Another reason to kick James Carville out of the party

[Ken Burch]

The man has been working to help the rich in Venezuela force Hugo Chavez out of power and return the country to the failed and pointless policies of austerity and right-wing "globalization".
as this quote from the new issue of EXTRA!(the magazine of Fairness and Acccuracy in Reporting)shows:

In September, when Democratic operatives Paul Begala and James Carville appeared on New York City public radio station WNYC (9/25/06), Begala told host Brian Lehrer that Chávez was “an autocrat, not a democrat,” and said he had “a terrible human rights record.” Carville told Lehrer, “I’ve worked in Venezuela and I would be very reluctant to call Chávez a democrat.” What Carville didn’t say was that he worked in Venezuela as an advisor to Venezuelan opposition groups leading an economically devastating strike by managers of the national oil company in an effort to destabilize the government (Washington Post, 1/20/03).

If Carville wants the poor to face increased misery in Venezuela, he can't be on the side of working people here.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. thanks for this information

I've never liked Carville, and couldn't figure out why--but with him badmouthing Dean's 50 state strategy (which helped us get our majority in Congress)and now this, I think my feelings were justified.

[niceypoo]

21. You all sound like republicans eating your own

James Carville is a god. He got Clinton elected. I hope he runs for president. Its not as if Howard Dean has never done anything stupid in his life.

[Ken Burch]

22. Howard Dean has never been a collaborator with an extreme right-wing movement

to crush the poor and restore the violent domination of the rich. That is what the Venezuelan opposition is. It HAS no progressive or honorable intentions. It wants to do unto Venezuela as Pinochet did unto Chile.

[KittyWampus]

24. Actually, as Governor, Dean did work for energy deregulation/

[lostnfound]

82. Nicely summed up, though maybe "the violent domination by the rich"

is a bit more clear, so as to not confuse those who have believed the propaganda. Only the poor left anti-government forces who fight for political power against the forces of enslavement unaccountable capitalism democracy are to be termed violent, not the right-wing death squads paramilitaries and police forces who only want to silence and intimidate the masses restore order and bring democracy...don't ya know.

[Ken Burch]

94. Oh, yeah, you're right.

Will that be on the linguistics mid-term, Dr. Chomsky?

[lostnfound]

96. LOL. Unfit to tie his shoes, or shine them. nt

[karynnj]

27. But who gets credit for Clinton's victory?

Bill Clinton has been described as the best natural politician of his time. He ran against a politician who was in the 30s going down in approval ratings. Yet, at one time he was polling 3rd out of the 3 candidates.

That campaign had its ups and downs. Could it be that Clinton won in spite of Carville? It seems there are too many superlatives awarded because Clinton ended up winning. (If W had his father's approval rating in 2004, Kerry would have won - his approval was over 10 points higher. Yet, both Cahill and Kerry are critisized over a narrow win.)

[Cha]

30. Yeah, caville is a god-

damn idiot.

[ShortnFiery]

54. Any one who would marry such a horrid Right Wing Operative

deserves to be monitored closely. :thumbsdown:

Remember, the bad always rubs off on the good and not vice versa. ;)

[cyclezealot]

32. Carville needs be told when he steps over the line.

Not ready to kick him out of the party, but we need for now display our displeasure.

[Joe Chi Minh]

57. Not ready to kick him out? Are you serious? What does he have to do?

Pay for a statue of Pinochet?

[cyclezealot]

60. Pinochet.?

that would be due cause? IS it the case.

[Ken Burch]

63. It would REALLY be due cause

If the statue was anatomically correct.

You just plain wouldn't want to see that.

[cui bono]

70. ...

:puke:

[Divernan]

2. His marriage compromised his moral and political values

The cognitive dissonance of maintaining Clinton era values while living off of and with the conservative, pro-Cheney woman he married proved beyond his abilities.

[suziedemocrat]

23. I agree - it's a fact of nature - you have to adapt to your environment or leave

To live in harmony, you either surround yourself with like-minded individuals, or become like the people you are around. Otherwise it would be too difficult for a normal person to deal with the constant conflict.

[mzmolly]

37. Yes indeed. He's been brainwashed.

Sad to see a hero fall so far. :(

[lostnotforgotten]

3. Once A DLCer, Always A DLCer - Applies To The Clintons As Well

These people are not progressive democrats.

