My Favorite Bible Verse

My favorite part of the debate last night between the democratic presidential primary debate was "which is your favorite bible verse". Even more fun was how it was reported. Here is NBC Reporter Chris Matthews on Bill Richardson's response:

"And what about Bill Richardson? He didn't even know what to say !"

For the record, gentle myDD'r,  here is what Bill Richardson actually said, in his direct and simple  response to the question:

"(My favorite Bible Verse is) the Sermon on the Mount -- Social justice and equality. "

These are the guys, by the way, who were sent out to find something silly to write about in the past three months. Funny how those neat quotes can come from a seasoned diplomat.  Who has a history of the deliverable.  

Ok, I need to vent. Its about Kucinich and Gravel (sp?).  Anyone who advocates lowering the voting age to sixteen in the same breath as alcohol standards, deserves to stand hand in hand with the guy who claimed that personal bankruptcy is "sticking it to the man". This is simply not kosher.  Sorry, I just wanted to get that off my chest.

But hey, I don't know. Did I miss anything?  :)

There's more...

Lehrer News Hour / Bill Richardson

Tonight as fate would have it I lit up for the first time in almost 9 years a new cable connection. I decided to get a DSL line and it came with a cable bundle, so I thought what the heck.

I am used to playing with rabbit ears to catch the Lehrer News Hour (my mainstay). But tonight, Governor Richardson was there clear as a bell. I was pretty darn surprised.  

It began to dawn on me halfway throught the really , really nicely clear and static-free interview , where I didn't have to adjust the rabbit ears once - that the Governor was talking about unifying a deeply divided country.

I thought about that for a minute. You see, I live in the land of the conservative white man. Alot of these souther GOP  won't identify with the groups that are doing something about unwinding the mother. But they are fed up. This I promise you.

Now for my money, it  just doesn't seem to make sense to have the worst commander in chief in known history up there and the so called mil bloggers still rallying around his party. Honestly to me thats the seeds of division to have these people out there still waving the elephant flag, but hey. There they are.

What is the quality of someone who can unify? Is he a big personality that just waves the right color flag? Or is he someone who can understand the calculus and really bring people to the table.

I thought I saw the guy who could do that, on the Lehrer news hour. Whats more, It suddenly dawned on me that this is someone who can build a really great cabinet.  And he will announce his cabinet in the General, right after primary?

Has this ever been done before.. could it be... transparency in a candidate? Gasp..

What will they think of next, honesty in government?

There's more...

Richardson and the Map

I would like to open up a discussion about what  electoral map would look like in the fall of 2008. Given that America has chosen only two sitting senators in its entire history, to become president - I decided it might make sense to look at a Richardson candidacy and see how it plays across the crucial, high electoral vote states relative to the shifting senate map.

As we know, the house and senate are up to gain more seats for the Dems. The crucial advantage, being a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.  Right now, the Webb amendments that would have helped the situation in Iraq were torpedoed by the republican slight minority (predictably enough).  And although
the house plays by different rules, even there we see trouble with bush republicans. Pelosi is draining the swamp.

There are three regions I think would play well. The southwest, where Richardson is popular (having been elected by the widest margin of victory in his state's history).  And, speaking as one from the dirty south - I do think he will play well in many states in the sunbelt.  And he plays well enough in the midwest. New Mexico has a kind of rugged character that way. IMHO the seats in play - Domenici (who is up to his eyeballs in the Attorney General Scandal) (NM), Maine, Minnesota, and Oregon are all favored by a Richardson coattail.

Now the defended seats, in Louisiana, and South Dakota, are not harmed, in my view, by having someone on the ticket who is not Hillary. Don't get me wrong. I like Hillary, and as a small businessman I would be ecstatic to see the whole health care thing worked out (honestly, I do think that is a good signature issue for her). But in the Red states, she will have a massive campaign launched against her and the GOP is praying she will get the nomination so they can sharpen up the old propaganda machine and use it all against her. Richardson would blindside them. Trust me. The GOP is all set to battle Hillary down there in the south. She has very little pull there. The GOP will count the south as their base, and The Louisiana seat will be harder to battle for. As will be South Dakota (same rural effect).  There is a character I find appealing in Richardson, that I believe will play well in the rural areas.  And I guess we all know the lesson about how to surprise your enemy.

