I just saw James Carville on MSNBC refuse to apologize for calling Bill Richardson a "Judas" for Richardson's endorsement of Barack Obama. Far worse than not apologizing, Carville offered that he wanted to "brand" Richardson for this act of betrayal, so that everyone would know Richardson by that act.
Actually, Richardson's endorsement of Obama was an act of outright courage - an act of standing up for what Richardson thinks is good and right for the country.
What does Carville hope to accomplish by his "branding"? Frighten or caution other super delegates, who may be thinking of moving from support of Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama? Not likely to happen.
Indeed, the only lasting effect of Carville's graceless attack on Bill Richardson is that it will long be remembered as an example of just how low gutter-sniping campaigns, politics by intimidation, can go.
I know I certainly will plan on using Carville's remarks as an example of propaganda at its worst in the graduate course in "Propaganda and Persuasion" I'll be teaching at Fordham University this July.
2 comments:
I think Carville is a Clinton loyalist, who stayed on the sidelines for whatever reason, and watched the Clinton people bumble along with a sense of entitlement that has now cost them everything. Had he been involved more directly in this campaign, he'd have been more ready to take advantage of her "celebrity" in wrapping up the nomination months ago. He would have played hardball as soon as Obama started to win in February and cut things off at the pass.
I think this reaction is disgusting, but it seems a lot more like a former power broker who really cares for Hillary a lot and is kicking himself for letting her lose it. If Richardson is Judas, I think it's safe to say that Carville is Dominic Loricatus.
Ha - welcome back, Mike, and good one on Dominic ...
I may need to work him into Unburning Alexandria...
Post a Comment