Memo to Carville: STFU, idiot

MEMORANDUM

FROM: Sinfonian
TO: James Carville
RE: Richardson endorsement of Obama
DATE: March 22, 2008

Regarding your outburst yesterday over Gov. Bill Richardson's (D-N.M.) endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) for the Democratic nomination for president, you, sir, are an idiot.

This should not come as news to you, as it does not to me, but for you to compare Richardson to Judas because he decided not to endorse your BFF, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), is gross hyperbole, and also stupid.

If you need a refresher, Jim, let me remind you of your exact words:

“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."

Jim, there are only a couple of possible interpretations of your statement. Either you are equating Sen. Clinton with Jesus H. Christ (D-Nazareth), or you are claiming that Sen. Clinton somehow was entitled to Gov. Richardson's endorsement. Both of these are ludicrous.

Although I have not yet endorsed one of the two remaining Democrats, I definitely get a sense that Sen. Clinton and her cronies, including you, have a misguided sense of entitlement, that somehow Sen. Clinton deserves the nomination because ... well, I've really no idea why. You see, Jim, in America -- at least in the America I believe deep down you and I both want -- things aren't just handed to you. You have to work for them, to prove that you deserve them. We've endured over seven years of a president who never had to work for anything in his life ... whose extraordinary sense of entitlement -- I say this without hyperbole -- is destroying this country. Yet you and your candidate seem to believe that she likewise is entitled to certain things from America: the endorsement of Gov. Richardson for one, and the Democratic presidential nomination for another.

That's not how the system works, Jim. I don't have anything against Sen. Clinton, but the more you -- and she -- behave as though she deserves to win this race, the more I have to question whether or not she should be president. So, for the sake of your candidate, and the sake of the party, I must ask you to shut the fuck up.

Please let me know if you have any questions on this.

cc: Blast Off! readers

Nancy Pelosi is full of shit

What the hell is Nancy Pelosi thinking?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Sunday that Congress cannot end the war in Iraq without President Bush’s approval.

Voters, she told Fox News Sunday, “want it to end and they had expectations that Congress could end it.”

But, she added, “You know we can’t without a presidential signature.”

That is a difference in tone from the defiant stand she took when campaigning for Congress and when she took over as speaker.

That's utterly ridiculous and incorrect on its face. First of all, Congress could simply refuse to fund the war other than enough money to bring the troops home or redeploy them appropriately.

Or, you could do what one Democratic presidential candidate suggests:

But Democratic presidential candidate Bill Richardson challenged Pelosi’s assertion just a little later Sunday.

He told ABC News’s “This Week” that Congress could “de-authorize” the war without Bush’s signature, using a resolution already introduced by Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.).

“I believe a national movement could be built to support that,” Richardson said. “The president cannot veto that because it would be under Article I of the Constitution. That is the decisive step that the American people want. There is a disconnect between the voters and what’s happening in the Congress.”

Seriously, Nancy, you know you're wrong, and it's embarrassing to think that the Speaker of the House, whom we essentially elected to lead the Democratic majority in the House in opposition to Drunky McStagger's ruthless abuses of power, is either so ignorant or so mesmerized by the Republicans that she would say something as ludicrous.

Does anyone wonder anymore why we need progressive challenges in primaries next year? Richardson is right, and it's time to end that disconnect and send a message to the Democratic leadership that we mean business. The American people deserve better than what we have.

Nedra Pickler takes on Bill Richardson

AP writer Nedra Pickler long has been known (scroll down) for writing absolute dreck that props up GOP stooges and denigrates Democrats. Today she's unsheathed her red pen to go after New Mexico governor and Democratic presidential candidate Bill Richardson.

In a speech today in Baltimore, Richardson, who will be the guest on Comedy Central's The Daily Show with Jon Stewart tonight, warned that more attention must be paid to al-Qaeda and less to Iraq, especially with a looming threat that the terrorist network could gain access to nuclear weapons.

But check out who Nedra cited, apparently without provocation:

Asked why he doesn't support a nuclear-free world like former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and other Cold War leaders have promoted, Richardson replied, "I'm a pragmatist."

"I believe what the world needs to do is nuclear arms reductions," Richardson said. He recalled that it didn't work when President Reagan and Soviet Prime Minister Mikhail Gorbachev agreed in 1986 to renounce all nuclear weapons "for about 10 minutes."

Richardson worked on securing Russian nuclear weapons when he was energy secretary in the Clinton administration. But he accused the Bush administration of underfunding their programs.

"Meanwhile, we are spending $10 billion a month on Iraq," he said. "Of the many ways in which the Iraq war has distracted us from our real national security needs, this is the most dangerous."

No word on whether Nedra gets an extra-special bonus for mentioning Kissinger in her article. But it wouldn't surprise me.

Water is wet

And, in other news, Obama draws large crowds in urban areas:

[Leah] Hanes is among the throngs of people who have turned out to hear Obama speak during the two weeks since the Illinois senator formally entered the race. Obama is drawing eye-popping crowds in an unusual campaign swing that is taking him to large urban areas outside of the early voting states where presidential candidates typically stump for votes.

The people Obama is attracting in those cities won't be able to cast votes in states like Iowa and New Hampshire that are so critical to deciding who makes it to the White House. But his tour is designed to build his reputation among voters nationwide who still don't know much about him and to create an army of small-dollar donors who are invested in his success.

Obama is expecting huge turnout for rallies Friday in Austin, Texas, and Monday in Cleveland. More than 10,000 people have signed up on Obama's Web site for free tickets to each event, according to the campaign.

That's a larger turnout than President Bush usually gets and certainly more than Obama's rivals in the 2008 campaign are pulling in.

The last sentence reminds me of the old quote from Babe Ruth. When asked how he could justify making more money than the president (Herbert Hoover), Ruth replied, "Well, I had a better year."

Anyway, I'm still struggling with my choice for 2008. I guess it's still pretty early yet, and I don't think I was even this far along four years ago (indeed, I didn't start volunteering for the Howard Dean campaign until August of 2003), but each of the Democratic candidates has a major flaw that keeps me from diving in. I liked Obama at first, dating back to his scintillating speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, but his apparent desire to appease the religious right and his tendency to change course with the wind have raised questions about him in my mind. I'm also not sure that skipping yesterday's joint Democratic forum in Nevada was such a great idea.

Meanwhile, I find Clinton too polarizing, Edwards too weak (following his failure to stand behind his bloggers in the face of wingnut attacks), Kucinich attractive (politically) but unelectable (unfortunately), Biden too 1988, and the rest are basically supporting characters at this point. I probably should look more at Bill Richardson, though ...

Memo to Al Gore: please run. Thanks in advance.