James Carville's 'Judas' analogy continues to resonate
How out there was James Carville's "Judas" reference to Bill Richardson in reacting to the New Mexico governor's decision to endorse Barack Obama?
So out there that even Howard Wolfson -- the pugnacious, rarely-known-to-pull-a-punch communications director for Hillary Clinton -- distanced himself from it.
During an appearance on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" show, Wolfson had this to say about Carville's comment: "It's not something I would have said."
After adding that he considers Carville "the most brilliant political mind of the last 20 years," Wolfson reiterated: "It's not something that I would have said."
The man in the middle of the flap ...
... wasn't backing down one iota.
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.
The furor, of course, also had the effect of keeping Richardson front and center -- we doubt that his turn on "Fox News Sunday" and the invites he received today from various cable new shows (culminating tonight with a chat with CNN's Larry King) -- were based solely on the desire to hear more about why he now backs Obama.
Carville, while unrepentant about dissing Richardson, displayed his distinctive flair in assuring Blitzer that he would have no problem in helping Obama if the Illinois senator triumphed in the prolonged fight for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Referring to his own dome and one of Obama's top aides, Carville said that "Corporal Cueball" would enlist in "Captain [David] Axelrod's army" from "Day One."
For our money, the best sound bite -- among the hundreds -- being offered on Carville's "Judas" remark came from political strategist Matthew Dowd on "Good Morning America." Dowd (who, as long as religiously tinged terminology is in vogue, underwent a much-publicized conversion from George Bush loyalist to critic), had this to say:
"Probably fortunate for Bill Richardson it wasn't Fourth of July because he'd probably be Benedict Arnold today."
-- Don Frederick



Jesus never lied about his accomplishments to gain his followers. The only miracle HilLLIARy Clinton ever pulled was making it this far while blatantly lying and conning her way through this election.
Proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=It6JN7ALF7Y&eurl=http://video1.washingtontimes.com/bellantoni/2008/03/on_pennsylvania_and_bosnia.html
Posted by: SkeevieMac | March 24, 2008 at 06:04 PM
OK. Are we done with Hillary now? Got her out of your system? If you are no longer wrapped up in that played out spiel about experience being acquired through osmosis, we can get about the business of electing a non-pro-war president who will restore integrity to the office.
Posted by: N.E. BodybutHillary | March 24, 2008 at 06:14 PM
So Carl Rove learned from Clinton
Posted by: gus | March 24, 2008 at 06:22 PM
Yes, Clinton supporters are loyal bunch. So loyal that they see their "BOSS" as their "JESUS" before the persecution. They now see no way to survive. Thus blames Richardson as traitor.
But this is what people wants, and this is what the Democracy is all about. Mr. Richardson and the other Superdelegates have to listen to the voters. Look beyond the Loyalty.
Posted by: humblesage | March 24, 2008 at 06:24 PM
With friends like Richardson, who needs enemies? The thing that bothered me most was his saying that he felt that Obama would be better at uniting all races. I don't know of any two people who have been in politics who have worked for the good of all races than the Clintons. Richardson is just like most of the blacks who have turned their backs on Hillary for Obama, yet the hispanics which Richardson is, have supported Hillary. My we do become strange bedfellows when it comes to who we think will do the most for us politically! VOTE FOR HILLARY She is the uniter.
Posted by: Anna Knapp | March 24, 2008 at 06:28 PM
Really and I thought their advisors ASSURED me this endorsement wasn't significant! Sounds like their changing their tunes....like NAFTA....like I was on the front lines in Bosnia. Can you trust a word these people say? Richardson endorsed Obama in large part because of Clinton's negative campaigning, straight from the RNC playbook. Their divisive, win-at-all-costs strategy is costing them big. She's burned her bridges with me and evidently with Robertson, Ted Kennedy & Nancy Pelosi just to name a few prominent Judas.
If they cheat Obama the nomination off this dirty politics, I'm voting for McCain.
Posted by: Celeste | March 24, 2008 at 06:29 PM
So the Clintons own the black and hispanic people and how dare you think for yourself and not endorse or vote for them. The true (racist) colors of the Clintons and other liberals are coming to light, pardon the pun.
Mrs. Clinton is NOT entitled to be President. Obama is far more presidential, even though I don't agree with his policies. Still though among the three stooges, I vote for Obama.
Posted by: treetime | March 24, 2008 at 06:34 PM
I used to have some respect for Hillary Clinton & Carville, but they are really starting to annoy me now. We need to take the Democratic Party back from them.
