James Carville Calls For Democrats To Work With David Brock

440px-james_carville_1

We recently discussed the continued evolution of David Brock who went from attacking Hillary Clinton, then professing allegiance to Clinton and attacking her opponents like Bernie Sanders, then professing allegiance to Sanders and promising to attack his opponents.

In the last election, Clinton was attacked for her association with Brock who was viewed as reaching a new level of sleazy and vicious work. You may recall Bernie Sanders denouncing Clinton for her continued alliance with Brock and use of his controversial PAC organizations. Sanders referred to Brock as simple “scum” but Clinton refused to denounce Brock or to discourage Democrats from working with or contributing to his PACs. As we discussed, it turns out that even Clinton aides were disgusted by Clinton’s refusal to cut off Brock or to denounce his work. In the latest batch of Wikileaks, Neera Tanden, the President of Center for American Progress, allegedly emailed John Podesta that “I hope Hillary truly understands now how batshit crazy David Brock is.” That does not appear to be a problem for various Democrats donors and speakers who attended a recent Brock retreat or James Carville who has called for Democrats to embrace Brock. Carville was previously paid by Brock who raised millions after his conversion to a Democratic attack dog.  Carville dismissed Democrats who object to Brock’s vicious conduct and said that those who want to fight Trump without resorting to people like Brock are wearing “ideological chastity belts.”

 

Various Democratic operatives have stated anonymously that Brock was a hindrance and possibly unstable.  More importantly, they said that the millions raised by Brock was wasted as he funded various groups.  Brock is the founder of the media watchdog Media Matters for America and liberal super PACs American Bridge and Correct the Record.   Despite the many figures like Sanders denouncing Brock for his vicious and shadowy activities, all but one of the candidates currently running to chair the Democratic National Committee reportedly attended Brock’s retreat.

For his part, Carville declared Brock to be a necessary evil and brushed aside his tactics as even relevant to whether donors should embrace him.  Carville rejected the notion of Democrats seeking a break from Brock  and his tactics — the very break that Clinton herself refused to do before her defeat. Carville is quoted as saying

“Are they calling for purges? David has a really good relationship with a lot of donors and people who can help the party. If I were them, I would be thinking of ways I could work with David Brock, as opposed to having a tribunal determining the extent of party purity. I don’t think we need to walk around with ideological chastity belts.”

 

It will be hard for the Democrats to maintain that they are taking the moral high ground while funding people like Brock.  Once again, Sanders was popular because he represented a change in politics.  Clinton’s refusal to denounce Brock reinforced the widespread view that she was not truthworthy or principled.  Carville and Democratic donors however appear intent on staying with that strategy while denouncing Trump for his tactics.

 

What do you think?

61 thoughts on “James Carville Calls For Democrats To Work With David Brock”

  1. There is no Muslim ban. Out of 50 Muslim majority countries, there are 7 affected by the EO. The 7 are not listed in the EO – it refers back to a law Obama put in place. The 7 were probably suggested by the then-SOS (Clinton? Kerry? arrgh who can remember these days?)

    Saudi Arabia wasn’t on that Obama list. Then again, they were big contributors to the Clinton foundation. Gosh there are a lot of coincidences in politics.
    FFS.

      1. Don’t know if it is or not because Obama was blamed for killing a 16 year old in the same article. 🙂 Equal opportunity reporting….

      2. In all seriousness the article was about the drone strikes continuing and inflicting several casualties over the weekend. Among them was an 8 year old girl whose 16 year old brother was killed during a drone strike ordered by Obama’s administration.

    1. Trump killed an 8 year old girl in Tunisia this weekend and and she was not the only casualty. Just heard that Trump and Netanyahu are getting together to take action against Iran. So maybe it is not selective outrage now that the killing has begun under Trump. It is just outrage.

      1. “Trump killed an 8 year old girl in Tunisia…”
        ~+~
        What a completely ridiculous and asinine assertion “Joe”. So Donald Trump travelled to Tunisia to kill an eight-year-old child? What’s next? President Trump formed a caldera on Mount Vesuvius? Perhaps it might be good for you to consult with the rest of your “friends” and try to collectively arrive at a semblance of reason without erupting mindless rhetoric.

  2. One of the reasons Clinton lost, and there are a few-any one of which can be called, the reason, was that she was advised not to labor excessively on details pertaining to what she would do and how she would do it. She was advised to counter Trump’s sloganeering and vitriol with sloganeering and attacks of her own. The argument was that the voters were not equipped to follow the details. This created a change in how Clinton ran her campaign. Clinton started to play DDT and simply couldn’t pull it off. You can’t out DDT, DDT. More importantly the focus of DDT’s sloganeering and vitriol was toward the sort that wouldn’t have voted Democrat regardless. This was, perhaps, Clinton’s greatest mistake. If she had stayed the course and continued to explain, in some detail, the reasons why she would make the better President, at least 80,000 voters in three states might have had the mental resources to understand. As it turned out she fell on her face where it mattered most.

