudin in his mouth so he can’t speak.
The only amusing thing I can see in this whole Judas analogy is that it probably makes Al Gore salivate at the idea of endorsing Obama. Obviously, he probably won’t need much prodding, but if I were in the Clinton camp, I’d be preparing my reaction for when that day comes.
UPDATE: Carville stands by his putrid verbiage Monday, saying, “I was quoted accurately and in context, and I was glad to give the quote and I was glad I gave it,” Mr. Carville said. “I’m not apologizing, I’m not resigning, I’m not doing anything.”
Well, if you’re going to be an idiot, it’s probably best not to apologize for it. Perhaps he doesn’t care about credibility. Because he just lost a lot of it. Jackass.
UPDATE: I’m watching Anderson Cooper 360 with James Carville speaking. He keeps repeating that his Judas quote was transcribe “in context” – um, who gives a shit? No one is questioning whether he was quoted in context or not and what does that have to do with the veracity of his metaphor? Secondly, he says that he made the metaphor not just because Richardson owes the Clintons for his appointments but for other reasons he will not say – only that Richardson knows what they are. So, he’s got the balls to make the Judas comparison, yet won’t provide the justification for the comment.
Let’s hurl indefensible, unreasoned insults. That really makes sense in this arena. Didn’t someone recently compare Bill Clinton to McCarthy? That comparison should have been saved for James Carville. I won’t say why, though. He knows.