A wise man once said to me about Clinton, "He was the best Republican president that ever was."

[tabasco]

5. That's what republicans say to try and co-opt Clinton's success.

The republicans did nothing but try to destroy Clinton.

[lostnotforgotten]

6. Agreed - But Clinton Was Not A Progressive - Successful Yes But Not A Dem

eom

[tabasco]

9. The country had peace and prosperity for eight years.

That seems like progress to me.

Maybe an unsuccessful, but more to the left, President would be more to your liking?

I agree that there is more to be done but if we crucify our own for not getting it done overnight, we work AGAINST progress.

[Ken Burch]

15. why assume that any Democrat to Clinton' left would've been unsuccessful?

Clinton won on personal charisma and rapid response to smears and attacks. He would have been elected as a real Democrat had he chosen to run on his original principles.

[karynnj]

29. and he ran against a very unpopular President

with far lower approval ratings than his son.

[tabasco]

83. Well, a Republican Congress after 1994.

I'm not a fan of the DLC crowd, and Hillary makes me puke with her pandering, but to shit on a successful Democratic President or call him a republian is stupid and counterproductive (see Green Party).

No, we didn't get our health care, but at least it was easy to find a job back then.

[Ken Burch]

89. You're right about the GOP Congress.

However, a lot of us put its emergence down to Clinton's deliberate decision to alienate the party base over and over. Those first two years should have been about galvanizing and rewarding the party's supporters, not treating them as the enemy.

Yes it was a better time, but we don't have to settle for the limits of those times now.

[lostnotforgotten]

16. Whatever Progress That Was Made Under Clinton Has Been Destroyed By Bush

We're starting from ground zero in my view.

This time we should elect a true progressive.

[Joe Chi Minh]

59. From what I understand, the wages of most working people remained low,

manufacturing industry continued to be destroyed, and I don't think any significant inroads were made into the pandemic of homelessness, and Hillary's attempt at improving health-care for people was stymied.

Was it not the GAT Agreement that implemented globalism in a big way, so that American jobs could be outsourced so voluminously?

[wyldwolf]

73. then you must get your talking points from someplace other than reality

[Joe Chi Minh]

90. Sure.

[MockSwede]

86. peace? prosperity?

what nation do you live in? on what world? peace? how many dead in Iraq? prosperity? where's your income and net worth increases since 2000? are you sucking a bag full of glue or something? You're correct that more needs to be done but there is NO PROGRESS, NO PEACE, and NO PROSPERITY. Unless you're in the top 5% net worthers in the US to which King George is funneling all our 'tax cuts'.

Check this out:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/articles/061217/25edit.htm?s_cid=rss:site1

[Nederland]

88. The poster was refering to Clinton's eight years

...not Bush's.

[Ravy]

36. Clinton was most definitely a Democrat.

Not all Democrats are progressive.

[talk hard]

50. He's a Democrat

its pretty narrow thinking to only see just one track.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[Ken Burch]

42. It doesn't take support of NAFTA, punitive welfare legislation, and increased executions

To be a Democrat.

Bill Clinton didn't do anything that could ever have outweighed those despicable betrayals of all human values.

Any Democrat would have won in 1992 if that candidate had had Clinton's "rapid response" team and his personal charisma. The abandoment of the poor and the labor movement never had to happen.

[lostnotforgotten]

45. And That's Why Clinton Was Such A Good Republican

He abandoned the poor and destitute.

[lostnotforgotten]

46. Excuse Me - Are You calling Me A Pimple On Clinton's Ass?

He should be so lucky to have such a purposeful pimple as I.

[mtnsnake]

69. No. What I said is that you wouldn't make a pimple on Bill's ass, but it got deleted

just like this will, too, most likely. You wouldn't make a pimple on his ass because you aren't 1/1000th the Democrat Bill is, and you deserve to hear that after saying something preposterous like you did that Bill Clinton isn't a Democrat. Now run along...

[wyldwolf]

75. I wish I could nominate single posts to the greatest page!

[Freddie Stubbs]

93. Yet the Democratic Party nominated him twice

The Democratic primary voters in 1992 and 1996 seemed to think that he was a Democrat.