Truly, victory in Iraq or any strong push forward there would upend alot of plans, except in my view Richardsons. After all, he is telling everyone we are selling the Iraqi government short and we should let them take over.  McCain is trying to make the GOP side look like victory depends on troop levels. Richardson and others are turning the Dem side of this equation into a logical and healthy discussion about whether or not a tripartite entity is a win there, and as usual, contrasts the GOP use of force in favor of diplomacy.Its a strong argument in the south, still. And in many red states. Who for better or worse, will likely decide, again, the election. Just as those voters in Ohio did last time.

IMHO  a diplomat in the white house will go a long way in fixing the damage done by a previous governor of Texas that chose force over diplomacy.

I think Richardson would help the map for everyone. I see alot of purple on the map this year. There are safe democratic seats all over the map, and the new territory seems to be solidly along the lines of New Mexico and the Govenor's potential strength. Of course I am vaguely aware there are other candidates in the race, and they might have their own effect on the map. (see poll) What do you think?

There's more...

How to end the war in one easy vote.

A primary goal for me, as a voter, is to find a way to end the war. In my ideal case, the war ends with some kind of democratic solution for Iraq, in which they can find their voice and stabilize their country.  

Bill Richardson met and , more importantly , successfully negotiated with Saddam Hussein. Most of the Iraq warlords are miniature versions of the same.

His plan for complete withdrawal can sufficiently shift the politics of Iraq and its neighbors to break the deadlock that has been killing so many people for so long. It is also elegant, and has massive red state appeal. Most people understand a losing bet when they see one. And they know the smartest thing to do is just walk away from the table.

The other candidates do offer a plan, to withdraw slowly.
I just wanted to offer an historical precedent to such plans.
President Richard Nixon chose such a strategy, in my view due at least in part to the political influence of (surprise) Texas contractors that were making money out of it. (the GI's nicknamed them "burn and loot",  you know them as "haliburton").

Energetic diplomatic plans, backed by a president with real world diplomatic expertise, will result in an early stage victory. As we have seen from the Petraeus hearings, there is a building consensus that a unity government in Iraq is not the best way to go, and Bill Richardson's original tripartite plan shows the most promise. Although our diplomatic efforts in Iraq still maintain that we should try to foster this unity government, they acquiesce it is so far behind its benchmarks that we must keep our optimism "under control".

So here's my way I am going to end the war, with what will save American money, lives and our foreign policy standing - I am going to vote for Bill Richardson.  

There's more...

Chris Bowers on Bill Richardson

This interesting quote came from former myDD regular, Chris Bowers.. the 'question' I believe he is referring to is a simple one, that is now being reviewed for inclusion in the upcoming debate, that will be sponsored by Univision. Its a question that I believe goes something like this "How many troops will you leave behind, in Iraq?" . I posted earlier that I believe this question should be included and asked, of the candidates, at the debate - and I agree with Chris:


I applaud Richardson's efforts on this front, just as I applauded MSNBC when they attempted to get straight answers from candidates on how many troops they intend to leave in Iraq if they become President. However, if my experience on this front is any indication, even if this question is asked at the Univision debate, in all likelihood no one except Richardson and Biden will answer the question (Kucinich and Gravel might, since it is hard to predict what they do). The question will be labeled hypothetical, and the response will be that they will listen to the commanders on the ground. And then, the debate will move on to the next question.

The more I think about this dodge from Clinton, Obama, and Edwards on how many troops they intend to leave in Iraq, the angrier I become. Why is an inquiry into how many troops they intend to leave in Iraq a hypothetical question not worthy of an answer, but inquiries into how much their health care plans will reduce the cost of insurance premiums a hypothetical question worthy of prominently displaying an answer to on your website?

He was my second favorite here at myDD. (Jon is my first!). :) What do you think? (poll included !) Is  an inquiry into how many troops they intend to leave in Iraq a hypothetical question not worthy of an answer? Like Lilo said  to Stitch .. "It's all you!"

There's more...

Progressive Dialogue

In 2004, we had a guy named Howard Dean that pretty much lit a fire under everyone. He was like Hemmingway, everyone was either trying to be like him, or exactly not like him.  The reason he was interesting, to me at least, was that he spoke truth to power. His simple observation regarding the Iraq war, was and is a real driver for change.  The GOP prepared their weapons for someone else, and when he came along, they scrambled to catch up. His was a progressive agenda. The progressive dialogue, thanks to his candidacy, in 2004, was strengthened immeasurably.

