Skip to main content

View Diary: Is Carville Emanuel's Sockpuppet? (300 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Which is why Carville (23+ / 0-)

    needs to shut the fuck up.

    "I have a philosophy about elections. I believe issues divide and values unite."--Gov. Brian Schweitzer

    by Joan McCarter on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 11:57:40 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  And why he needs to (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PLS, sagra

      go the fuck away.

      Jon Kyl
      Incompetent, Bush's lapdog

      by Cato come back on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 12:31:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  What if he's right (0+ / 0-)

      What then?

      •  Right about what? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HillaryGuy

        That Howard Dean screwed up the Congressional races, which are the purview of the DCCC, btw? That the DCCC wanted 50 races to begin with and it was Dean's job to find the funding for it? (Once again, the DCCC is in charge of Congressional races and fundraising for them.) That Dean has so mismanaged the DNC that he should be ousted? On the heels of a signficant victory?

        "I have a philosophy about elections. I believe issues divide and values unite."--Gov. Brian Schweitzer

        by Joan McCarter on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 12:39:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Any of those things (0+ / 0-)

          I don't really care what the point of contention is, I object more to the rather violently expressed notion that Carville (or anyone else) shouldn't be allowed to say what they think

          •  Well, sure, it's pretty distasteful (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mcjoan, HillaryGuy

            to a democratically-minded body of Democrats to impose gag orders on anyone.  People at dKos itself don't like being told to Shut Their F-ing Pie Hole, for example.

            But at the same time, I don't see how it's particularly productive for Carville to rain on the Dem's parade right now.  It's obnoxious, for one -- it's like the erstwhile team captain who watches the newbie lead the team to victory, saying, "Phht... I could have done it better."  That's like so totally obnoxious!

            Over and beyond that, it does something that Republicans are loathe to do:  break the party's united front.  Carville shouldn't be made to shut up, but does he need to share his critical musings openly with reporters?  Is that what Rove or Norquist do?  Can you imagine some prominent RNC advisor stepping in front of reporters immediately after the '94 victory and saying, "well, if they'd followed MY idea, we could have picked up 80 seats"?

            No one should be made to shut up.  But I reserve the right to say that they're an idiot for shooting their mouth off at the wrong time, and in front of the wrong audience.

            Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of nonthought. -- Milan Kundera

            by Dale on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 12:54:43 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I support at 100% (0+ / 0-)

              doing things Republicans are loathe to do!  What Rove/Norquist do just got a resounding "NO" from the majority of Americans..

              Plus for most folks this is inside baseball, at this particular moment, the voters just let us know what they think & a Carville vs Dean public argument is not going to turn things around and put the GOP back in power.  (I do think putting Murtha at majority leader post wouldn't help us on the ethics reform front though)

              •  have you ever met Howard Dean? (0+ / 0-)

                just curious, because you appear to have no idea who or what he is about. Free speech is great. Ignorance and lies are not.

                Please explain at least possibility where Carville could conceivably be right re his castigations of dean's choices/ Please be specific. Free speech and all.

                •  I haven't met Dean personally. (0+ / 0-)

                  I started participating in the blogosphere via the Dean for America blog in summer 2003.  If the archives of that are still around anywhere you are free to check, I don't know if they are or not.  That's how I found Daily Kos (pre Scoop era) in the first place.  I went to Dean for American meetups and organizing events in Rhode Island, summer 2003 - early 2004.  I heard him speak at a small high school in New Hampshire, late 2003.

                  Carville could be right in that the DNC's plan is sound, but implementation is not.  Or in that strategically, it's more wise to put up enough money to win more seats in the current climate, so favorable to us, than use all the money for long term party building.  He could be right.  It's about strategy and use of resources and what he sees as far as how DNC resources are being used and what potential it has.

            •  Again and again (0+ / 0-)

              It is the corporate media.
              It is the filter (gag) that screens out serious Democrats and promotes the corporation kissers exclusive venues.
              It is becoming even worse.  The ABC news division seemed on an even keel.  Anybody watched it in in the past few days?

