Carville: I Meant to Burn Richardson

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and Democratic firebrand James Carville exchanged op-ed pieces today in the Washington post, ostensibly regarding Richardson's endorsement of Barack Obama for President, and Carville's characterization of Richardson as "Judas" for doing so. Richardson:

Led by political commentator James Carville, who makes a living by being confrontational and provocative, Clinton supporters have speculated about events surrounding this endorsement and engaged in personal attacks and insults.

While I certainly will not stoop to the low level of Mr. Carville, I feel compelled to defend myself against character assassination and baseless allegations.

Carville:

So, when asked on Good Friday about Richardson's rejection of the Clintons, the metaphor was too good to pass by. I compared Richardson to Judas Iscariot. (And Matthew Dowd is right: Had it been the Fourth of July, I probably would have called him Benedict Arnold.)

I believed that Richardson's appointments in Bill Clinton's administration and his longtime personal relationship with both Clintons, combined with his numerous assurances to the Clintons and their supporters that he would never endorse any of Sen. Hillary Clinton's opponents, merited a strong response.

This is too much fun for one guy to have. After the jump, I spoke to Jim earlier, I'll give you the high points, and I'll explain why Keith Olbermann might owe me an apology, and I will render a decision in this verbal prize-fight that (local TV anchor voice) might surprise you.Okay, a little quick background. On a Clinton conference call last week, I asked Howard Wolfson 3 or 4 times if he thought Carville should apologize for the Judas remark, at one point asking the follow-up, "If Richardson is Judas in this analogy, whom does that make Senator Clinton?" From The New York Observer:

And after three attempts by AOL reporter Tommy Christopher, Wolfson said that James Carville should speak for himself about whether he regrets comparing Bill Richardson to Judas, but, added, "If I had said it, I would apologize."

So, I called Mr. Carville today to see what he had to say about it, especially Wolfson's tacit demand for an apology. Now, Carville and I are both on record as saying that the serial apologies in this campaign have been ridiculous, and that people ought to toughen up a little. I only asked Howard about the Judas comment because he was really having a go at General Merrill McPeak for his Joe McCarthy comment. Here are a few choice quotes from our exchange:

Tommy Christopher: In your op ed today, first of all, you credited Keith Olbermann with the line, "So if he's Judas in this analogy, who's Jesus?" I just wanted to let you know, that was my line, I asked Howard that at the conference call.

James Carville: (laughs) Well, sorry, I didn't mean to give him credit, (necessarily)

TC: I wanted to get your comments on...

JC: I have never spoken out against any of Obama's supporters, Bobby Casey, Daschle, we're all friends, but considerin' the relationship with the Clintons, this (Richardson) was a special case that merited a special response. It was intended to cause him pain, and I think it did, it burned him.

JC: Look, this campaign ain't dirty, this is nothing. If the Obama campaign thinks the Republicans are going to leave him alone, they're livin' in a dream world.

TC: Sure, I get that, but the thing I really had a problem with was hitting him with the Commander in Chief thing, which I think hurts both of them.

JC: Well, I can't say anything about that.

Wow. My finest hour. I left James Carville speechless.

Well, not really. We talked for a few more minutes about the state of the Democratic Party vis a vis cojones. I like Carville's style, just not his DLC-style politics. Here's hoping they let him loose on McCain and Gingrich once this nomination is settled.

As for the aforementioned prize-fight? A Mike Tyson-style knockout for Carville. Here's the thing. I agree with Richardson, he did the right thing in endorsing Obama, but Carville's characterization, although colorful and hyperbolic, was apt. His relationship with the Clintons, combined with the fact that he holds great influence with Hispanic voters, a key Clinton bloc, made his endorsement of Obama that much harder a punch.

Plus, does he really think President Clinton had nothing better to do on Super Bowl Sunday? I know if it was me, I would have been at the Maxim party or something. Richardson traded on that relationship for years, and although I give him the benefit of the doubt that his decision to endorse Obama was sincere, even he acknowledges he knew a storm was going to come. Governor Richardson needs to stop whining about it and take his lumps.