The progressive dialogue that is going on now is fairly weak.  I think we've all noticed this. Dean was truly an outsider. As we all know, a massive front loading of the primaries this year  has been designed into place to keep the insurgents out. It will be all over by New Hampshire. Everyone seems to acquiesce this.

I am a numbers guy, and I could really go to town on the polls. And I will. But first I want to see clearly. After all, the Dean candidacy taught me  that polls aren't votes.  Iowa's caucus system handed a come-from-behind candidate the nomination on election day.

I guess what I'm driving at, is that being progressive means to me means at least partially trying to have a dialogue about it. the primary might take us, to get that done. There is a sense of independence about the progressive dialogue that I seek; it is  to me, the defining element of it all.

After all, I am not sure quite why no one is really saying this but isn't it obvious that the sort of muted tone here has a lot to do with the fact that Lobbyist money is now flowing into the winning side?

IMHO Dean's candidacy - and in particular his ability to articulate then-unpopular positions, that really resonated with a large base of people - on such issues as the war, are indeed  relevant and shaping dialogue today.  What candidate took a stance that really helps define the differences between the parties? Or carries your progressive thought, or idea to its logical conclusion, in government?

I can only seem to find that dialogue with Bill Richardson. I am not clear how the populism of Clinton, and Edwards makes progressivism any more real. I have been a past fan of Obama but he seems to be really all about playing it safe.  The other candidates are already under the bus.

The most radical and clarifying moment for me, this season, to me, is the statement that the only solution for Iraq is full withdrawal.  

To this day, I can still almost see Dean , at the moment he reportedly decided to run - standing there in his kitchen, holding a copy of the paper, and saying to himself "I can do better than this".  I really like the idea that someone can head out there into the presidential primaries and speak truth to power. And stand up for real change.

The point of this post, wasn't to wave a flag. This election is not a cutest baby contest. These are all good candidates on the democratic side. The GOP is toast. The point is, I was hoping we could use this post as an open thread to ferret out just a few statements and stances that really get you going.  The rubber will hit the road here, pretty soon. Did you hear or see anything this season that moved you? What stood out for you?
Has anyone, really caught fire from a progressive standpoint?

There's more...

Progressivism - A perspective. Yours?

This is from Second Life, a metaverse that I occasionally inhabit in various forms - and a great way to talk to people from all over the world. I was speaking to a gentleman from Australia...