              The corporate media is the enemy.

          •  He can say whatever the fuck he wants (6+ / 0-)

            behind closed doors with the powers that be.

            But carrying on this very public pissing match is harmful to the party. It's destructive. It feeds into the narrative of Dems in disarray. It does no one any good.

            If he has real, valid concerns about the way the DNC is being run, he has the ears of the people who need to hear it. Taking his fight to the press is distasteful and destructive.

            "I have a philosophy about elections. I believe issues divide and values unite."--Gov. Brian Schweitzer

            by Joan McCarter on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 01:07:25 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  I mean, it's a big tent isn't it (0+ / 0-)

          One person's "let's maintain party discipline and STFU" is another person's views and interests getting trampled on and silenced, innit

          •  Again, isn't it a question of where (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Malacandra, kaye, Yamara

            those views are shared?  If Carville wants to share his strategic vision in closed session with other Democratic leaders, great.  But does he need to go straight to the media with his ideas?  

            Isn't this what we objected to with Lieberman?  If it was simply that he had dissenting views, would we have mounted a primary challenge?  Or is it that he systematically chose the mose public forums -- the little standing "O" at Bush's SOTU address; the Fox News interviews bashing Dems -- to air this dissent?

            Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of nonthought. -- Milan Kundera

            by Dale on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 12:58:48 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Carville's presence is out of proportion (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            The Gryffin, kaye

            Dissent is one thing. Filling the most available airtime with a position that is made of nothing but self-aggrandizing fantasy bravado is disservice.

            It's deliberately counterproductive to the success of what most Democrats are after, and what they have been working for. Thus, he should "STFU".

            Carville is the magician's hanky, though. He's actually nothing. The more he's waving away out there, the more I start looking at the other hand: Rahm Emanuel.

            "To such thinking you have only to say 'the land you loved is doomed' to excuse any treachery, indeed to glorify it." -Tolkien, On Fairy-Stories, 1938.

            by Yamara on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 01:06:14 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  How is he right? (0+ / 0-)

        I mean that in all seriousness.  If Dean pursued a fifty-state strategy, against heavy opposition from the Dem establishment, and it succeeded in gaining Dems many seats, and even erstwhile skeptics are now attributing the win to Dean's decision to have someone competent running in every district, and money for certain races that the earlier strategy would have deemed lost causes, then where does Carville's brilliant strategy fit into all this?  How is he right?

        Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of nonthought. -- Milan Kundera

        by Dale on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 12:44:22 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't know and it's not my job to explain. (0+ / 0-)

          We'll never find out if he's right or wrong, if the answer is to order him to STFU.

          Surely if Dean is doing such a great job, the facts will stand up to scrutiny, yes?  

          •  Scrutiny (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            HillaryGuy, Cottagerose

            McGovern and a lot of other people were right about the war in Vietnam. But the Democrats who had been involved in the prosecution of the war under the Johnson administration helped undercut his campaign in 1972. People in his own party poo-pooed him -- a veteran with 35 bomber missions over Europe and a Distinguished Flying Cross -- as some sort of soft hippy peacenik. The end result was that Nixon won handily, only to continue the war for another couple of years, to have his VP resign in disgrace for acts committed while he was still governor of Maryland, and to run out of office himself before he was impeached. Yet Nixon's the one who's generally regarded as the better statesman, his cronies (Kissinger, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc.) are the ones who are advising the current administration on Iraq.

            So sure, facts stand up to historical scrutiny, but a lot of damage can get done in the process, not only to reputations, but more importantly to people, the nation, and the world. The whole "history will be our judge" is so GW Bush, don't you think?

            Those who do not learn from history are stupid. --darrelplant

            by darrelplant on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 01:22:05 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  i think daria might be troll-baiting (0+ / 0-)

              Now a non-HillaryGuy. No, I am still a guy, but probably with smaller balls than Rahm. But Hill's people piss me off. Rahm + Carville = a ton of ego

              by HillaryGuy on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 01:57:40 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  ? (0+ / 0-)

                I feel pretty strongly about this - if we're in the reality-based community, we should be able to have a good honest debate and the truth will out.

