Posted on 09/06/2004 12:32:58 AM PDT by sixxiron
With the new "dream team" of Carville and Begala in place, I thought it worthy of posting Carville's utter trashing of Zell and his blaming Republicans for making Zell turn on his Dem buddies. Key points: Zell Miller was Carville's former employer and Miller officiated Carvilles wedding!!! There is no bottom for Carville and this marks the beginning of the next phase in the battle for the White House. I wonder if Carl Rove forced Zell into writing a best-selling book which chronicled his disgust with his party more than a year ago.
Here is the transcript from MTP:
MR. RUSSERT: James Carville you ran that man's campaign for governor of Georgia in 1990.
MR. CARVILLE: Right, I did. It's a shame they put that poor man out there in the twilight of his career with a bunch of half-truths. Then they put him on TV after, out there making a fool of himself, and they're showing how he said, "Well, you said Kerry did this." It's the very thing that Dick Cheney recommended. "You said that he called them occupiers." In fact, President Bush had called them occupiers on three separate occasions.
You know, it's a shame, because Senator Miller's had a distinguished mid-career, and I'm very sad for him and the people that work for him that he's going to be remembered, as Joe Klein said, you know, probably the most, you know, hate-filled speech that he's ever seen at a convention. But the problem is, how does a man who sits on this thing, the vice president, who says that we expect to be greeted with roses and you said--you asked him in a follow-up question, "Well, suppose there's insurgents?" He said, "Tim, we don't expect that." How could he possibly, possibly question John Kerry's judgment about being fit to make decisions as a commander in chief?
The record of this administration is already out there. The president has admitted--and when it comes to the war on terror, in June, President Bush said, we can win the war on terror. By August, he had changed his mind and said we can't win the war on terror. So I think there are legitimate questions about judgment. I think there are legitimate questions that don't relate to what happened in Vietnam or not. But they relate to the record of this administration, the miscalculations, the errors and they are all in that report from this royal institute in London, that we've already lost this. We're not going to have a democracy there.
MR. RUSSERT: Mary Matalin, the vice president did say we'd be greeted as liberators, and now, Jim Schlesinger, Republican secretary of defense said that we are unprepared for the insurgency.
MS. MATALIN: We have never, ever, in our history or any history in war, found on the ground plans that went exactly as were planned. It's called the moment of contingency. We have said, the president has said, that the march to Baghdad was completed more expeditiously than had been expected. And it is true that Iraq's become a magnet for all the terrorist, and we do want to fight them there. We don't want to fight them here. And we are winning. This Iraq is in a relatively short period of time on the road to self-government.
MR. RUSSERT: Senator Miller, spitballs, weak, wobbly. Was he over the top?
MS. MATALIN: No, this is--you know, Senator Miller is a man of great passion. If you look at his 1992 keynote Democratic convention speech, he was equally passionate. This is a man who is angry at his party, his party who left him. He is a delightful and loving and wonderful man who officiate at our wedding.
MR. CARVILLE: I love Senator Zell. I'm just so angry at what those cynical Republicans did to him, putting him up. and making him stay stuff that is indefensible.
MS. MATALIN: Well, you know, Senator Miller...
MR. CARVILLE: ...sticking him on TV when he was questioned on it...
MS. MATALIN: Senator Miller, since he's been in office, has been with the president. I saw him regularly on the Hill when I would go up there with the vice president. He was disappointed with his party on economic issues, on these issues of war and peace. He is a wonderful senator. He is a passionate man, brought just as much passion to the Democratic convention in 1992 and these guys just don't like the truth.
MR. RUSSERT: We've got to...
MR. CARVILLE: The difference is when Paul wrote Senator Miller's speech in '92 it was based on fact. When Karl Rove wrote Senator Miller's speech in 2004...
MS. MATALIN: Senator Miller wrote his own speech.
MR. CARVILLE: ...it was based on no fact.
MS. MATALIN: I think I know who wrote Miller's speech.
MR. CARVILLE: You know?
