• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Carville Wanted Bush To Fail

Mike

Well-known member
On the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, just minutes before learning of the terrorist attacks on America, Democratic strategist James Carville was hoping for President Bush to fail, telling a group of Washington reporters: "I certainly hope he doesn't succeed."

Carville was joined by Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg, who seemed encouraged by a survey he had just completed that revealed public misgivings about the newly minted president.

"We rush into these focus groups with these doubts that people have about him, and I'm wanting them to turn against him," Greenberg admitted.

The pollster added with a chuckle of disbelief: "They don't want him to fail. I mean, they think it matters if the president of the United States fails."

Minutes later, as news of the terrorist attacks reached the hotel conference room where the Democrats were having breakfast with the reporters, Carville announced: "Disregard everything we just said! This changes everything!"

The press followed Carville's orders, never reporting his or Greenberg's desire for Bush to fail. The omission was understandable at first, as reporters were consumed with chronicling the new war on terror. But months and even years later, the mainstream media chose to never resurrect those controversial sentiments, voiced by the Democratic Party's top strategists, that Bush should fail.

That omission stands in stark contrast to the feeding frenzy that ensued when radio host Rush Limbaugh recently said he wanted President Obama to fail. The press devoted wall-to-wall coverage to the remark, suggesting that Limbaugh and, by extension, conservative Republicans, were unpatriotic.

"The most influential Republican in the United States today, Mr. Rush Limbaugh, said he did not want President Obama to succeed," Carville railed on CNN recently. "He is the daddy of this Republican Congress."

Limbaugh, a staunch conservative, emphasized that he is rooting for the failure of Obama's liberal policies.

"The difference between Carville and his ilk and me is that I care about what happens to my country," Limbaugh told Fox on Wednesday. "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?"

Carville told Politico that focusing on Limbaugh is a deliberate strategy aimed at undermining Republicans.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Carville told Politico that focusing on Limbaugh is a deliberate strategy aimed at undermining Republicans.

I seem to remember some saying the Whitehouse did not have anything to do with the Rush smear campaign!

What is it Reader quotes, "Fiddling while Rome burns"

Scapegoating is a hostile social - psychological discrediting routine by which people move blame and responsibility away from themselves and towards a target person or group

This administration has a short but telling history!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Carville told Politico that focusing on Limbaugh is a deliberate strategy aimed at undermining Republicans.

I seem to remember some saying the Whitehouse did not have anything to do with the Rush smear campaign!

I didn't know Carville was in the White House :???:
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
hypocritexposer said:
Carville told Politico that focusing on Limbaugh is a deliberate strategy aimed at undermining Republicans.

I seem to remember some saying the Whitehouse did not have anything to do with the Rush smear campaign!

I didn't know Carville was in the White House :???:

Only one the daily conference calls.... :wink: I think 'Whitehouse" refers to the President and his recent remarks about Rush. Seems he has a hard time ignoring a talk show host who disagrees with him and always has to respond. Sure makes him look small.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Back on January 29, we discussed the daily strategy phone call engineered by Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel for friendly TV commentators and “reporters.” Politico reported that Emanuel has a daily phone conference call with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, and CNN’s James Carville and Paul Begala. With Rush Limbaugh’s raucous CPAC address, as he termed it his “first address to the nation,” we can see at least one example of what is likely an attack strategy resulting from the Emanuel phone session with a rush to bash Rush the day after the appearance.


March 9th, 2009
Swinging the Ax
Posted by Tom Bevan | Email This | Permalink | Email Author

So much for changing the smallness of our politics. In the New York Times this morning Jeff Zeleny confirms what we already know, which is that David Axelrod approved of the strategy of having the White House engage with Rush Limbaugh:

The recent back-and-forth with Rush Limbaugh, for example, was explicitly authorized by Mr. Axelrod, who told aides that it was not a moment to sit quietly after Mr. Limbaugh said he hoped that Mr. Obama would “fail.”

I heard James Carville justify the White House's strategy last week by saying that Rush Limbaugh "started it." That's a true - though utterly juvenile - response.

The whole point is that while Limbaugh's statement is legitimate grist for Democratic National Committee and liberal groups around the country to beat Republicans over the head with, the White House should be above the fray of engaging in direct attacks on its critics, particularly unelected individuals.

And, of course, it's especially hypocritical of Barack Obama who campaigned for two years on the promise of getting past the "smallness" of our politics and who just a few weeks ago lectured the nation on the importance of putting aside "childish things" to focus on the important tasks facing the country
 
Top