by Frank James
James Carville, the Democratic political strategist, was on CNN this afternoon and defended himself against the charge that, like conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh, he said he wanted the president of the opposite party to fail.
Bill Sammons of Fox News reported that at a breakfast meeting with reporters the morning of 9/11 before anyone at the meeting knew of the attacks, Carville and pollster Stanley Greenberg both said they wanted President Bush to fail but that after the people in the room learned of the terrorism, Carville said to disregard everything he had said about not wanting Bush to succeed.
Here's Carville's exchange with Wolf Blitzer:
Carville: ...I said look, everything I said, given the circumstances, the entire thing had changed everything. And thank God that I had the good sense to realize that the United State was at war and that changed everything. Unlike Mr. Limbaugh, who four times after he said it, when the United states is at war, fighting three different wars, kept insisting he wanted the president to fail at a time of war.Again, I was pretty clear. When I read that report I was very, you know, that Bill did say I said that after I found out."
Blitzer: Let me just be precise. Did you say that morning that you hoped President Bush would fail.
Carville: I don't know what I said that morning. I know him to be a reputable reporter. I have no idea of the context. But once I found out that the country was at war, I said "I don't mean that. Whatever I said disregard it. It's inoperative." And I had the good sense presumably to the extent I can remember anything 7-1/2 years ago to say that. And I was grateful that he put that in."
Here's an excerpt of what Sammons reported:
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.
Comments
This is another reason why the Greedy Oil party is marred deep in the minority....NO ONE wanted Bush to fail! It wasn't until much later, after Bush had already proven that "succees" to him meant more innocent people dying and more people going broke that anyone wanted him to fail.
Druggy Rush started his own demise when he stupidly barked out that he wanted Obama to fail only three days after the inauguration. All Obama ever said to the GOPer's was that they shouldn't always listen to Rush and he only said it one time.
The Repugs were left to either agree with Rush or diss him, thus the mess the find themselves in now.
Posted by: Mullah Limbaugh = Leader of the Greedy Oil Party | March 11, 2009 6:37 PM
The Repuglicans are never going to crawl out of the minority if they don't stop using cartoon characters as their party representitives.
Like this cartoon character:
http://media.photobucket.com/image/rush%20limbaugh/lorgonumputz/rushlimbaughspeaks.gif
And this cartoon character:
http://media.photobucket.com/image/chuck%20norris/xdjak47/chuck-norris.gif
And this cartoon character:
http://media.photobucket.com/image/joe%20the%20plumber/pdwv/fun%20stuff/JOETHEPLUMBER.jpg
Posted by: bubba Porter | March 11, 2009 6:51 PM
The Wingnuts are frustrated. In their little pea sized brains they believe that the office of President should always be held by a Republican.
God told them this and so did Newt and Rush back in the 90's when they were busy raking Bill Clinton over the coals.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUdZnxtKR2A
Posted by: Biff Dyslin | March 11, 2009 6:58 PM
Why aren't you folks as adamant about Rush's comments being "taken out of context" as you are in implying that Carville's have been distorted???????
Posted by: UnfrozenCavegirlBlogger | March 11, 2009 7:02 PM
Carville, Limbaugh, a liar ia a liar no matter which side of the issue he is on. The big difference is only one party has a kiar as their leader.
Posted by: Ron M | March 11, 2009 7:36 PM
This is sooooo stupid. No one was wishing for Bush to fail less than two months into his presidency the way the Repuglicans are doing with President Obama now.
The Repuglicans need to quit with all of this idiocy and start getting serious or they're going to go the way of the Whigs before long. The GOPer's face a real possibility of being reduced to a regional party of limited national relevance unless it broadens its appeal beyond angry white men living primarily in the states of the old Confederacy. That being the case, why are they kissing the ring of the angry white man who broadcasts from West Palm Beach? [...]
The GOPer's have reliably been able to woo the red necks by demonizing gays, people of color, Muslims, feminists and anyone else who did not fit their white picket fence fantasies. But the changes afoot in our country suggest that won't work quite as well in the future for them, their defacto leader -Druggy Rush- and their minions.
Posted by: Hulk Smash! | March 11, 2009 7:46 PM
I don't remember any major Democratic politician or personality repeatedly expressing the sincere hope that their president - George Bush at that time - would "fail" in any substantive way.
http://www.political-buzz.com/
Posted by: matt | March 11, 2009 7:51 PM
Carville, Limbaugh are distractions.
Limbaugh garnered a larger audience and now Carville wants the same.
Want Obama to fail. Didn't support his ideas (actually, Rahm's ideas), didn't vote for him. And continue to not support Obama's policies.
Out in 2012.
Posted by: mike | March 11, 2009 8:57 PM
Republican thinking: Accuse the Democrats of wanting Bush to fail and that will counter the effects of Limbaugh's stupidity and narcissistic intransigence in wishing Obama would fail. Limbaugh can't back away from that statement, he would stake his reputation as the leader of the troglodytes and the few intelligent members of the Republican congressional delegation. But the fools in congress who do not seperate themselves from him have labeled themselves as traitors.
Posted by: Ron M | March 11, 2009 9:02 PM
Why is everyone making such a big deal about Rush Limbaugh. In all honesty who cares what he thinks.
I will give him credit for one thing being honest. All politicians want the other party or other guy to fail . Anyone who thinks other wise is lying. Politics is the ultimate blood sport.