MS. MATALIN: Senator Miller wrote his own speech.
Carville is a very dark and evil person.
Mary Mattalin must've been higher than a giraffe's a** when she hooked up with the SerpentHead.
I don't see any other explanation other than Mary is another David Gergen Conservative Destructor...
That's true. Carville is an exceptional campaign tactician. He understands, day-to-day, how to run a campaign. If Clinton had had him in the White House as political director during the early 1990's, there might have been no 1994 Republican landslide.
Nevertheless, it must be said that Clinton and his ilk were awful strategists. The Democrat Party imploded during the Clinton years, and Republicans became their equal all the way down the ballot, becoming the equal to the Democrats.
The thing is, he did get his way with ASAT and DIVAD.
Neither of those are in service today.
When will these clowns realize that the difference is intense and discrete, and symantics will not fool anyone who is listening. The left claims we are imperialists whose goal is to occupy. The right proclaims, justly, that the GOAL is liberation.
Playing word games will not change that fact. Using the word occupation is not an admission of imperialist goals. I'm so sick of the leftist BS that I could spit.
Oh, you had to see the look on Matalin's face throughout this discussion. She exhuded pure disgust at Rainman.
James won't be getting any--for the duration.
They actually look alike, except for the hair.
In DIVAD's case, that was a GOOD thing.
True.
As for ASAT, who can really tell? I'd like the ability to "turn off" a satellite whose imagery we can't buy up.
This is how you fight somebody like James Carville...
==============================================================
In former president Jimmy Carter's recent speech at the democratic convention, he launched into a tirade completely out of keeping with the dignity and decorum one would expect from a man of his stature and accomplishments, wildly accusing the Bush administration of defective judgment, immaturity, slavish acquiescence to the "super-rich," gross miscalculation, arrogant unilateralism, disregard for freedom and justice, and radical extremism. He spit out these rapid-fire accusations in such a reckless manner that there is only one conclusion a reasonable person can reach --
Jimmy Carter was shot up with drugs by the democrats and forced to give a speech they had written for him. They got that poor man in the twilight of his career and just used him. They said, 'Look, go up there and say this,' and they handed him a bunch of documents. It was a put-up job. There is no other explanation for this reverend, silver-haired statesman carrying on like that. It's really "elder abuse," and I'm calling for a full investigation with the responsible parties brought to justice for their crimes against one of our senior citizens.
==================================================================
MR. CARVILLE, PROVE THIS DIDN'T HAPPEN. NO, MR. CARVILLE, ANSWER THE QUESTION. PROVE THIS DIDN'T HAPPEN! YOU CAN'T DISPROVE IT AND THAT'S WHY YOU'RE TRYING TO DISTRACT EVERYBODY FROM THE QUESTION. PROVE IT DIDN'T HAPPEN! ==========================================================
Think Carville’s just some lunatic?
The same thing was said about Father Coughlin back in the 1940s. But Roosevelt clearly recognized that he was a political threat and acted to neutralize him. The same thing was said about Huey “Kingfish” Long during that period, but he was an enormously successful demagogue and FDR wisely acted to counter him as well, with less success. In that case, an assassin's bullet solved FDR's problem for him.
You underestimate a man like Carville at your peril. He knows what he's doing and he has the track record to prove it.
There are about a million guys who are sitting on barstools as we speak and are thinking and talking just like Carville did in this TV appearance. As they sit there with their beers, looking up at the TV on the bar room wall, they take him seriously, they are looking at eachother and nodding, and they vote. They don't vote out of deeply held principle or because they have followed current political events closely and have reached careful conclusions. They vote because they they think they should, even though they are too lazy to pay much attention to the campaigns and the issues raised by them. When they take much interest at all, they respond only to sound bites, slogans and symbols, not logical arguments. They don't pore over documents or spend time at online places like Free Republic. And they constitute a large chunk of those undecided voters Bush and kerry are tussling over.
These are the people Carville is talking to.
it's called sleeping with the enemy
Yes, you're right. That's one thought process that baffles me completely.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.