Hillary SAT ON her millions $$ in last days of Election 2006... the SAME sin that Carville foamed-at-mouth at DNC Chair Howard Dean for!!

If James Carville directed one-tenth the outrage at his wife for espousing "THEY'RE WRONG" Republican atrocious policies that he directs at DNC Chairman Howard Dean for running WINNING Democratic grass-roots campaigns, he would be booted out of his own home in a New York minute!



In an earlier post, "JAMES CARVILLE, WTF?!' we wrote
http://cowardlydemocrats.blogspot.com/search?q=James+Carville%2C+WTF%3F
that James Carville was a blooming, craven IDIOT for shouting (in that Carville ragin' cajun style of his) that DNC Chair Howard Dean should be FIRED for (according to Carville) not digging deep enough into the DNC's credit line to pump additional funds to a few critically close races in the last days of Election 2006.

Well, now it turns out that not only is Carville a CRAVEN, BLOOMING IDIOT for his comments back then, BUT he is a HYPOCRITE and liar as well!

For, you see, Hillary Clinton in the final days of Election '06 (days leading up to November 7th) wasn't just sitting on a huge, commanding, insurmountable lead in the polls, but she was also SITTING ON TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS of cash-in-hand campaign funds!

HOW can Carville explain his ferocious, outspoken condemnation of Howard Dean for not using IMAGINARY (credit-line) funds, while PRETENDING IGNORANCE of HILLARY'S UNSPENT cash-in-hand war chest??!!

Our thanks to Paul Rogat Loeb and Buzzflash.com for pointing all this out.

Of course, ANYONE who has been paying ANY attention to the Right-Wing since they lost their Cold-War "evil empire" as adversaries and enemies (when the USSR and 'Iron Curtain' collapsed in late 1990s) understands that the HARDER THE RIGHTIES SHOUT about some alleged sin, crime, and scandal by the Democrats and "left," THE MORE THEY ARE DESCRIBING their OWN dark hearts and conduct.

AS we write this, MSNBC is playing the media "GOTCHA!" story, incoming Democrat House Intel. Committee Chairmen Reyes apparently is not fully conversant in Al Qaida facts, stats, and briefing info.

BUT, the SAME MSNBC news whores (including former Congressman Joe Scarborough) GIVE A FREE PASS, not only to two outgoing (SITTING) Republican members of the House Intel Committee who failed the SAME question, but of course they CONTINUE to give George W. Bush a FREE PASS for IGNORING pre-9-11 "Al Qaida wants to hijack airliners in America" warnings from the CIA, FBI, Mossad, Egyptian security forces, and even the ITALIAN POLICE, who stationed surface-to-air missiles around Genoa Italy in July of 2001 specifically to deter the threat of a hijacked airliner. That is, the American whore media (in this case MSNBC) gives the US president a FREE PASS for being MORE IGNORANT and INCOMPETENT than the Italian police and security forces! And then tries to make incoming Dem Intel. Committee Chair Reyes look ignorant and incompetent for not having his own pat answers to a media pop-quiz.

James Carville is completely in the same boat as MSNBC and the WHORE media: he is trying to make Howard Dean's WINNING leadership of the DNC in election 2006 into a SCANDAL, while SITTING on the info. that shows that Hillary Clinton is guilty, in spades, of EXACTLY what Carville accuses Dean of doing (or not doing)!!

WHY is Carville such a hollow, shrill, has-been?

In a word, he has become exactly the DC insider he DESPISED when he came up with the Clinton-Gore unofficial campaign motto in 1992, "It's the economy, STUPID!" Carville is now married to Mary Matlin, who has not only been a longtime PR campaign aide to the Bush Sr. White House, but she is now THE head spin-meister for Dick Cheney, the Vice-President (and some say acting co-president) of the United States. It simply doesn't get any more "Washington DC INSIDER" than being the spinmeister/PR advisor for the sitting Vice President/godfather of so many appalling administration policies and directions.

In 1992 Carville channeled his RAGE and OUTRAGE against the economic policies of the Bush Sr. administration into winning tactical and strategic (media) plans for the 1992 dark horse (outsider) Democratic candidate.