Posted by: tlsmith1963 | March 24, 2008 at 06:35 PM
The fact is Bill Richardson is far more qualified to be President than Clinton or Obama, but Americans are known for their ability to responsibly vet candidates as companies do in the hiring process. No, Americans just get caught up in the hype and momentum. For instance, John McCain was polling no better than fourth in national polls with just 9% two week before the Iowa caucus.
Posted by: TJ | March 24, 2008 at 06:37 PM
I am really getting tired of the Clintons. They are true Machiavellians. The closest thing the democrats have to the republican party. In this Judas analogy Bill Clinton is Jesus Christ, right? What was he doing in the oval office with interns? Maybe if Mrs. Clinton was home taking care of domestic policy(as in her husband) and not so active in foreign policy (what a joke) the analogy might be more legitimate. Carville, you should go read the prince again to figure out what Richardson is doing. And when you have the Clintons as clients you should avoid the biblical references.... especially comparing your clients to Jesus Christ.
Posted by: Paul H | March 24, 2008 at 06:40 PM
This morning Matt Lauer from NBC asked Richardson why he changed his opinion that Super Delegates should support what the voters have choosen in their state. H. Clinton won Richardson 's state of New Mexico yet he doesn't follow the wishes of New Mexico. NBC played back the clip from Feb. It should be interesting to see what Obama offers him in the future. I think Carville maybe on to something
Posted by: jd | March 24, 2008 at 06:42 PM
As someone who considered voting for Hillary, Carville's Judas remark just makes me and thousands of other voters want to support Obama. James Carville is the "class act" ace in the hole that the Obama campaign needs to bring in undecided voters. Keep it up, Jimmy boy.
Posted by: fladder | March 24, 2008 at 06:46 PM
Hm... Hillary died for your sins?
Let him who is without ... oh forget it.
Posted by: ule | March 24, 2008 at 06:46 PM
With friends like Richardson, who needs enemies? His endorsement of O just made me donate another $100 to Hiillary. How she maintains her poise and perseverance even when backstabbers like this jump on the bandwagon, is amazing. So, Clinton or Obama? Hmmm....let's look at their resumes....relationships with "close advisors".....seems pretty clear: Hillary. Why not jump on a bandwagon of hype? The problem I have with Mr. Obama is his pattern of saying one thing and then distancing himself from those words when the opposite is revealed at a later date. That is called "spin", folks, and certainly not "new politics". It also speaks to his platform of "good judgement". How can it be good judgement to listen to divisive words when you are also running on a platform of "unity", and listen to that for 20 years, just as an aside. How can it be good judgement to have a close friend and political associate whom you used to buy a piece of property with, who was widely known it be under investigation for political fraud and corruption? We have a need and right to know Senator Obama from every angle and what he believes when he talks of equality and a "vision" for America. For voters (or media) to say that Clinton +/or Obama is at fault for the direction the Democratic campaign has headed, is ludicrous and short-sighted. America is a melting pot of races, genders, culture, etc. and we each have a personal interest in seeing "ourselves" in our President. With that connection comes passion and emotional investment. However, it also must be tempered with information about the candidates (good and bad, without negative "label" attached to said information) so that we can make informed choices, rather than only emotionally-driven ones. To Americans: try to take off the blinders of opinion polls, media spin, mud and excitement and remember what this race is really about: Hiring someone to do the toughest and, arguably, most important job on the planet. Being President of the US isn't about speeches, promises and what-if's - it is about who you believe will get up, everyday, and work their butt off for every hardworking American, because they have a track record of that already. That person is Senator Clinton. She has worked hard and diligently for all Americans, and spent years building strong relationships because she has a passionate vision of what America can be, not just because she's running for President. Vetted, intelligent, tested and hardworking. Senator Clinton is the right choice for me in '08
Posted by: sunny florida | March 24, 2008 at 06:49 PM
If Bill Richardson can deliver the Hispanic vote he will be Obama's running mate. That is certainly worth 30 silver coins.
Posted by: J. Fernando Cevallos-Candau | March 24, 2008 at 06:50 PM
Bill Richardson is indeed metaphorical for Judas. Will we be surprised if Obama names him as the VP spot on the democratic ticket? Unfortunately, no one in history ever liked or respected a traitor because they cannot be trusted. Unfortunately, Bill Richardson is just like Obama, a typical politician. He voted not because of Obama's racial-re-setting speech, which was only delivered to try to cover up for the hatred of Obama's personal adviser and anti-American, bigoted Pastor, but for political aspirations.