    When one looks back at the beginning of the Democratic primary between Sanders and Clinton one remembers the difference in the levels of anger and vitriol as compared with the Republican circus. This is the key issue regarding the future of this country, mindless anger and vitriol versus intelligence and attraction to detail and truth. Guys like Brock should be purged from the Democratic Party. Guys like Sanders should be sought out and cultured to repeat the campaign that would have trounced the idiot we received.

    Sanders was a tad too far to the left, a tad too removed from practicality, but much, much, closer to the middle than DDT. There are two years before the next chance comes along to staunch the bleeding of this disgusting open wound we have in the White House. The first task should be to purge the party of tabloid fodder of this disgusting and turncoat sort. Brock and the others that have embarrassed the party need to go. The focus should be on developing the ground support that would have made Sanders the President, if it were not for the people like Brock.

    There may not be enough Republican supporters with the brains to understand a dangerous megalomaniac when it comes along but in the entire country there surely must be enough voters to understand. Perhaps DDT will turn it around but after two weeks it appears that this may have been America’s biggest mistake ever. This mob makes Cheney look reasonable.

    1. Sanders was a tad too far to the left, a tad too removed from practicality,

      Total bs. Sanders was to the right of Dwight D. Eisenhower. He was “painted” too far to the left by ideologue’s like you who numbly march to the orders of the corporate brain wash -Democrat color. Hell they don’t even use two brain washes any more; too expensive and hard to offshore, just one with red or blue food coloring.

      1. As it turned out Sanders was not too far to the left and just the right temperature for the millenials who chose to stay home. Now they are out in massive numbers protesting the tangerine dictator. They are the future and the democratic party will be forced to chose candidates that appeal to this new crowd of protestors or lose.

          1. Okay, maybe I am overstating the case as of now. He is a wanna be dictator but is not quite competent enough to get it together. And then, they are those pesky protests….. For, now he is an authoritarian.

            1. Thank you Joe. Same question but replace dictator with authoritarian. What actions has this President taken in his first 10 days in office that would equate him to be an authoritarian? Is it possible you simply don’t recognize the actions of a President that seeks to “…faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”?

              This may be an inconvenient truth but not liking who is at the helm or the course the President has set DOES NOT disqualify him as President. It may disqualify that person from membership or support from those holding a certain worldview. The ONLY true measure of this President’s performance is his fidelity to the oath of office. The nanosecond he violates that oath then there will be more than just leftists or Democrats opposing his actions.

        1. Perhaps the millenials stayed home. However, the cockroaches came out and that is why DDT is President. This is a wake up call to citizens. The Democratic Party needs someone that cannot be confused with the sleaze and hypocrisy that it harbored and that has been eclipsed by the Republicans. The Democratic Party needs to purge the scum like Brock and design its program around the advantages of thinking progressively and resist even entering the ring with scum like DDT. That is why DDT is President. DDT beat Clinton when Clinton started plying DDT’s game. Nobody can out DDT.

          1. I will differ a bit. Yes, the bigots came out but they also had an assist from those that wanted relief from unemployment and high healthcare premiums, etc. The latter group is going to get further kicked to the ground by the oligarchy and will be open to someone new. The bigoted group will never leave him and are really digging the wall and the Muslim ban.

        2. Joe, re: “They are the future and the democratic party will be forced to chose candidates that appeal to this new crowd of protestors or lose.”

          You are WAAY more optimistic than I am. I think the Dems care more about their corporate donors. BUT I hope you are right and I am wrong =) Time will tell…

          1. The Trump presidency is certainly galvanizing them and where they go remains to be seen. One thing we do know is they they won’t be heading anywhere close to Trump and the republicans.

      2. This is 2017. Hold your breath, let the gray cells get repositioned. Now read and think, read and think, read and think. Sander’s solution to increasing student debt, making colleges free, is a ‘tad too far to the left’. ’nuff said?

      3. Total bs. Sanders was to the right of Dwight D. Eisenhower.

        I cannot figure out if you’re playacting or stupid.

    2. re: “When one looks back at the beginning of the Democratic primary between Sanders and Clinton one remembers the difference in the levels of anger and vitriol as compared with the Republican circus. ”

      YET the RNC convention was peaceful – the Repubs got behind their man even if they didn’t like him – they realized that the Donald had the support of the population. Contrast that to the DNC convention – protesters, scabs, turning off the lights, white noise machines. Blocking Nina Turner from speaking. and on and on. Bernie, like Trump had major enthusiasm and they chose to ignore that fact.