Since then, Carville has written the book, "WE're right, THEY're Wrong." But apparently his REPUBLICAN INSIDER wife didn't get the message... she continues to champion the OUTRAGEOUS Republican policies such as torture, unlimited spying, and TAX CUTS FOR BILLIONAIRES while sticking the rest of us Americans with the not only the costs of Bush's disastrous wars, job outsourcing, soaring healthcare and drug prices, and DEFICITS..... _AND_ INTEREST ON those deficits - but the portion of the federal taxes that billionaires no longer pay!!!

James Carville is, clearly, STILL a man of OUTRAGE.

Except, INSTEAD of CHANNELING THAT OUTRAGE at the appalling policies HIS WIFE ESPOUSES... he HYPOCRITICALLY channels them at Howard Dean, a small-state governor who, until his 2004 presidential campaign, was the quintessential DC outsider.

THANKS, Paul Loeb, for the TEXT BOOK example of DC Democrat INSIDER HYPOCRISY by James Carville and the Hillary camp, and their Republican-esque "POT CALLING KETTLE BLACK" "projection."

<< I just got my Visa bill for my final election donations-all those click-and-donate appeals in my email box and on the Web. I gave more than I thought I had, more than I'd intended to spend, and more than I'd ever given before. You make enough $25 to $50 contributions, and soon you're talking REAL MONEY, a tenth of my annual income.
But I feel just fine about my giving. I'm proud to have helped support Dean's 50-state strategy by donating to the Democratic National Committee early enough to help build key infrastructure, and then again and again as new opportunities emerged. I felt great about giving to Jon Tester six times, including for his final election week push. Between my donations and my volunteering with MoveOn's CallforChange program, I felt like I'd personally helped elect Tester, Jim Webb, Claire McCaskill, Sherrod Brown, Bernie Sanders, Sheldon Whitehouse, and half the Congressional candidates from the NetRoots Act Blue page. I'd have felt proud to do my part even if the close races had gone the other way.

What DOESN'T please me, in fact DISTURBS ME IMMENSELY, is discovering that Hillary Clinton raised $52 million dollars for her Senate campaign and allied leadership PAC, HILLPAC. She spent $36 million of it on a race that she could have won staying home in her pajamas, not spending a dime. Now she's SITTING ON a $13.5-million-dollar war chest, which she'll roll over to her presidential campaign. I know political money is hard to raise, particularly with the new contribution limits, and that some of Hillary's spending went to build a grassroots donors' list that she'll tap in the future. But according to the wonderful site of the Center for Responsive Politics, the entire Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee raised only $107 million, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign $103 million. Hillary spent a third as much as either of these, more than any candidate in America, for a race that was never in doubt. She did distribute $2.5 million to various Democratic institutions and candidates, but imagine if she'd transferred $20 million into the dozen Congressional campaigns that Democrats lost by margins as close as a few hundred votes. Or into Harold Ford's Senatorial campaign, to close the gap between the $10 million spent by Ford and the $15 million that Republican Bob Corker spent. Hindsight's always easy, but by late summer it was clear that the Democrats had a huge opportunity and were scrambling for the funds to respond to it. A few more ads would almost certainly have tipped the balance for some of the under-funded candidates who came heartbreakingly close. That's why so many of us were digging deep to contribute, and then digging deeper, EVEN WHEN IT HURT. Evidently Hillary had other priorities.

But she had a chance to make a major difference in this critical election -- and she blew it. >>
==============================

Hillary Clinton and My Visa Bill

by Paul Rogat Loeb, author of "The Impossible Will Take a Little While"
Tue, 12/12/2006
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/contributors/625

I just got my Visa bill for my final election donations-all those click-and-donate appeals in my email box and on the Web. I gave more than I thought I had, more than I'd intended to spend, and more than I'd ever given before. You make enough $25 to $50 contributions, and soon you're talking real money, a tenth of my annual income.