[4:54]  Turner Singh: What does America look like, to you. That is. Does it seem to be a comfortable democracy?
[4:54]  Turner Singh: What would an aussie think of us - at this stage in our evolution.
[4:55]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: I am waiting for the next American revolution
[4:55]  Turner Singh: ok.
[4:55]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: Your political system has become  corrupt ...
[4:56]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: Your politicians either have to be rich..
[4:56]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: or know a lot of rich people
[4:56]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: So, they are exposed to big business
[4:56]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: and, if there is no such thing as a free lunch,  ...
[4:57]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: pay back when in office
[4:57]  Turner Singh: .. understood.
[4:57]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: How can anyone claim a mandate , with about 60% voter turnout?
[4:57]  Turner Singh: ah.. interesting point. all good points.
[4:58]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: I am most fascinated by America
[4:58]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: I am sure glad we are on the Americans side ... but at the same time ...
[4:58]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: I am stunned that the richest country in the world ...
[4:59]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: has such a poor track record for its poor
[4:59]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: Give me you poor huddled masses ...and I will piss on them
[4:59]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: (Lou Reed)
[4:59]  Turner Singh: velvet underground.
[4:59]  Turner Singh: go . on.
[5:00]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: So (this is an opportunity rarely given to an Aussie ... I am more complimentary to Americans,I assure you)
[5:00]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: Your health care sucks!
[5:00]  Turner Singh: lol amen.
[5:00]  Turner Singh: >:)
[5:01]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: Your gun laws are insane!
[5:01]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: Your Reaganomics ... of reducing taxes to rich ... and let it filter down ..
[5:01]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: has simply trashed your working poor ...
[5:02]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: And I cannot believe they are not angry!
[5:02]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: Another interesting feature  is that your politics is not divided as rich vs. poor
[5:03]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: and I don't get it! ...How so?
[5:03]  Turner Singh: ok well my goal here was to capture your thoughts.
[5:03]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: It is about progressive vs conservative
[5:03]  Turner Singh: aha!
[5:03]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: What do you think? Have I made a fool of myself?
[5:04]  Turner Singh: what does - progressive. mean you you.
[5:04]  Turner Singh: if you could summarize it, in one sentence.
[5:04]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: Abortion ... gay rights ... environmentally sustainable ideas ...
[5:05]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: These are examples  .... 'Having a social consience'
[5:05]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: Caring for the less politically powerful .. .the poor,etc
[5:05]  Turner Singh: ko
[5:05]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: All of these
[5:05]  Turner Singh: alright.
[5:05]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: Why do you ask all this?
[5:05]  Turner Singh: ah. sorry just one more q. then I will let you know. if thats ok?
[5:06]  Turner Singh: alright.
[5:06]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: OK
[5:06]  Turner Singh: eine kleine gedankenexperiment ja?
[5:06]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: Huh?
[5:06]  Turner Singh: ( a thought experiment) ..
[5:07]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: eine kleine  nachtmusik
[5:07]  Turner Singh: ... lol.
[5:07]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: OK - thought experiment
[5:07]  Turner Singh: right.
[5:07]  Turner Singh: ..... So.. suppose .. I have given you the power. to create a golem.
[5:07]  Turner Singh: it is made entirely out of clay.
[5:07]  Turner Singh: it is 10 feet tall.
[5:07]  Turner Singh: now.
[5:07]  Turner Singh: this golem's name is "progressive"
[5:07]  Turner Singh: and
[5:08]  Turner Singh: if you write an action, upon a scroll ... and place it in its mouth
[5:08]  Turner Singh: it will come alive and do one thing, in America for you. whatever it is.
[5:08]  Turner Singh: anything.
[5:08]  Turner Singh: but only that thing you write up on that scroll.
[5:08]  Turner Singh: what would you write there.
[5:08]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: This takes some thought
[5:08]  Turner Singh: k i will be back in a minute. (flies over to Burning Man)
[5:09]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: The statue of liberty statement comes to mind
[5:11]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: "Let us restore the Golden Age of America ... with a sense of common wealth - for common good"
[5:11]  theGreatandTerrible  Oz: How does that sound?

..
It stops me occasionally to find out what real people from other countries think of what we have going on here. The stakes are even higher, sometimes, when we all realize that genetic engineering is just around the corner and society will be up-ended by it all.  The progressive movement seems to be about, at least in my view - trying to get us in a position where we can deal with more issues, in a manner that costs less, and with greater respect for all.

What would you say? If progressivism could be summed up into a single sentence, what would it be?

There's more...

Richardson versus Rove

Apart from the fact that Governor Richardson has delivered  for New Mexico,  taken a pioneering stance on the war, and other issues - I thought it fair to ask the question, which candidate best deletes the instilled methodologies and practices of Karl Rove, either in campaign or office.  Viz. What would a celebrity deathmatch,  between Karl Rove and Bill Richardson?

Thanks to Rove's recent resignation, and of course, the GOP finally waking up to the fact that fact that he was given a candidate opposition in 2000 that had refused to associate himself with one of the most successful presidencies in the history of the United States, and had "Joementum" Joe Lieberman as the running mate - he was unable to deliver a knockout blow. I imagine, since he's the title champ -  Rove would get to walk around first, in the ring, holding the 2004 belt up in the air. Crickets. And then, both to their respective corners.

In the red, on the right. Weighing in at.. oh forget it. You don't want to know.. Karl Rove, the "architect" , would stand in the corner. At his side would be his trainer and friend, his grandfather  - wearing the  extensive, comfortable dealings with the Third Reich that are his public family history.

Rove would open up with partisanship, maybe use sexual orientation as a political weapon, and then, if he really was desperate he might even resort to breaking and entering (at least what we know of from his police record). And finally, he'll deliver the "catch phrase". Maybe it will be "freedom fries" Ok so maybe freedom fries wasn't his idea, I know he will deny it.  But we all know he tried to remove the blue christmas ornaments from the white house christmas tree. We have the negatives.

In the blue, coming in hard from the left, and striking at the center of the ring, Bill Richardson - Opening up with a workable 1-2-3 Iraq solution roundhouse kick.  200 billion dollars would slams back into American bank accounts!   He'd then back it up with a shattering early round voices against the war (2003 - three years early),  deliver a strong Homeland Security department(2002) and then maybe he'll reach over and pull the towel off the towelheaded  Osama Bin Laden (attempted to capture him by extradtion, 1998, negotiating with the Taliban). The crowd will go wild.