[mopinko]

26. no, republicans don't say that

you think they praise clinton in any way? get your head out of your ass. btw, that smart guy who said that is mike malloy.

[Ken Burch]

56. And Clinton did nothing

but try and drive all progressives OUT of the Democratic Party.

[wyldwolf]

76. Really? How?

[Freddie Stubbs]

92. Thank God the nightmare of the Clinton Presidency is over

I don't know if the country could have take much more prosperity. What a catastrophe.

[confludemocrat]

4. He exemplifies a big part of the Dem party

sad to say. These two are a coupla tools.

[IndianaGreen]

47. Carville represents the wealthy wing of the Democratic Party

the people that wet their pants anytime their stock goes up in price, like when a factory is closed to move jobs to cheaper labour markets overseas.

[ret5hd]

7. I've been saying this for a while now...

I watched “Our Brand is Crisis”, a documentary about the 2002 Bolivian elections. The firm Greenberg Carville Shrum (GCS) was hired by Goni (running against Evo Morales).

So he's worked againsy BOTH CHAVEZ and MORALES! It's a pattern.

At the end of the documentary, the credit scroll said that GCS has done work around the world, including Mexico, Venezuela, South Africa, Western Europe, and the U.S.

from 2003:

http://www.casavenezuela.org/05persp/articles/economia_stupid.html

Venezuela's embattled private sector is banking on the colorful U.S.
political consultant James Carville to help oust leftist President Hugo
Chavez. The hire may herald an effort by the anti-Chavistas to focus more on
the issues than on personality. According to several individuals with
knowledge of the matter, a group of business executives contracted with Mr.
Carville this year to craft a strategy that will unify a fractious and
frustrated Chavez opposition and resonate with voters in a possiblerecall
referendum. The executives are hoping that Mr. Carville -- the folksy,
59-year-old Democratic Party consultant from Louisiana known as the Ragin'
Cajun -- will push a variation of his "It's the economy, stupid" theme that
helped propel Bill Clinton to victory in 1992.

But analysts say Mr. Carville and his clients face a formidable challenge.
Mr. Chavez has strengthened his hand since surviving a military coup in
April 2002 and defeating a recent two-month national strike led by oil
executives, labor leaders and business organizations. Despite a deepening
economic recession, the business elite here and its middle-class allies are finding it hard to persuade core Chavez supporters in urban slums and the countryside that the president isn't delivering on his populist promises. They have another hurdle to jump in blaming all the country's economic problems on Mr. Chavez after their own ill-starred strike accelerated the economy's slide.

"These business owners are arrogant. They can bring Carville or anyone else,
but they don't stop to understand what everyday life is like for the
people," says Patricia Marquez, an anthropologist and academic director of
the Institute for Higher Administrative Studies, a graduate school of
management here in the capital.

[MethuenProgressive]

8. I agree with Carville

"I would be very reluctant to call Chávez a democrat." - James Carville

Not even Chávez would call himself a democrat.

[durtee librul]

11. I am reluctant to call Carville

a democrat. I used to like him,but lately he is off the radar. Must be the reaction for some new meds for male pattern baldness.

[Ken Burch]

14. What the hell do you mean Chavez wouldn't call himself a democrat?

He's won eight elections, elections every observer said were free and fair?

How can you put "progressive" in your name and be an anti-Chavista?

The alternative to Hugo is the eternal return of globalization and neoliberalism, and we have proven that neither of these can EVER benefit the poor and the workers.

[MethuenProgressive]

33. History says so, my Red friend...

In 1992, Chavez led a military coup d'etat. That wasn't very democratic.

And then you crumble deeper into silly nonsense with:

How can you put "progressive" in your name and be an anti-Chavista?

Easily, since I'm not anti-Chavez. Progress, to many if not to you, doesn't equal a descent into anarchy or socialism.

[Ken Burch]

35. Quite a response.

You may perhaps have forgotten that George Washington led a military coup d'etat against British rule in the colonies BEFORE he won two terms as president. Does that mean The Father of Our Country would not be considered a democrat?

And "My Red Friend"? Nothing like a little Christmas Day McCarthyism.

