James Carville is an idiot, Part 2

First of all, I should clarify that I don't really think that James Carville is an idiot. He's obviously a very intelligent man, and I am very glad that he is on my team (at least in terms of party). But I want to expand a bit on my earlier post. I think his comment about Richardson was idiotic because it reinforces what many people are saying about the Clintons: it's all about them. They put their interests ahead of everyone and eveyrthing else. Calling a former colleague who supports Obama "Judas" and justifying it in terms of loyalty makes that blatant. I'm still glad I supported and worked for Bill Clinton in the 1990's. But it is increasingly clear that people like Andrew Sullivan are right: you are with them or you are against them.

James Carville is an idiot

James Carville wrote in the WaPo recently about his description of Bill Richardson as "Judas" for not supporting the Clintons. He's unrepentant - Richardson is a traitor, pure and simple. He does add some classic Ragin' Cajun flavor:

Heck, I give myself some credit for managing to get the Clinton and Obama campaigns to agree on something -- that neither wanted to be associated with my remarks.

He is personally deeply loyal to the Clintons, which is perfectly appropriate - they made him. And, at the very least, Richardson could have kept his mouth shut: "Silence on his part would have spoken loudly enough."

For Carville, it's pretty straightforward: "I believe that loyalty is a cardinal virtue."

Fine. Nothing wrong with loyalty. But Carville is a political operative, not an elected official. And for someone holding an elected post, I think the loyalty should first go to the three c's: country, conscience, and constituents. Richardson's loyalty to the Clintons is superseded by his loyalty to America, his principles, and what he believes is the best for the people of his state. If James Carville can't handle that kind of complex political calculation, maybe he should keep his mouth shut.