So the next round, would be campaign tactics. Rove is dangerous here. Did the opposition ever expect  the attack ad to bounce off , and a positive and extremely competitive Richardson campaign message re-define the tone of the entire campaign?

Rove would be flying his man over the Katrina death zone, and then staging photo ops with firemen while they're trying to work there. Then he would follow up with a smothering "sign a loyalty oath, to participate in this debate" whenever his boy gets out there.  Richardson, on the other hand, actually came down to Atlanta and met people. He sets up town halls. He goes to Moveon.org Town hall debates.  Rove would be fast with his hands, trying to select the best questions that would set up his deadly "catch phrase" pollster knockout.

But Bill Richardson would take it like a man and straight from the floor. If you go to any of his campaign events, I bet you'd find this out. Rove would reel back, having spent his last 20 million dollar punch and connecting with nothing. All of his best punches were sized for hitting Hillary down south of the belt. And rrrrrRove is down for the count. The decision is for Richardson.  Birds sing! Puppies Dance! Cheney admits Iraq was a mistake! (click the shirt for a free prize)

I honestly feel its a good metric. IMHO Rove's tactics and especially his ability to tie everything to corporate campaign contributions have changed the american political landscape. And as Nancy Pelosi said, there is a huge swamp to be drained. (still!)(hey she's off to a good start!). Unique among all other candidates, Richardson has changed the tone and content of this race , in my view, with his position to remove all troops from Iraq and then following up with a series of sharp campaign ads to back up the idea that the presidency actually includes , among many other things, diplomacy. Who here, really believes that Bill Richardson would be the kind of President that would not be able to figure out which door to open, during a press conference?  This was , or is a gedankenexperiment meant to test how well your candidate can obliterate the atmosphere of partisanship in DC. Try it with your candidate, it might help? Just speaking as a person from the south, be careful with this if you are an HRC fan,  I think the opposition was planning to hit a girl this year. >.)

And actually, the real reason I would go is so that I could see Bill Richardson wrap Karl Roves head up in the ropes, like a twist tie, and then flip him out over the crowd like a pudgy zeppelin.

Whats interesting, is that the the race in Iowa is tightening.  This might mean that one or all of the other candidates could do the same? Tag Team?   ... Did I miss any good moves here?

There's more...

Sam Nunn - Independent Bid?

Democrat Sam Nunn has been making sounds that he will run in the 2008 general as an independent.  He is a moderate, a skilled populist.  A generally cool headed individual.

IMHO Sam is a different sort of centrist, that Joe Lieberman. Although both senators have crossed party lines on several occasions, Nunn has accomplished much in his career regarding National Security. So much so, in fact, that he was often discussed as a potential 2004 running mate for John Kerry, before John Edwards proved that "objects in the rearview mirror are closer than they appear".

Nunn is likely to change the political landscape of the south if the 2008 season starts up with him on the ticket as an independent. I am not sure how. But it will be different. He is popular in the red states.  He's got a senate record spanning 24 years, he's a strongly independent voice and he's on the record being critical of the Bush administration - a stance that now plays widely.  What do you think would happen if this Democrat, throws his name in the hat? Would it change the political landscape of the south?

There's more...

Richardson Dark Horse

I lived in New Mexico when I got out of college and in that twilight between college and grad school. In my chosen field that meant no money and even less exposure to the world at large. I had just spent the last three years of my life (a car accident laid me up in my freshman year)  at the library.

The first thing that struck me about New Mexico, during Bill Richardson's tenure there, was that it truly seemed to be going places. Things just worked.  The trains, for lack of a better expression, ran on time. We are not the most political animals fresh out of college (Jon Singer excluded) and so my introduction to politics came mostly from a small community on a high mesa.  Being that my volvo kind of .. died.. there, I did alot of walking. In fact, I walked to Taos, NM. once.  I got to walk past Indian Reservations. There are alot of intensely creative people in Santa Fe, Angel Fire and Taos. They don't always expect someone to walk up out of the desert and say hi.   And where I was walking, you would meet the entire spectrum all the way down from the poorest of the poor to the most interesting artists, the most gentle  and wonderful people and also I will be damned if not the most dangerous. There's something about the desert that really attracts the ... ahem.. where was I.. So of course, I used all of this political knowledge to lobby for a bike trail in my neighborhood here in Atlanta. (hey, it boosted my home value up like, 100 percent). So thats my political background in a nutshell.

