Bill Clinton plays Bill Richardson like he did Chris Wallace at CDP Convention

it figures. "Judas" doesn't come out of nowhere n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: CarlsbadDem @ Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:29:17 AM CDT

eh, clarification (0.00 / 0)

By that I mean, you don't get surrogates out there exercising nuclear option words like "Judas" without some massive gritty rage on the part of the principals.

---

by: CarlsbadDem @ Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:31:14 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I was shocked to read about this... (0.00 / 0)

... if only because Rachel Binah is one of the nicer people you're ever likely to meet. But 'nice' doesn't mean 'doormat', and I'm not surprised that she was forthright enough to call Clinton on Carville's over-the-line statement.

But I didn't realize that one of the perks of being an ex-President is that you are so exalted that you get to have other people call in your apologies for you.

As an Obama supporter I have to admit that I was concerned about the prospect of Bill Clinton sweet-talking our superdelegates.  I felt better when I found out that there was such a small turnout at their meeting... and now I'd it may be that Bill's outburst may event have had a negative effect.  

These opinions are my own, and are not representative of those of any of my employers.

---

by: Malacandra @ Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:52:59 AM CDT

the truth is (0.00 / 0)

that very few of our superdelegates are actually uncommitted, in fact far less than I thought a couple weeks ago.  Hence the low turnout.

---

by: David Dayen @ Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:53:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Committed (0.00 / 0)

I have to wonder how much weight to afford the word 'committed' when it comes to the superdelegates.  Depending upon the publc stature of the individual and the degree to which they've pledged support, I think a number of them are in a position to be able to flip.  Someone like Bill Richardson wouldn't be able to easily back out of a commitment, but others might merely be assumed to be committed... or be able to revise their 'commitment'.

Case in point - prior to the primary, my rep Lynn Woolsey endorsed Sen. Clinton.  This certainly implies that she'd vote for Clinton as a superdelegate.  But that's an implication - it's not an explicit commitment.  Her district voted decisively in favor of Obama, and there was a recent diary on Daily Kos saying that after repeated calls to her campaign office, a staffer told the diarist that Lynn would be "voting with her district".

Woolsey can make the case that she tried to use her influence to help Hillary when it would count... prior to the primary, but that she's facing re-election in a district that strongly favors Obama.  So the assumption of her as a committed Clinton superdelegate was presumptive.

And superdelegates who are DNC members probably typically have more leeway than most elected official to be able to shift allegiances as it suits them.  

The fact that superdelegates can "vote their conscience" means that none of them can really be taken for granted by either side.

These opinions are my own, and are not representative of those of any of my employers.

---

by: Malacandra @ Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 15:02:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

the clintons don't seem to realize (0.00 / 0)

the clinton don't seem to realize that while all this kind of nasty, stupid, silly crap may or may not fly in the heat of battle, eventually they're gonna have to live with the consequences.

bill's legacy has really taken a hit with these temper tantrums and nasty comments and the like. he has done a great job making sure that as an ex-president, he is, in fact "no Jimmy Carter."

And Al Gore continues to be a class act, even after getting stabbed in the back by Bill when Hillary ran for Senate, and continues to do something besides make money ( oh wait, we don't know how bill makes money because he refuses to release his and hillary's tax returns!)

--
www.gregdewar.com

---

by: gregdewar.com @ Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 13:03:42 PM CDT

i'm with you gregdewar (0.00 / 0)

i was an ardent clinton support thru out the impeachment and early part of this millennium...

but i have been totally turned off by the campaign's behavior, and the behavior of sen. clinton's sock puppets, bill included.

sometimes i wonder if the repubbb version of the clintons as loud-mouthed ill-mannered hicks wasn't more spot on than i first thought...

(don't worry, i dont' really give the gop that much credit...but i have been disenchanted w/the clintons in spite of my sincere wish to not be).

skippy the bush kangaroo! now with 30% more snark!

---

by: skippy @ Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 21:06:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

More from the article, very interesting (0.00 / 0)

But as the group moved together for the perfunctory photo, Rachel Binah, a former Richardson delegate who now supports Hillary Clinton, told Bill how "sorry" she was to have heard former Clinton campaign manager James Carville call Richardson a "Judas" for backing Obama.

