The problem with James Carville calling Gov. Richardson “Judas” isn’t that it’s crass and stupid – I mean, we’ve seen that side of James Carville before – its that it gives up the Clinton camp’s trump card right away. If they call Richardson “Judas” for making a free choice, what are they going to call the other superdelegates they’re holding a big stick over when they too decide to join Sen. Obama and the majority of the party?
What a hypocrite, especially since he’s literally sleeping with the enemy.
Carville’s been an embarrassment since he first came to national prominence. But we’re going to be stuck with him, because he’s “entertaining” and “provocative” and “edgy.” Gag.
Hillary’s the Mitt Romney of our party- loaning her campaign money, flip flopping every day and Carville thinks she’s a deity
Okay, so let’s check the scoreboard.
Obama supporter says something maybe she shouldn’t have – “off the record”, gets fired THE NEXT DAY, and apologizes.
Two Hillary supporters say something stupid, nobody says anything for a week, and THEY’RE NOT SORRY THEY SAID IT.
The difference is, Oliver, and I assume you are deliberately overlooking the fact, that Richardson would be an unknown congressman from a sparsely populated state except that Bill Clinton recognized his talent and like so many other minority appointments he made gave him a “affirmative action” leg up. I remember the not so distant past when Afro-A’s valued Bill for his inclusiveness. Richardson should have just stayed the hell out of it. Carville nailed it and I’m glad he refused to retract anything he said.
Jim: Richardson would be an unknown congressman from a sparsely populated state except that Bill Clinton recognized his talent and like so many other minority appointments he made gave him a “affirmative action” leg up.
OK, first, that’s just stupid. Clinton recognized his “talent”, but his being appointed was an “affirmative action leg up”? Whuh-hut??
Second, because Clinton once appointed Richardson, Richardson is now obligated to always support Clinton? Is that what you are really saying? Richardson is not allowed to use his own judgment to endorse who he sees as the best candidate. He must endorse Clinton no matter what?
‘S funny. Requiring a loyalty oath seemed more the kind of thing the Republicans would do. (Not that Clinton’s tactics aren’t seeming more Repugnant every day.)
Wait. I thought Richardson’s endorsement “isn’t signifigant.” If so, why is Carville running to call him “traitor?”