Oh and while we're on the subject, I'm too lazy to listen to any campaign manager. These guys do send me mails, and have been sending me mail even some personally for the past six years but I tend to search out the mails written by members of the opposite sex then put the mail from the campaign manager off to the side there and "get around" to reading them. As in. Never.

And just so we're straight, in my home the term 'bush republican' is synonymous with the word 'bozo'.

And by that I don't mean republican, or conservative. After all, I'm writing from the perspective of a small businessman, broadcasting to you straight from the land of the conservative white man. Cobb County Georgia, USA. The place that brought you Bob Barr, Newt Gingrich, and Phil Gingrey. And the pajama clad bloggers that launched "Memogate" and ended the career of Dan Rather (as if). Phil was there at the cookout at my stables a month or so ago, and my horse didn't seem to mind him being there at all. So just so you know, my motto is. If it doesn't scare my horse. Then it doesn't scare me. In my six years of blogging, the one place that I appreciate most is MyDD. (boot licking toady comment follows). MyDD is +the+ most objective, cleanest political blog in the entire blogosphere and my absolute favorite place to hang out during +any+ election. This place doesn't reduce it all down to bullet lists.  Being selected to author here on Thursday for what in my view,  for the  progressive candidate in the list this year,  is a great honor, - and I'd like to thank all the people that I bludgeoned to near death, to make this possible. They say the bleeding stops in about two hours. I hereby warrant that no animals or young republicans were (permanently) harmed in the writing of this blog post.  

Now, the reason I know Bill is the Progressive Candidate is that I have seen this four-time nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize, DNC Chair, Bill Richardson in action. New Mexico, under Governor Richardson - prospered. This is a personal statement for me as well. So I made my way down the torturously long list of candidates in this race (Clinton, Obama, Richardson, and Edwards) (did I miss anyone?)  ...  and I short listed Richardson from pure genetic memory.  

Now part of it all for me is also First Debate. This is where the hunt begins. Sure enough, in the first real debate - the Moveon.org Town Hall -  Richardson skies it. He blows past the field and leaps out of his startup tier. Thats what a dark horse does.  At that debate I learned Richardson had the nerve to go for a complete withdrawal plan. No other candidate had that initiative. This was a moment for me. Its on youtube as well. It reminded me of that famous line - "What I want to know is, why are so many Democrats supporting George Bush's war in Iraq".  Do you remember that one? That line changed American politics.

I call these types of moments "Black Swans". Moments you don't expect. It communicates to you tha the guy knows where he's going. It speaks of not only executive but diplomatic experience, the same kind that helped get North Korean nuclear talks back on track.    Richardson locked me from that moment on. I think up until that point I was for a guy whose name began with the letter "O".. can't remember ... the memory is fading..

Now there are contrasts to Dean's insurgent campaign. The most apparent of which is that Richardson's politica ads are the best of the entire year. Actually in my view, the past ten years (I just don't go for pictures of wolves roaming around in the forest - you get a different perspective when you meet them there yourself). If you want to see any of these things, or for that matter, anything the Governor has been up to lately - just youtube "Bill Richardson".  IMHO they're clever. They don't burn you out. Iowans like them. This is important if you want to get elected, and Richardson is precisely where John Kerry was in '04 in Iowa right now - the primary is front loaded in a way that is unprecedented (this is by design, to try to keep insurgents out)and thanks to candidates like Richardson and Edwards, its an open contest. We are so early in the season anything can happen amongst the top four.

In Bill Richardson, we have someone who has the experience, is willing to take a gutsy stand.  He's got the right team to handle the media machine. So, thats the conclusion of this post. I am trying to state my assumptions and definitions here. All in all,  I would call Bill Richardson the very definition of a dark horse candidate. What I really want to know is what you think about the governor. I am a kind of border collie watchdog. I will head out there and bring stuff back for you. Maybe more than you want. I plan to  write about Bill's parallel to JFK (there are quite a few) and resume. But also the man. We seem to have a lot of "anti war" candidates this year - do we have any, "end the war" candidates? What do you think ?

There's more...

Diaries

Advertise Blogads