It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Carville Wanted Bush to Fail

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Carville Wanted Bush to Fail


www.foxnews.com

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."
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   
wow how things come back to bite this alien looking man. Where were the reports EVER of this event? of course there were none, because it wasnt a negative comment against Barack Obama.

The double standard that liberals run their mouths about is just amazing. I hope people question carville to death about this issue.

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swatman
The double standard that liberals run their mouths about is just amazing. I hope people question carville to death about this issue.


Oh, here we go again. This is a double standard? No, it's an excuse to let right wing factions of the media do what he did. No double standard, just a continuation of the manipulation of the gov't, through the media, to divide thinking people.

Btw, Carville is the single most disgusting "reporter" on the planet. When are you guys going to start seeing this #? Jeez.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Really... Enough of the Liberal/Conservative, Left/Right, creppola.

Both sides are run by the ones behind the scenes.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Really... Enough of the Liberal/Conservative, Left/Right, creppola.

Both sides are run by the ones behind the scenes.



people always say this yet i fail to see how it is the same.

i can point out a liberal in the audience everytime.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
James Carvell isnt considered the leader of 20 million liberals/Dems neither does James Carvell represent half of the Democratic party.. you dont get 20 million dems referencing Carvelle everytime they talk and believe somthing


I do see some of your points though... no doubt there were some who wanted Bush to fail but to make these little comparisons doesnt excuse the little show the Republican party and the rightwing fringe are putting on.



[edit on 11-3-2009 by Southern Guardian]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swatman

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Really... Enough of the Liberal/Conservative, Left/Right, creppola.

Both sides are run by the ones behind the scenes.



people always say this yet i fail to see how it is the same.

i can point out a liberal in the audience everytime.


Oh, sure, there are surface ideological differences (much like religious differences) which are employed to divide and conquer. But if you look at things like appointments, and other activity that is (and is NOT) being taken, you can see the "business as usual" undercoat of the two-party circus.

What is NOT being taken, for example, is a drive to repeal the "Patriot" Act. That should be a tell right there.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Of course Cargill wanted Bush to fail. I've got an extremely liberal, ideologically brainwashed and uncompromising sister who wanted Bush to fail beginning in January 2001. Nothing new here. Just move along and ignore those that have nothing constructive to contribute.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Sorry for my ignorance, but I think I am missing something?

What I understand from the OP.

Over 7 years ago someone I have never heard of, made a negative comment about an ex president.

How is this even news? If it is why is it important to the world?



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by lightchild
 


You make a great point.

As a known neocon, I think the OP might be attempting to justify recent remarks from the
pompous, portly pig that is Rush Limbaugh. But it is hard to analyze an atom-sized brain.

Moreover, it appears to be another guise as an Obama bashing thread.

Let the fun begin.

Regards...KK

BTW James Carville is a "Democratic Strategist" who worked under Clinton. He his married to his political polar opposite, Mary Matalin. Both possess more brains than beauty.


[edit on 11-3-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by lightchild
Sorry for my ignorance, but I think I am missing something?

What I understand from the OP.

Over 7 years ago someone I have never heard of, made a negative comment about an ex president.

How is this even news? If it is why is it important to the world?


How is this news? He's pointing out the hypocrisy/double-standard issue again.

His point is that this Carville guy gets away with saying he wanted Bush to fail. While Rush Limbaugh stirs a massive uproar and gets verbally crucified for saying the same thing about Obama.

However I can kinda see the point the rest of you are trying to make.

First of all...

When you talk about Bush and Obama in the same sentence? You're comparing apples and oranges when it comes to popularity--regardless of before or after they were elected.

Bush was popular in 2001. Sure. But his level of popularity was a far cry from Obama's level of popularity before and after his election.

So therefore I can see why this guy goes unnoticed by the media.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   
I'm sorry I searched this on Google and this site came up. When I read some of the posts I thought I would add something. Carville, is hardly a nobody in that President Clinton thought so much of him he let him run his campaign in 1992. He again joined John Kerrys campaign in 2004 as an adviser. SO the man is pretty high up in the Democratic party. Rush Limbaugh, whom I don't always enjoy, has never been in charge of a campaign for a GOP candidate.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Bush did fail.

Carville got his wish.

Also, who cares? Limbaugh is a blowhard and Carville is a genius, albeit an eccentric one. If the two were actually to debate politics, the ragin' cajun would wipe the floor with old Rushy-boy. They both talked smack about the current president, and we live in a free society where people are allowed to do that.

End of story.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Consider the time. In 2001, Democrats were still reeling because they felt that Bush "stole" the election from Al Gore with the Supreme Court's help, so I imagine just about every Democrat wanted Bush to fail back then, just out of spite.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Marked One

He's pointing out the hypocrisy/double-standard issue again.

His point is that this Carville guy gets away with saying he wanted Bush to fail. While Rush Limbaugh stirs a massive uproar and gets verbally crucified for saying the same thing about Obama.


Rush is the leader of the conservatives and has one of the largest radio audience in the world, whereas Carville is just a political consultant. Big difference there.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leto

Originally posted by Marked One

He's pointing out the hypocrisy/double-standard issue again.

His point is that this Carville guy gets away with saying he wanted Bush to fail. While Rush Limbaugh stirs a massive uproar and gets verbally crucified for saying the same thing about Obama.


Rush is the leader of the conservatives and has one of the largest radio audience in the world, whereas Carville is just a political consultant. Big difference there.



where is he listed as the leader of the conservatives???? last time i checked he wasnt elected



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by drwizardphd
Bush did fail.

Carville got his wish.

Also, who cares? Limbaugh is a blowhard and Carville is a genius, albeit an eccentric one. If the two were actually to debate politics, the ragin' cajun would wipe the floor with old Rushy-boy. They both talked smack about the current president, and we live in a free society where people are allowed to do that.

End of story.



carville? a genius?






posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 





Both possess more brains than beauty.


lol..carville could be a compete and total moron and he'd STILL have more brains than beauty.

he's one of the ugliest people i've ever seen.

He makes the Crypt Keeper look like his younger brother.



[edit on 13-3-2009 by David9176]



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 12:09 AM
link   
I see what the OP is saying.

The "Rajun Cajun" got away with it because Bush never really had a chance. He started his Presidency with Dems claiming he stole the election, so he has been getting pounded on for a long time now. So it is easy to see how this got lost in the shuffle.

President Obama on the other hand is very popular and not to many media outlets speak out against him. Rush says the same thing as Carville said and it gets front page treatment. All of a sudden the Dems forget that the guy who ran Clintons campaign said the same thing and claim that Rush is the Republican leader (which is false) and that he wants all of America to fail.


Of course this will never fly with the Dems because as seen in a few of these posts, some people just don't like that Rush is on the radio and will not be happy until he is unemployed.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leto

Originally posted by Marked One

He's pointing out the hypocrisy/double-standard issue again.

His point is that this Carville guy gets away with saying he wanted Bush to fail. While Rush Limbaugh stirs a massive uproar and gets verbally crucified for saying the same thing about Obama.


Rush is the leader of the conservatives and has one of the largest radio audience in the world, whereas Carville is just a political consultant. Big difference there.


I remember there was a time when you couldn't turn on CNN news without seeing his goofy grin. The man, last I heard, has retired. He reached alot of people when he was working and that was on television.


I have yet seen Rush on CNN or Fox (apart from the conferance) or any other news station.

No differance between the two. When employed at the same time they reached roughly the same amount of people. Plus Carville had more exposure due to him running Clintons campaign.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join