It was as if someone pulled the pin from a grenade.

"Five times to my face (Richardson) said that he would never do that," a red-faced, finger-pointing Clinton erupted.

Good for Rachel for calling Bill on the Carville calling Richardson a Judas. That was despicable.

This is what Carville actually said.

"Mr. Richardson's endorsement came right around the
anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30
pieces of silver, so I think the timing is
appropriate, if ironic," Carville told the New York
Times.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.co...
the NYT article requires registration.

"Carville, who usually appears on CNN as an analyst,
today was an interviewee, telling Wolf Blizter that
his quote "had its desired intent" -- i.e., depicting
Richardson as disloyal to the Clinton brand that he
once had been so firmly affixed to."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.co...

Bill Richardson had an excellent op-ed in the Washington Post today
regarding Carville's "Judas" remark (see below).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

While I certainly will not stoop to the low level of Mr. Carville, I feel compelled to defend myself against character assassination and baseless allegations.

As I have pointed out many times, and most pointedly when I endorsed Sen. Obama, the campaign has been too negative, and we Democrats need to calm the rhetoric and personal attacks so we can come together as a party to defeat the Republicans.

Carville and others say that I owe President Clinton's wife my endorsement because he gave me two jobs. Would someone who worked for Carville then owe his wife, Mary Matalin, similar loyalty in her professional pursuits? Do the people now attacking me recall that I ran for president, albeit unsuccessfully, against Sen. Clinton? Was that also an act of disloyalty?

And while I was truly torn for weeks about this decision, and seriously contemplated endorsing Sen. Clinton, I never told anyone, including President Clinton, that I would do so. Those who say I did are misinformed or worse.

I think here he is saying that Bill Clinton himself is "misinformed".

In my view, Sen. Obama represents our best hope of replacing division with unity. That is why, out of loyalty to my country, I endorse him for president.

---

by: dan in sd @ Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 13:06:41 PM CDT

Clinton Remarks Taken Way Over the Top from the Real Event (0.00 / 0)

As one of the people in the room--- this is so much ado about nothing!
I am not sure how this gets so much play --- I guess folks just hope for some sort of "bad" news to rally with....

The fact of the matter is the President was pleasant and curtious to all... congratulated Christine Pelosi on her new marriage, signed books, photographs, took photos with everyone who asked.

He did a review of where the campaign is to date and how he saw the race going over the next few primaries....etc.

He did "forcefully " answer the Richardson quetion-- by way of saying that it was James Carvell who made the remark and his is not on the Clinton payroll and that both he and Hillary regret his remark. Pres. Clinton said that James had taken full resonsibility for the remark.

He did say that Bill Richardson asked him to come watch the Super Bowl with him and requested several other meetings with the Clintons.

This endosement, without notice,was a surprise to the campaign but not a major event!

By the way Clinton then took photos with Rachel and other superdelegates. He went to the convention floor and delivered his remarks and was in a great mood.  

---

by: Aleita @ Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 16:55:31 PM CDT

"taken full responsibility" (0.00 / 0)

Those have to be the three most meaningless words in the political vocabulary. After all, Bush "took responsibility for" the Iraq intelligence failures and the Hurricane Katrina response. Carville has not only declined to apologize for his comment, he has affirmatively said that he stands behind the words and even going so far as to say that they had the "desired effect":

Clinton campaign adviser James Carville said Monday that he stood behind his controversial weekend comment that compared Bill Richardson's decision to back Barack Obama to the betrayal of Jesus by Judas - a statement the New Mexico governor termed "gutter tactics."

"He quoted me accurately and in context," Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign manager told Wolf Blitzer on CNN's The Situation Room. "I think the statement had the desired effect. It was what I said."

I appreciate your contribution, as a first-person witness, to the discussion of Bill Clinton's meeting with the CA superdelegates. It's good to get multiple sides of the story. So my quarrel is not with you, but rather with Clinton's characterization of Carville's "taking full responsibility."  

---

by: CarlsbadDem @ Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 18:09:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

oops, wrong link for Katrina (0.00 / 0)

here it is: http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITI...

---

by: CarlsbadDem @ Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 18:10:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]