      So there was a major Demexit after the shenanigans and indies who would have voted for Sanders refused to get behind HRC.

      The party is continuing in a direction that we cannot and will not support – Pelosi, Schumer, Booker, Ellison and Warren are corporate shills. And they will try to destroy Tulsi Gabbard or any other candidate who challenges the system.

      1. Not sure you speak for those out protesting……You have been making fun of the resistance movement. They are the future and not young people like you and squeeky.

        1. Joe, yes I have been making fun of the “resistance” movement because I am pissed off. Those idiots walking around with their pink hats who refused to challenge the DNC and any of Obama’s many mis steps while he was in office. Most are protesting because they “lost” not because of any issues – where were they when the banks were bailed out and Holder put in “too big to jail” (translated “too wealthy to jail”, single payer was not on the table, indefinite detention was signed off on, the illegal invasions of Syria, Libya, the ousting of Zelayla in Honduras, pay for play at the Clinton Foundation etc etc.

          Indies criticize both the Reps and Dems when we don’t like their policy.

          You wanna know know how the indies think check out Tim Black, Jimmy Dore, HA Goodman, Jordan Chariton, Sane Liberal, Chris Hedges, etc.

          1. Chris Hedges was at the protest….Maybe people were too complacent about Obama but that it is the past. Also, the first march was largely about women and their reproductive freedom. Many of these women feel threatened by Trump and Pence’s views on women’s healthcare which are truly frightening. The protest over the weekend were also part of the resistance but had a different focus. Better late than never……

            1. Chris Hedges was at the protest…

              Does that make it better or worse?

          2. Good points Autumn. The Democats lazily generalize. Trump is quite possibly equally detested (quietly) in the Republican ranks, with the exception of McNuts–errrr McCain. Big showdown coming there. We’ll see how the team up goes. I expect a partial smackdown from Repubs, which will delight Democrats. This will have the effect of the oligarchy reeling control back in. Then the populace can put their blinders back on…

            1. Hopefully more republicans will do the right thing and speak up on the Muslim ban.

              1. I suspect many will, WHEN there is a ban on Muslims. Let’s put some common sense into what has taken place.

                When an agency of the government identifies a risk to public health and safety, what actions do you want them to take? I guess that depends on how widespread that risk is. If a Cessna crashes in Utah, we want the NTSB to identify what the cause of the crash was so that it is not repeated. If our immigration policy has holes in it to the point that the safety and security of our citizens is put at risk, we should expect our federal government to identify the root cause and make the necessary changes.

                The Affordable Care Act is a prime example of how the government can overreach in that regard. They identified a very small percentage of Americans that were without health insurance and they decided to disrupt health care insurance for the ENTIRE population. When it comes to public policy the Left doesn’t seem to care all that much about diagnosing an actual problem to determine the proper course of action. Problems for them are ideologically based; not constitutionally based. They seem to prefer the government have the surgical precision of a chainsaw.

                1. I think about 15% of the population was without insurance coverage, so, not small.

      2. “YET the RNC convention was peaceful – the Repubs got behind their man even if they didn’t like him – they realized that the Donald had the support of the population.” Autumn Your slip is showing

  3. Desperate hit the nail on the head. CNN is having one of their lame Town Hall shows w/ Nancy Pelosi. She’s 76, although she fights the signs of aging w/ the scalpel and Botox. Using baseball as a metaphor, they are an over the hill team w/ a weak minor league and only a few prospects.

    1. The king of orange is over the hill and so are most of his pale male cabinet. They may think diversity is an alternative shade of orange spray but they are wrong. This is the first administration with no hispanics in 30 years. Progress?

      1. He put men of accomplishment in his cabinet, men who had demonstrated their mettle in occupations with satisfactory operational measures of competence.

        Steny Hoyer apparently had some sort of suburban law practice at one time, but he’s been collecting government salaries for 54 years without ever serving in the military or passing a civil service examination. As for Pelosi, she’s testament to the power of family and personal connections. She may have been a schoolteacher 50-odd years ago. She’s been a patronage baby ever since. Her seat in Congress was all but bequeahed to her by Sala Burton, who’d succeeded her husband. As for Harry Reid, he managed to acquire a net worth of $6.7 million on four decades of politicians’ salaries (after about 9 years practicing law in Las Vegas, then a 3d tier city). Charles Schumer never practiced law and he hasn’t had a private sector wage since the summer job he had working for Kaplan. He was elected to public office at age 24 and has been there ever since. He’s 66. There’s one tu quoque defense of these cretins: the biographies of AM McConnell, Paul Ryan, Trent Lott, and Robert Dole.