And then you bash Hugo Chavez and claim you AREN'T anti-Chavez? :wtf:

And btw, "progressive" is a term reserved for left-of-center political and social ideas.

it goes without saying that nothing progressive ever comes of privatization, austerity or mass layoffs.

(I get the sickening feeling you think General Pinochet and Generalissmo Franco were BOTH "progressive")

[MethuenProgressive]

38. Wow, so much to correct - where's my Red pencil?

George Washington wasn't involved in a coup d'etat.

George Washington didn't want everyone to vote - hence, not a 'democrat'.

You are what you are, it is what it is, Red is not Green.

Because I hold a different opinion than you, that means I'm "anti" you? Not a very sophisticated thought on your part.

Good for you! You got one right!

If something 'goes without saying' perhaps you shouldn't say it.

You close with meaningless nonsense, no wonder you feel sick.

Merry Christmas, and I hope you recover soon.

[Ken Burch]

41. Will Rogers would never back the right wing candidate against Hugo Chavez

And again, how can you redbait and call yourself "progressive"?

BTW, A lot of Green Party people are Red as well as Green. Green politics are not conservative politics.

You aren't interested in a decent life for the workers and the poor. If you were you wouldn't support the right wing in Latin America.

nothing right of center is progressive.

And there's little real difference between Washington overthrowing an illegitimate colonial rule and Hugo Chavez attempting to overthrow a Venezuelan government that had stopped being democratic and only served the rich.

Hugo's won EIGHT elections, eight free and legitimate elections. It's a right-wing lie to call him "anti-democratic".

[MethuenProgressive]

43. You have nothing but Republican-style rhetoric to offer as response?

Ah well, I'm sure the other trust-fund Redskis at the coffee bar think you're just oh-so-smart, but you surrendered in this debate two posts ago. You're just not clever enough to realize it. Try actually going to class someday.

[Ken Burch]

44. Excuse me, but logically, you can't hate the Republicans AND the left

That doesn't leave any political position that actually exists on Earth.

For the record, I'm a democratic socialist, an honorable political position.

"Redskis"? Puhleeze...

Are you just another incarnation of Benchley?

[Morgana LaFey]

64. Ignore him. Literally. Put him on ignore. He lost me with

charging YOU with "Republican style rhetoric."

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

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

[MethuenProgressive]

79. I'm a "McCarthyite shitbag" - to quote this Ken Burch person

Ken is using the classic Karl Rove tactic of today's Republicans - bash to bits anyone who doesn't think the way you do.
Real democrats don't do that.
You have become that which you claim to hate, Ken. How can you claim to hate Republicans when you actually love the way they hate people?

[Ken Burch]

81. There was no excuse for you to call me "Red"

When you know perfectly well that that term, to most Americans, does NOT refer to anyone on the left but specifically to Stalinists.

You had no reason whatsoever to make that implication about me.

McCarthyism is NEVER appropriate. And is irrational in the year 2006, considering that the "Communist menace", as it was once known, no longer exists.

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

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

[Joe Chi Minh]

61. Your many is the usual "many" alluded to by the Republicans, i.e.

their wretched wee selves.

If you scorn Socialism (and I don't mean the cronyism of the rich), what would you know about democracy, Dumbo?

How about those elections, nitwit? Shot our coup d'etat down in flames, didn't they? You need to go on a freeper board. They're your intellectual mark.

[Contrite]

72. Izzat so? THE LIES BEING TOLD ABOUT HUGO CHAVEZ...

Then why did he win in a landslide in a 54-percent hand-counted democratic election?

The lies being told about Hugo Chavez:

http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_a_l/johann_hari/article2064733.ece

[Donkeykick]

10. Sorry.

But I'm still up in the air over Hugo Chavez and actual democracy in Venezuela.

What James Carville has said about Dean was uncalled for, but one should consider Chavez's human rights record as well.

[ret5hd]

12. But yet, we insist on calling the USA a democracy...

http://www.hrw.org/doc/?t=usa

[Donkeykick]

17. I Agree.

Another reason that all of us come in here: to remind people of the atrocities that happens everywhere--including our own country. Good Find! :toast:

[ret5hd]

18. Good find? It's the most obvious thing i could think of.

And i would hardly call putting coup-plotters on trial "human rights violations"

[Donkeykick]

20. Yes.

But there are other things at that site that should be considered to be pretty bad--such as protesters being abused.:shrug:

[hollowdweller]

13. He did a great job with the Clinton campaign HOWEVER

The country is not as far to the right as it was back then, yet he seems to be running the same type we're republican lite campaign as was needed back in the late 90's

It doesn't seem like he's been very successful in recent years. I'm not sure why he still is in demand. He doesn't seem to know anything about use of the net or the important factors in 21st Century Politics.

