Stimulus Porkulus: What the Hell HaveWe Got Ourselves Intous?
PT 16: RUSH VS. CARVILLE
Over the couple of weeks leading to Tax Day (April 15), I'm going to be dissecting the economy and the stimulus, budget and the various other issues that have unfolded between banks to AIG to tea parties all over the country! I had bookmarked a lot of articles since the end of January and it's interesting to read them with perspective and "read between the lines."
For as much as Limbaugh had been lambasted for wanting The Big O's economic/socialist leaning policies to fail, it turns out that Carville wanted Bush to fail--the day of 9/11 in fact--and it was buried by the media (shocker!) until now. So when the news broke about that little juicy tidbit, then it was Limbaugh vs. Carville at the watercoolers across America...
Bill Sammon at FOX News writes about how on the morning of 9/11, Carville was speaking with reporters about Bush 43 and said "I certainly hope he doesn't succeed."
Further: "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!'"
Sammon ponders, "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."
Sammon goes on to compare this media coverup with regard to Carville and the recent "feeding frenzy" on Limbaugh.
Recent commentary by Carville on CNN: "The most influential Republican in the United States today, Mr. Rush Limbaugh, said he did not want President Obama to succeed. He is the daddy of this Republican Congress."
Limbaugh responds to Carville: "The difference between Carville and his ilk and me is that I care about what happens to my country. I am not saying what I say for political advantage. I oppose actions, such as Obama's socialist agenda, that hurt my country. I deal in principles, not polls. Carville and people like him live and breathe political exploitation. This is all a game to them. It's not a game to me. I am concerned about the well-being and survival of our nation. When has Carville ever advocated anything that would benefit the country at the expense of his party?"
Carville Gleefully Spouts off to Politico: "The television cameras just can't stay away from him. Our strategy depends on him keeping talking, and I think we're going to succeed." They've succeeded so much so that no one is talking about it anymore...
2006 Poll Among Democrats: 51% wanted him to fail.
And of course, not to be shot down by Limbaugh, Carville came out swinging like the Ragin' Cajun we know him to be with these parting words: "Thank God that I had the good sense to realize that the United States was at war and that changed everything. Once I found out that the country was at war, I said: Whatever I said, disregard it; it's inoperative."
"Unlike Mr. Limbaugh," he added, who "kept insisting that he wanted the president to fail at a time of war." Really Carville, we're at war?! Better fire up the presses and notify J-NO since they're not using the word "WAR" nor "TERROR" anymore...In fact the only war I've noticed lately is The Big O's PC War On Words...
Politico Chick
Bill Sammon at FOX News writes about how on the morning of 9/11, Carville was speaking with reporters about Bush 43 and said "I certainly hope he doesn't succeed."
Further: "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!'"
Sammon ponders, "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."
Sammon goes on to compare this media coverup with regard to Carville and the recent "feeding frenzy" on Limbaugh.
Recent commentary by Carville on CNN: "The most influential Republican in the United States today, Mr. Rush Limbaugh, said he did not want President Obama to succeed. He is the daddy of this Republican Congress."
Limbaugh responds to Carville: "The difference between Carville and his ilk and me is that I care about what happens to my country. I am not saying what I say for political advantage. I oppose actions, such as Obama's socialist agenda, that hurt my country. I deal in principles, not polls. Carville and people like him live and breathe political exploitation. This is all a game to them. It's not a game to me. I am concerned about the well-being and survival of our nation. When has Carville ever advocated anything that would benefit the country at the expense of his party?"
Carville Gleefully Spouts off to Politico: "The television cameras just can't stay away from him. Our strategy depends on him keeping talking, and I think we're going to succeed." They've succeeded so much so that no one is talking about it anymore...
2006 Poll Among Democrats: 51% wanted him to fail.
And of course, not to be shot down by Limbaugh, Carville came out swinging like the Ragin' Cajun we know him to be with these parting words: "Thank God that I had the good sense to realize that the United States was at war and that changed everything. Once I found out that the country was at war, I said: Whatever I said, disregard it; it's inoperative."
"Unlike Mr. Limbaugh," he added, who "kept insisting that he wanted the president to fail at a time of war." Really Carville, we're at war?! Better fire up the presses and notify J-NO since they're not using the word "WAR" nor "TERROR" anymore...In fact the only war I've noticed lately is The Big O's PC War On Words...
Politico Chick
0 comments:
Post a Comment