But I feel just fine about my giving. I'm proud to have helped support Dean's 50-state strategy by donating to the Democratic National Committee early enough to help build key infrastructure, and then again and again as new opportunities emerged. I felt great about giving to Jon Tester six times, including for his final election week push. Between my donations and my volunteering with MoveOn's CallforChange program, I felt like I'd personally helped elect Tester, Jim Webb, Claire McCaskill, Sherrod Brown, Bernie Sanders, Sheldon Whitehouse, and half the Congressional candidates from the NetRoots Act Blue page. I'd have felt proud to do my part even if the close races had gone the other way.

What doesn't please me, in fact disturbs me immensely, is discovering that Hillary Clinton raised $52 million dollars for her Senate campaign and allied leadership PAC, HILLPAC. She spent $36 million of it on a race that she could have won staying home in her pajamas, not spending a dime. Now she's sitting on a $13.5-million-dollar war chest, which she'll roll over to her presidential campaign. I know political money is hard to raise, particularly with the new contribution limits, and that some of Hillary's spending went to build a grassroots donors' list that she'll tap in the future. But according to the wonderful site of the Center for Responsive Politics, the entire Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee raised only $107 million, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign $103 million. Hillary spent a third as much as either of these, more than any candidate in America, for a race that was never in doubt. She did distribute $2.5 million to various Democratic institutions and candidates, but imagine if she'd transferred $20 million into the dozen Congressional campaigns that Democrats lost by margins as close as a few hundred votes. Or into Harold Ford's Senatorial campaign, to close the gap between the $10 million spent by Ford and the $15 million that Republican Bob Corker spent. Hindsight's always easy, but by late summer it was clear that the Democrats had a huge opportunity and were scrambling for the funds to respond to it. A few more ads would almost certainly have tipped the balance for some of the under-funded candidates who came heartbreakingly close. That's why so many of us were digging deep to contribute, and then digging deeper, even when it hurt. Evidently Hillary had other priorities.

When Bill Clinton first surfaced as a leading Presidential contender, I asked a mutual friend what he thought. "He's smart," said my friend. "He reads good books. He wants to do the right thing." Then he paused and said, "But he won't go to the mat for anything except his own political future." To me, that was Bill's core flaw (even more than his pursuit of Monica Lewinsky). Hillary seems to share Bill's hunger for power. You can always rationalize dubious choices by the good you'll do when you gain just a little more clout, and I'm sure she truly believes her candidacy will benefit the United States. But she had a chance to make a major difference in this critical election -- and she blew it.

Hillary is far from the only Democrat vulnerable to the charge of hoarding scarce resources: As of mid-October, John Kerry with $13.8 million in his campaign account, and Evan Bayh had $10.6 million. But Kerry transferred over $3.5 million to Democratic candidates and used his networks to raise almost $10 million more. Between his inept 2004 campaign and the damage done by his foot-in-the-mouth military joke-telling, I don't want him as a Presidential candidate; but compared to what Hillary transferred from five times the resources, Kerry at least dug deeper to help. I have even more respect for potential contenders like John Edwards and Wesley Clark, who campaigned throughout the country to support Democratic candidates, but did relatively little fundraising for their own campaign committees and PACs, mostly to maintain basic infrastructure. Their top priority was to help other Democrats to win this 2006 election

I'm sure Hillary would say she did all she could, and then some, and she definitely lent major star power to the campaigns and fundraising efforts of many worthy candidates. But I think about all the ordinary citizens who gave more time and money than anyone would have expected and as a result made a critical difference. In comparison, Hillary falls short. The money she spent may have gained her a few extra points of electoral margin in a race she won by 36 points, and buttressed her already massive frontrunner status. But it did nothing to increase the Democratic victory. Those of us at the grassroots aren't going to stop volunteering and donating merely because some of our most prominent political leaders fall short. But it's a measure of their character that I hope we'll remember when the Presidential primaries begin.

A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION

Paul Rogat Loeb is the author of The Impossible Will Take a Little While: A Citizen's Guide to Hope in a Time of Fear, named the #3 political book of 2004 by the History Channel and the American Book Association. His previous books include Soul of a Citizen: Living With Conviction in a Cynical Time. See www.paulloeb.org To receive his monthly articles email sympa@lists.onenw.org with the subject line: subscribe paulloeb-articles