Richardson Grok
Laughs and Points for Richardson
By Emily Esterson, 6-11-07
The latest CNN poll, released late Monday night, showed Bill Richardson has gained significant points since the June 3 debate in New Hampshire. According to CNN, the poll involved telephone interviews with 309 New Hampshire adults who plan to vote in the Democratic primary January 22, 2008. The poll’s margin of error was plus or minus 6 percentage points. While Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama also gained points, John Edwards has lost support. He’s now at 12 percent, with Richardson close behind at 10 percent. CNN notes that Richardson may have gained support during the debate because voters perceived him as decisive. CNN also wrote that 57 percent of New Hampshire Democrats noted the war in Iraq as a key deciding point.
If that’s the case, then Richardson’s his strong statement on Iraq Sunday night could have won over more voters. The El Paso Times, among other newspapers, picked up the Associated Press report of Richardson’s statement: “I would leave no troops in Iraq whatsoever. The difference between me and the other candidates is, they would leave troops there indefinitely, and I would not,” Richardson told the report on Late Edition on CNN.
Forbes.com reports that the newest Bill Richardson ad, along with the other two in the “job interview” series, appear to be working, or at least worthy of a chuckle. Since he started advertising, the website says, Richardson’s poll points have risen, but he’s yet to break into the top three. The ad, which is set in a nondescript office setting and uses the same “job interview” setup as the other two, makes the “questionable claim” that New Mexico has done more about global warming than any other state.
Even presidential candidates are talking about Paris Hilton. Richardson praised a judge’s decision Monday to send Paris back to the clink. And if Paris ever moved to New Mexico, she’d have to install an ignition interlock system; earlier this year the state passed legislation requiring convicted drunk drivers to install the device, even if they move here from Hollywood.
And speaking of driving and Hollywood, Richardson wasn’t not exactly preaching to the converted when he touted light rail to car-crazy Californians. Richardson promised, if elected, a partnership to build out the Los Angeles’ light rail system, but didn’t offer details on how such a massive project would be funded.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
I am very glad that more and more people seem to recognize the importance of Richardson's breakthrough regarding the Bush Adminstration’s abjectly failed Iraq policy. These failures have impacted almost every phase of American foreign policy, which has based more on military power than traditional diplomacy for the past six years. Richardson’s effectiveness is even clearer now, with Lieberman threatening to use nuclear weapons on Iran. I find this posturing and blustering to be totally absurd and even dangerous; because of my extensive studies of the horrendous effects of nuclear weapons on the health of the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, called “hibakusha” in Japanese.
I strongly agree with Richardson’s overall focus on diplomacy, and putting economic sanctions on Iran. I agree especially his innovative idea put forth during the New Hampshire debates. There has been a general silence among nations vis-à-vis China’s ghastly atrocities in the human rights realm, and not just about China and Darfur, but especially toward Tibetans. China has constructed in Tibet dozens of prisons which, for Tibetans, are exactly like Auschwitz and Dachau.
I posited the same idea in 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, in correspondence to His Holiness, the Dalai Lama, and to many heads-of-state, that the moral indignation of the nations in the Olympics in Beijing in 2008 could be harnessed into at least the threat of a boycott. To be effective, this could be perhaps worded more diplomatically. During the debate, both Senator Edwards and Senator Biden clearly agreed with this point by Richardson.
Make no mistake: this is probably the last chance in human history to do anything constructive about Tibet, to prevent henceforth the genocidal treatment of Tibetans remaining in Tibet, which has since 1959 seen 1.2 million Tibetans killed. This totals, roughly 20% of the entire population of Tibet. American political powers could decline to put to use what little remains of our powers of moral suasion in the world at large, and we could to once again docilely capitulate to dim-witted politicians who say that the Olympics are only about sport, and not about politics, and such claptrap as “a boycott would unfairly punish the athletes.” Then we would be no better than the many nations who were oblivious to the growing obviousness of the genocide of Jews in Europe before and during World War II.
Actually, the USA was for many years totally oblivious in this regard, whether you blame Roosevelt or anti-Semitics in the State Department, all of which is thoroughly documented in Arthur Morse’s book, While Six Million Died. In that light, we think Richardson is on the right track! The case is even stronger, when you consider the dead pets and the poisoned cold medicines and toothpaste from China. Those considerations are just not “about politics”: that was life and death for many, including at least 100 dead, mostly children, in Panama!
News: In what may be its most audacious Olympic act yet, China’s Ministry of Public Security has issued an incredible directive that lists 43 categories of “unwanteds” who are to be investigated and barred from the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Pariah groups include: - eerily vague “key individuals in ideological fields” - “overseas hostile forces” - “counterrevolutionary”
figures - the Dalai Lama and all affiliates - members of “religious entities not sanctioned by the state” (e.g., Roman Catholics) - “individuals who instigate discontentment toward the Chinese Communist Party through the Internet,” - and even certain types of “disabled” persons. Members of the Falun Gong would be barred, as would be “family members of deceased persons” killed in “riots” — a euphemism for events such as the Tiananmen Massacre — and Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang province, which the regime brands “national separatists.” Only at the very bottom of the directive does it identify “violent terrorists” and members of “illegal organizations” as
targets for investigation and possible barring.
Respectfully,
Stephen Fox,
I do agree the movement by China against Tibet is a bit secreative
and the commissioner of the ganmes have vowed to move again several things including dirty Taxi's, and dirty Potties..
Will excutions n the streets be tolerated in Beijing?
This super=Power China floods the Americas with goods because of the low wage amounted work force..and its good relations to get good with China..well maybe this ex-ambassor Richardson may know what he is talking about when forgeign policy... involved..Bueno-viendos