[DoYouEverWonder]

19. When Carville married the witch Matlin

He sold his soul to the devil as far as I'm concerned.

[tbyg52]

25. I got a request for money

from his "Citizens for Tax Justice." I didn't even read the letter. I just sent it back with a note that he and his DLC buddies could go jump in the lake.

[mod mom]

34. they called my husband and asked for $100. I only wish I got the call...

He listened and said "no thank you, I don't particularly like James Carville". I would of gladly gone off on them and say we send our dollars to Howard Dean.

[leftofthedial]

28. this exposes the true agenda of the "centrist" Democrats

the DLCers are kinder, gentler repukes, serving the same masters with the same overarching capitalism-uber-alles agenda

[IndianaGreen]

49. They are secular Republicans in essence

The misnamed DLC's Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) advocates an agenda of global domination that is indistinguishable from PNAC.

This is why all DLCers voted for the Iraq War Resolution. They wanted Iraq's oil as much as PNAC did, and they wanted to transform the Middle East in the same way as Bush and Cheney did.

This is also why Hillary's criticism of Bush's war in Iraq revolves around his mismanagement of the war. Hillary has always supported the goals of the war!

[The Backlash Cometh]

31. 30 pieces of silver.

Until now, I never realized it but what a difficult task it is to be a good Democrat. You have to support free speech for pornographers AND be above taking a bribe.

I can see where this might confuse some.

[roody]

39. Habla espanol James Carville?

[IndianaGreen]

48. He probably speaks some Spanish to his undocumented Guatemalan maid

"Mama mi picha," Carville would say.

The man has no soul.

[mtnsnake]

51. Great logic, Ken. Yup, let's kick 1 of the strongest Dems out so we can lose in '08 again

What you should be proposing, instead of this counterproductive divisive spin of yours, is to make sure that Howard Dean AND James Carville are both on our team when 2008 rolls around, WORKING TOGETHER for our party in the best interests of ALL Democrats, not just YOUR Democrats.

Despite him not being perfect in your eyes, James Carville has been one of the FEW Democrats who has never backed down from the Republicans and instead has spewed venom directly into the fascist's faces. Without Dems like him getting in Republicans faces the way he does, we'd be right back to page 1 as a party of babies, getting pushed around by the likes of Karl Rove.

You're all so worried that Hillary is going to win, that you're going after her number one enabler, Carville. What you don't even consider is that Hillary might not even win the Primary, and Carville and Dean can STILL make an unbeatable team TOGETHER. Instead of trying to get Carville kicked off, you should be using that brain of yours trying to figure out easier ways of getting he and Dean on the same page. We have a lot better chance of winning in 2008 with both of them working for us than without one of them.

We need more Democrats like Carville, not fewer.

[Ken Burch]

53. How do you figure Carville is still strong?

He hasn't worked on a SUCCESSFUL Democratic campaign in years now.

And how can you defend the presence in the leadership of our party of a person who works for the defeat of all hope for poor and working-class people in Latin America? Why should we have anyone in our party who wants the rich to beat the poor in the class war?

[Joe Chi Minh]

66. The Dems have owed zilch to Carville since at least the run-up to

the 2000 election. Indeed, any contribution of his is likely to have been negative.

[IndianaGreen]

71. Carville has been bending over to Bush since he became Mr. Matalin

He belittled those Democrats that opposed the war and PATRIOT. He attacked those that said that Bush had been forewarned about Osama bin Laden attacking the US. He sided with the critics of John Murtha when he called for a troop withdrawal. He opposed the Kerry/Feingold troop withdrawal resolution, and he opposed the Alito filibuster.

At every turn, Carville has been an enabler of Bush's crimes, and an avowed opponent of impeachment.