    1. Chenrezik – David Brock works for George Soros. All he has to do is rebrand and move on.

  4. Every time I see the 50’s movie “The Thing” I almost always think of Carville. If I didn’t know that James Arness was the “Thing” I could swear.

    1. The Great Zambini – James Arness as an 8 foot carrot, what is not to like. 🙂

  5. Would not a more pertinent story be about the appointment of neo nazi Bannon to the National Security Council? The havoc he helped create this weekend was more than concerning.

  6. One word: “Graft”

    These people have neither Honor nor shame. As long as they remain in control it doesn’t matter the situation the party is in. If the DNC is in power they take credit for it being there. If in opposition, they claim they are necessary to return to power. It’s a racket I tell you.

    1. The Democratic Party had an opportunity last year to clean out the grafteurs and there is a bloc of Democratic voters sympathetic with that aim. They came up short.

      Now, look at the Democrats in Congress. Harry Reid, crook, retires, and they put in a vicious pure career pol as their floor leader. As for the House, the Democratic caucus is led by a woman born in 1940 with a deputy born in 1939. She has little or no employment history apart from political positions she’s held and has been in Congress since 1987. He’s been on public payrolls continuously since 1962 as a congressional aide, state legislator, and member of Congress, and apparently hasn’t practiced law in more than 40 years.

  7. “We recently discussed the continued evolution of David Brock who went from attacking Hillary Clinton, then professing allegiance to Clinton and attacking her opponents like Bernie Sanders, then professing allegiance to Sanders and promising to attack his opponents.
    ************************
    Brock feels strongly both ways and at the same time. Quite a feat.
    I hear an empty cab pulled up to the DNC headquarters and David Brock got out,

  8. David Brock must to sane. Media Matters is helping censor Facebook. How can a man who does that to find Fake News be called bats**t crazy?

  9. Newsflash: Stuart Symington, Hubert Humphrey, Eugene McCarthy, Edmund Muskie, George McGovern, Henry Jackson, Shirley Chisolm, Morris Udall, Frank Church, Paul Simon, and Paul Tsongas are dead. Jimmy Carter’s past 90, Michael Dukakis is 83, Gary Hart is 80, Jerry Brown is 78, Bernie Sanders is 75, Bob Kerrey is 72, Bill Bradley is 71. Only Brown and Sanders have held public office in the last 20 years. As for the Democratic Party’s commentariat, you have a few (Alan Dershowitz, Jerilyn Merritt, Mark Kleiman, Harold Pollack, Jeffrey Goldberg) who have actual principles which animate their remarks and not just improvisational talking points. Pollack (b. 1963) and Goldberg (b. 1965) are atypical in that they are alive and not eligible for Social Security.

    At its apex and center, the Democratic Party is a criminal organization. Those who argue on its behalf are commonly intellectual and moral frauds. Rank and file partisan Democrats traffick in dumb memes and Jon Stewart-type quips, and cannot be taken seriously. We live in a decadent age. The quality of the men and women born during the years running from 1928 to 1938 puts the succeeding cohorts to shame, and they weren’t even the Greatest Generation.

  10. Really Professor Turley.

    I haven’t even had breakfast yet and I have to look at James Carville’s mug.

    His resurrection or reappearance just concludes how anachronistic the current leaders of the democrats truly are.

  11. The number one progammer of the white identity secular progressive collective orders the various components to cooperate with the number one scum of the white identity secular progressive collective after hiding behind the mask of the former Democrat Party which is now controlled as far as I know largely anyway by African American Community.

    Comrade Carville aka St. James of Carville was first to ask the DNC ‘where’s the sacred ground’ reminding them that they are nothing more than components of a secular religion. His famous phrase is a rip off from Lenin and Hitler both “Anything done or said that promotes the party IS the truth.” When you look at this picture you are looking a true evil of the socialst fascist variety. He’s one of the classless societies ruling class along with ‘Yoda Lykoff’ what’s known as a party theoretician and just under George Soros. Probably the former Controller of the DNC. His former wife by the way is now a Libetarian.

    Like the rest of the extremist fascist of the National and Internationalist flavor he holds no real power especialy after the old Democrat Party imploded and then exploded. Might be a handler for Shumer and Pelosi two of the remaining fellow travelers.

    Unlike most of them don’t treat this as a well written page from a novel. Carville is the the real deal and very high up in the Progressives Politbureau.

  12. I hope the voters understand how batshit crazy the entire Democrat party is now, and that they vote accordingly in 2018.

    1. After two years with Trump one has to wonder if the moral high ground will have ceased to exist. We are certainly at the tipping point after one week.

      1. Well there’s a sample size one should trust. What moral bar has Trump crawled under this week? If possible, try to consider the rule of law and separation of powers in your response. Otherwise, it’s simply ideological and useless to any reasonable debate.

Comments are closed.