                •  cool, good enough for me. (0+ / 0-)

                  but the repetitive exact same questions you were asking seemed funny, that's all.  it's all good.

                  Now a non-HillaryGuy. No, I am still a guy, but probably with smaller balls than Rahm. But Hill's people piss me off. Rahm + Carville = a ton of ego

                  by HillaryGuy on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 02:14:41 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Debate (0+ / 0-)

                  Then present some facts of your own.

                  Adults -- and people in contact with reality -- know that the good guys don't always win.

                  BTW, the site you're linking in your sig, is that a Republican shill site, or what? I notice that a bunch of the "Most Corrupt" Republicans they're touting are on their way out from retirement or have been defeated at the polls. So that way they can include Murtha and Maxine Waters and pretend that it's a bipartisan slam on corruption? Interesting game.

                  Those who do not learn from history are stupid. --darrelplant

                  by darrelplant on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 02:45:14 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No, it's not (0+ / 0-)

                    I mean, you could Google and read up about it before you accuse me of that.

                    •  Google (0+ / 0-)

                      I don't need to Google it. I just looked at the list of the people on the site and noticed that a number of people on their list were on the way out already. I didn't accuse you of being associated with the site, either, just linking to it.

                      On the other hand, the "It's OK if you're a Democrat?" sig looks a little twinky. Why be coy about it?

                      Those who do not learn from history are stupid. --darrelplant

                      by darrelplant on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 08:48:09 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  ? (0+ / 0-)

                        I mean, you looked at the list of the people on the site and came up with a conspiracy theory about the site planting GOP names in there to masquerade as nonpartisan!

                        It's a liberal think tank founded by some ex-Clinton staff.  It listed mostly GOP because, surprise surprise, the most corrupt members are GOP.  

                        I have a problem with corruption.  I have a problem with folks glossing over Murtha's history in this regard by saying "whatever Nancy wants, Nancy gets" and essentially, it's OK, because we're Democrats.  It's not OK.

              •  ((( i think daria might be troll-baiting ))) (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                HillaryGuy

                there's not a doubt about it.

                Hey -- you don't get off saying "I have no idea how he's wrong and it's not my job to explain". Yes it is.  There's  a very odd ring to your comments. When someone feigns neutrality yet endorses, in a passive-agressive way, unfounded assaults, it's suitable cause to wonder why you raise the question at all about "what if Carville is right?"

                If you have reason to ask that question and you are since, then you have some obligation to know what you're talking about, otherwise where is your value add to this discussion. What if they're right, you're a troll?

                I have no obligation to find out one way or another, and it'n not my job to do so. Free speech and all.

          •  Facts are one thing, attacks are another (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Patricia Taylor

            If Carville has valid criticisms of Dean's management of the DNC, why doesn't he articulate them, rather than making ad hominem arguments on the basis of wild conjecture like "We would have won 50 seats in the House if not for Dean".

            That kind of statement cannot possibly be verified or falsified.  And no amount of water under the bridge can change that. Historical analysts can never verify hypothetical claims.

            What we can see is that Dean has raised record sums for a DNC chair in an off year, and has hired people in every state to help with grassroots organizing and strategy. When Dean does local fundraising across the country, rather than taking the money back to Washington, as his predecessor did, he leaves it where it can do good locally.

            These are verifiable empirical and incontrovertible facts. Whether these tactics ended up helping Democrats achieve victory is arguable. But Carville isn't arguing facts - he's making personal attacks.

            And that's not helpful to the health of the party or forwarding our understanding of the situation, regardless whether he's right or wrong.

            Victory has many fathers, but Howard Dean was the doctor in the delivery room.

            by Malacandra on Wed Nov 15, 2006 at 01:46:59 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site