Posted by: thomas | March 11, 2009 9:04 PM
I think all politicians or people involved in politics want the other guy to fail politics is the ultimate blood sport.
Posted by: thomas | March 11, 2009 9:10 PM
[[I don't remember any major Democratic politician or personality repeatedly expressing the sincere hope that their president - George Bush at that time - would "fail" in any substantive way.]]
Well, this would have been 7 1/2 years ago. I sometimes can't remember what I told my kids yesterday, let alone what I told them back in 2001.
The world is a different place, communications wise.
I have no doubt Carville said he wished Bush would fail. Truth be told, I would have been right there with him. For many, many months, I refused to even acknowledge the man as my president.
Not feeling the love to Obama, either. Do I hope his policies fail? Some of them, yes. I'm not so stupid as to hope he can't revive the economy, as my fortunes are directly tied to that. But I don't like the picture he's painted of life in the USA in Obama land. way too much government intervention and entitlement. We can't support it. It will bankrupt us.
Plus, frankly, the man is incompetent. I don't trust him.
Posted by: liz | March 11, 2009 10:34 PM
Does this sound like a bunch of people that wanted President Bush to succeed?
.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,95621,00.html
.
Mullah Limbaugh,
.
"Bush had already proven that "succees" to him meant more innocent people dying and more people going broke that anyone wanted him to fail." If you think people were going broke under President Bush, what do you think would happen under a President Obama where free enetrprise is being discouraged?
Posted by: Terry | March 12, 2009 6:25 AM
Here is a point all you lefties who "slobber" over the new Obama economic policies; why are Pelosi and her lot now suggesting a 2nd Porkulous package may be necessary? Could it be that their first Porkulous is failing, like most conservatives economists predicted. Duh!
Posted by: bubba Porter | March 12, 2009 7:39 AM
Hat-chewer Carville figures that if he repeats a blatant lie often enough, the lie will be believed.
Carville wanted Bush to fail. He said so. Carville expressed the view of most Democrats. The August 2006 Fox/Opinion Dynamics Poll showed that Democrats, by a healthy 51-40% margin, wanted Bush to fail.
See the Patterico website for more on the poll that no Democrat (certainly none who write for the Swamp) wants the public to know about.
Posted by: Dissent is Patriotic | March 12, 2009 8:37 AM
Wow, if that is the best that the pug data trolls can come up with, then the dem point rings truer than ever.
Posted by: Xcellentform | March 12, 2009 9:41 AM
Before the attacks Carville said he wanted Bush to fail. After the attacks, Carville said everything has now changed. Doesn't change the fact, though, of what Carville said before the attacks. In 2006, 51 percent of Democraps said they wanted Bush to fail. We had Democrap Sen. Harry Reid say the war was lost and the surge failed. We had Democraps and media for years talk down the economy, even when unemployment was under 5 and the Dow approaching 14,000. Those actions alone are proof Dems and the media wanted Bush AND the U.S. to fail.
Posted by: John D | March 12, 2009 11:34 AM
Rush can be Chuck Norris's Vice President in Texas. Palin can be their Secretary of Stae, with her seccesionist connections. The Republican Party has become the Party of treason. Lincoln would be ashamed. Why do they hate America so? Why do they want to destroy our nation?
Posted by: Fred Douglass | March 12, 2009 11:38 AM
Terry is right. The Republican economic policies are proven to work flawlessly. Bush handed Obama a booming economy. There were no economic problems under his watch. Banks thrived, the Dow boomed, Unemployment went continually down. We need to go back to those policies immediately. Cut taxes, especially the riichest people. Slash all social spending. make sure as many children as possible don't have access to healthcare. Privatize Social Security so that we can all make millions without any risk in the stock market. Invade another country or two. Don't ask for accountability from anyone. Thats what will make this country the economic paradise it was every single day under Bush.
Posted by: Rushpublican | March 12, 2009 12:14 PM
johnny dimwit......the dems have been warning us about this catastrophe-in-the-making for many years. I know in your dilusion, you think the dems caused this. The truths are that there were some serious problems that were being ignored in the better times and have come back to bite us in the arss. And that is what you hang your hat on and say we hoped for schrubs failure?
I stand by my original post here....if this is all the pugs can come up with.....a retracted, unpublished statement that was made well into schrubs presidency, then it is a VERY poor example. Also, for anyone to try and say that "I hope he fails" and "I hope he does not succeed" have the same meaning are idiots. One can maintain and "not succeed", yet one can not maintain and fail at the same time. Pure idiots are the lot of the pugs.
Posted by: Xcellentform | March 12, 2009 2:49 PM
There's no news here. Carville has become a rich and famous millionaire based on his talent for lying. The fact that he's now saying that he was lying back when he made the original is probably the only believable defense that could come from his lying mouth.
Posted by: Jeff | March 12, 2009 5:35 PM
I figured this leftist hack blog would cover for its Democrat brethren. What predictable tripe.
"It's ok for 'us' but not for you" and the Sun Times gobbles it up whole.
Posted by: Mark | March 12, 2009 8:41 PM
Rushpub,
.
Bush economy - 2001 - brought country out of recession thru tax cuts.
.
Bush economy 2002-07 - 73 months of economic growth, low inflation, low interest rates, and low unemployment.
.
Bush economy 2008 - Recession caused by the decline of the housing market. Decline of housing market caused by ...??? Name the Bush policy that led to the housing crisis.
Posted by: Terry | March 12, 2009 9:20 PM