To top all of this up, Carville had the arrogance to call for replacing Dean as DNC Chair right after the most successful Congressional election the Democrats have seen in decades. Carville was more interested in putting a Hillarybot at the head of the DNC than he was about the collective good of all Democrats.

[mtnsnake]

78. You spin this Hillary/Carville stuff so much that you're starting to believe it yourself

Almost everything you seem to say about Carville is totally out of context. For example, when you say Carville called for replacing Dean as DNC chair, you always fail to mention that he never said it that way. What he did was ask a hypothetical question, a "what if", as in what if Harold Ford was the DNC chair. Big difference. Same for the rest of your post/posts, too.

[talk hard]

52. How can anybody be kicked out of the party?

Repo his secret decoder ring?

[Ken Burch]

55. OK, we can't literally expel his sorry, reactionary, social justice-hating ass

But we can recognize that he really doesn't deserve to have any influence in the party anymore.

Christ, the man hasn't even gotten anybody ELECTED to anything in years now.

And can anyone deny that his opposition to Chavez and Morales is proof that Carville detests the poor and the workers throughout the world?

There is no reason for any Democrat to still be working for globalization and neoliberalism.

[talk hard]

58. so can we safely say you hate his guts?

ha-ha-ha

[Ken Burch]

62. I dislike HIM.

I have no strong feelings either way about his internal organs.

[talk hard]

65. yeah, we could tell ....

((rolling on ground laughing))

[ret5hd]

67. I'm with ya here, KB.

[wyldwolf]

74. What a dumbass thing to say!

WHERE is it in the rules to be a Democrat that one has to back someone who even Brian Schweitzer said is a rat... crook..dictator.

Just one more reason to kick the OP out of the party for daring to think he can dictate who is in and who is out.

[roody]

77. Who is Brian Schweitzer and why would I take his

word for it?

[proud2BlibKansan]

80. He is married to one of he worst witches in politics

That's enough for me.

[zulchzulu]

85. I have one question for Carville: Did he inform his wife of Kerry's Ohio vote strategies?

As on page 343 of Bob Woodward's "State Of Denial", on Election night, Carville whispered into his wife Mary Matalin's ears that Kerry was going to protest the Ohio vote and she quickly sent the news to the OPPOSING camp who then had Blackwell fabricate the vote numbers and make Kerry's chances at protesting the vote meaningless.

If Carville gave utterly, criticly vital information about the Democratic Presidential candidate's strategies to the OPPOSING candidate's team, he should be thrown out of the party by the back of his neck into the streets for the masses to eat alive!

So Smilin' Jimmy, what did ya do, ol' buddy?

[rox63]

87. This is one of the main reasons

I despise Carville. Yeah, there's plenty of other stuff to dislike about him. But if he sold us out to the rethugs in the 2004 presidential election, and gave us 4 more years of *, that's enough reason enough for any self-respecting Dem to hate the guy.

[zulchzulu]

91. IF you give information away to your enemy in time of war, you are...

...a traitorous turncoat. Period.

As much as I liked Carville in the past, there is absolutely no reason to like him now.

Until he apologizes to Kerry personally and to the American people in general for his actions on that Election night, he deserves nothing but complete distrust and should be run out of town tarred and feathered. His wife is no better, but she at least did her duty to tell her master.

Carville AND Mike McCurry are NOT TO BE TRUSTED. And if they plan on helping Mrs. Clinton, she needs to know what they did and make a statement about it...otherwise she is complicit on the crime.

[karynnj]

95. Even if the more outrageous accusations, fall flat,

he definately did NOT do what he could in his public role as a cable TV Democrat. He mocked and attacked Bush, but never even tried to put out any of Kerry's message - especially after he wasn't asked to be in the campaign.

He also gatuitously compared Kerry in negative ways to Clinton. The 2 men are very different and Carville fits better with Clinton's more flexible morality rather than Kerry's sense of accountability, morality and integrity. The point is NOT that he should have lied to praise Kerry - but there had to be something he liked that Kerry had done and there was no reason to bring Clinton into it.

We all feel it was the most important election of our lives. Kerry made mistakes, but it is clear that he and his family worked incredibly hard to win. Carville mainly dragged his feet. (Remember that even as Kerry was convincingly winning primaries, Carville was still speaking of the possibility of a brokered convention - with Hillary as a savior.)