Thanks for offering your perspective on Gov. Richardson. I've been interested since I heard a few more politically knowledgable friends discuss him and then when Kari posted his ad a few weeks ago, I was further impressed. It's still early in the campaign -- I can't help but think there will be some kind of news that shakes up the the race.

I strongly agree with Richardson’s innovative idea put forth during the New Hampshire debates, in view of the 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 towards Tibetans, and especially with its 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, perhaps worded more diplomatically. Sen. Edwards 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, roughly 20% of the entire population of Tibet. If American political powers and their pundits won’t use the remains of our powers of moral suasion in the world at large, and if we are to once again docilely capitulate to dimwitted politicians who say that the Olympics is only about sport, and not about politics, we are 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 oblivious in this regard, 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, and even more so, when you consider the dead pets and the poisoned toothpaste from China. That is just not “about politics:” that was life and death for many, including at least 100 dead 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” - “counter-revolutionary” 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 “handicapped” persons. Members of the Falun Gong would be barred, as would “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.

Stephen Fox, New Millennium Fine Art, [email protected]

Richardson isn't perfect, then again no one else is, especially those with the higher poll figures running for president. But of them all, he has the best resume and can make a reasonable claim to being the most competent. I would say Richardson for president and perhaps Edwards for vice president. Edwards could then get the education and experience he needs to hold the top job. Probably, Richardson would need all his negotiation skills to cope with the DLC to survive.

One heck of a resume, but he needs to stand out. Hillary's standing leaves me befuddled, but she knows how to stand out.

He is the only one of the pack I have sent any contribution to. I would encourage folks who support candidates to send in a contribution even as little $5/mo to the ones they support. It will make a difference. We all have $50/year we should spend as we get the rebate on our Oregon Income tax. I really like the way he is running New Mexico. The area I have looked at is schools, when I was researching best practices.

The fact that a putz like Fred Thompson is getting about 50 times more news media coverage than Bill Richardson speaks volumes about the vacuity of our media. For this reason, it is only logical to support Al Gore.

I like Bill Richardson too, but some electoral deficiencies in the "Land of Enchantment" (see Greg Palast) and his stumbling, bumbling performances in two debates and vs. Tim Russert give me pause.

However, three years on from his first moment in the limelight, I can find no significant blemish on Sen. Barack Obama...

When you look at resumes, he has every candidate from either party beat hands down. I first saw a Richardson for President bumpber sticker in South Dakota in 2005. I don't know how he can break into the top three, coming as he does from New Mexico, and as calmnsense points out, if he did, those New Mexico deficiencies would haunt him.

Here's my thing and it's not negotiable: I'd rather vote for someone who I disagree with but trust to be honest with me than for someone saying all the right things but whom I don't feel I can trust to be honest with me.

In that case, it looks like the only two candidates who might meet your criterion would be Mike Gravel and perhaps Dennis Kucinich. On the other hand, would you want someone who might be honest but incompetent (no reference to Gravel intended or implied) running this country? I believe of all the Democratic candidates Richardson would be the best president, but I have reservations in saying that. Which doesn't say much for the quality of our choices.

I currently live in New Mexico and I've had an opportunity to volunteer at a couple of Richardson's fundraisers. I agree that he did not do so well in the first debate or his interview on Meet the Press (he did do better in the second debate), however in the small gatherings I've seen him at he is great. I think his issues on the national stage will go away once he has a little more experience. Plus, I'd rather have someone who has proven himself an effective executive, diplomat, and leader, but lacks a little polish and rhetorical skills than vice-versa, i.e. Obama.

My perfect presidential ticket would be a smart, charismatic presidential candidate who can both inspire and analyze (maybe even at the same time!), supported by a solid, brilliant VP whose credentials cannot be questioned and whose experience makes him or her a logical stand-in for the President at any domestic or ineternational function. I'm undecided about the president half of the ticket at the moment, but as for VP...Richardson is my man. I cannot imagine a wiser or more qualified individual to be a support to the President and a power behind the scenes.

I wish him the best of luck in his Presidential campaign, but if he doesn't get the nomination, only a fool would pass over him for the VP slot.

I like everything I've heard about Richardson so far and plan on contributing to his campaign.

Richardson showed guts when he criticized the Immigration plan for ignoring family ties. Richardson also said he'd consider boycotting China's Olympics if they didn't help stop the genocide in Darfur. Most of the others cowardly backed down from even considering taking action to help the people there.

The more I hear about Richardson, the better I like him. He also has the best experience for the job. As a former ambassador, he could really help repair the damage around the world caused by our current administration.

I too like Richardson. I hope the early election cycle will allow the big name people to screw up and fall to the side so he can move forward.

If not, I hope who ever gets the nomination will make him VP!!

torridjoe Have you heard that his favorite SCOTUS justice was the reactionary Whizzer White, and he thought Roe V Wade was decided sometime in the 80s?

Compared to facts like Hillary voted for the horrible Patriot Act, was a member of Walmart's BoD, and voted for the awful Bankruptcy Bill? The only reason she's able to run is that she was married to a President.

Obama has too little experience to make him a viable candidate. I'd like to see him as VP or running in the next cycle.

I like Joe Biden, but don't feel he has enough support.

Richardson is the best candidate and the one I'm voting for.

I like Joe Biden, but don't feel he has enough support.

He probably doesn't have much support because many people have him pegged as a phony.

I, too, like Joe Biden, and think that he is as real and candid as any of the candidates, perhaps more so.

Richardson does have tremendous experience. He also happened to leave the Energy Dept under quite a cloud, and his time there included involvement in the Lewinsky scandal. I believe he tried to help her with employment. His victory in NM in '02 brought him back from the political grave, but he dropped out of the selection process to be Kerry's running mate for reasons unknown.

In addition, Richardson has a tenancy to use poor judgment and misspeak. Recently on "Meet the Press, it seemed like half of Russert's question's dealt with misstatemetns that Richardson has made. I don't think BR is a winner.

About a year or so ago when it was becoming too obvious to deny that Iraq was a disaster, Joe Biden was on Meet the Press when he suggested that Bush needed to speak to the nation and tell the people the facts. Until then practically every point Bush and his accomplices tried to make about Iraq had been proven to be rubbish. So, here is Biden suggesting we listen to a man whose credibility was in a slide that has continued to this day. Biden voted for the war on Iraq and ever since has been a constant supporter of military action, only now grudgingly getting around to admitting that, well, maybe things "ain't going so good."

Just to clarify, Richardson is trilingual- English, Spnaish, and French.

Thanks for the research, lestadelc. I knew Richardson had negatives but not that bad. It looks like the best we can say for him is that he is the least of the evils likely to have a chance at reaching the presidency. To your list we can add his very questionable conduct as energy secretary during the Wen Ho Lee injustice.

Another bit of history - He was also involved in undermining the Endangered Species Act when push came to shove over excessive water diversions drying up fish habitat in the Rio Grande River. He got together with Pete Domenici to waive application of the ESA in the Rio Grande Basin with respect to water issues in the river.