We shall see how Judas' move plays out if Obama should be lucky enough to hoodwink Americans and actually win the presidency and, by coincidence, Judas Richardson, whom perhaps Obama also sees as a typical brown person, will be assigned to a new cabinet position. Richardson's loyalty is as pathetic as John Kerry's when he dumped John Edwards to favor Obama. What a joke to see John Kerry & Ted Kennedy both had egg on their face after Massachusettes paid zero heed to their "endorsement" and voted overwhelmingly for Hilliary Clinton. Who needs friends like Richardson who will sell your white Grandmother for political gain? I doubt the Hispanic community will fall for Obama’s political move to try to win their support. If he casually uses terms like “a typical white person,” how can that assuage the Hispanic community or the Asian community both of which thanks to the spotlight on the Reverend Wright acutely realize that Obama is dedicated to the black community and Africa first and foremost, according to the tenants of his church.
Posted by: Common Sense Voter | March 24, 2008 at 06:53 PM
Does this mean Hillary is Jesus?
Posted by: a | March 24, 2008 at 06:54 PM
Of course it does. President Clinton gave Richardson a hand up by offering him a position in his campaign. To turn his back on the Clinton's at this point shows that he has no loyalty or integrity
Richardson's reason of wanting to see a new generation in the white house and did not like the idea of a bush,clinton, bush, clinton run are ridiculous. Wouldn't you want to weigh who is ready and qualified for the office? Not Richardson.
Richardson has also turned his back on the voters in N.M. that showed up at the polls and pushed Hillary to win the popular vote in .N.M .Richardson states that he doesn't need to represent the voters wishes because it was a close vote. Such Nonsense.
You have to think that Obama and Richardson have made a deal of some sort. Richardson will be rewarded with a nice slot in the white house when the time comes.
In the meantime we are stuck with two politicians that think it's okay to fool the voters with words while doing all their deals behind closed doors. It's politics as usual,. nothing new or different.
Posted by: Blenko | March 24, 2008 at 06:58 PM
Interesting that this 'betrayal' is of the Clintons, not the Democratic party...
But I'm so glad to learn that she can conduct foreign policy under sniper fire...I wonder what will come to her mind at 3 a.m....
Posted by: CTA | March 24, 2008 at 07:00 PM
ssml, you clealry didn't get the memo...don't you know that anything that doesn't support HRC's right to the nomination is wrong and anything that does is right?
Posted by: DHH | March 24, 2008 at 07:04 PM
I suppose if a fellow is not a black preacher in Chicago then he can say that kind of stuff.
Brian
Posted by: Brian Richards | March 24, 2008 at 07:06 PM
I liked the comment from a person on McCafferty File today! "If Richardson is Judas does Cavelle think Clinton is Jesus? I know Jesus and Bill Clinton is NO JESUS!"
Enough! I want to know what will happen to the 29,...... and some injured in Iraq when they come home. Are we taking care of them?? What about the economy? What about the BUdget? Congress is still in Recess? Get with the times!
Unci
Posted by: Unci | March 24, 2008 at 07:06 PM
James...really. Shame on you.
Was calling Hillary a monster worse than calling Richardson a Judas? But the Billaries jumped all over Samantha Power.
Maybe Mary will jump all over James.
Posted by: Malama Makena | March 24, 2008 at 07:11 PM
Loyalty? What loyalty? You mean the loyalty Hillary has shown to the Democratic party by aligning herself with Republican buddy McCain as being the only two running with enough (fake) experience to be commander in chief.
Hillary has proven that she's anything but loyal to the party that elected her husband twice despite all the scandals.
Now BiLLARY, wants us to forget the past and vote for them again this time based in part on experience (More like lack of experience) gained while dodging imaginary bullets in Bosnia, posing at northern Irleand talk photo ops and pillow talk security briefings with Bill.
For once, can we get real and start talking about how to end a war that has been waged in the name of 3500 9/11 victoms & national security. So far, we've killed at least 100,000 Iraq's, lost 4,000 troops, and spent over trillon dollars fighting a war in the WRONG country while our mortal enemy Bin Laden trains suicide bombers between podcasts from his plantation estate in north west Pakistan.
How about being loyal to your country when it needs to be United behind a person who has enough integrity & brain cell's left to say the war is wrong from the start and to risk everything by telling America what it needed to hear about race while inspring over 2 million Americans to believe in CHANGE enough to give a little of their hard earned income to a campaign that brings HOPE to us all. Why any one who would want to stop instead of joining such a positive movement is beyond me.
Posted by: Clarence McDowell | March 24, 2008 at 07:12 PM
From smooth faced presidential candidate to beaded supporter -give me a break!
Posted by: Jerry Cahallan | March 24, 2008 at 07:16 PM