News Flash: Clintons Back Bill Richardson for President

The Clinton campaign strategy apparently has been revamped to tell the American people that their criteria for judging for whom to vote is just wrong. Telling people they are wrong is not necessarily the best way to win friends and influence people, but their argument has another flaw: if you bought it, you would not vote for Hillary, you would vote for Bill Richardson.

Here is Bill Clinton, campaigning in North Conway, N.H., sticking to the key word "change."

"There's a difference between talk and action. It makes a big difference if you've actually changed people's lives, if it's the work of your life," the former president said.

And Hillary: voters should elect "a doer, not a talker."

Assessing the "Final Four" candidates for President, to whom can the Clintons be referring? The only person that truly fits THAT description is Bill Richardson, New Mexico Governor, former UN Ambassador, former Energy Secretary, and negotiator extraordinaire.

James Carville, Bill Clinton's major advisor, called Richardson, "probably the most qualified person EVER to have run for President". But, he backs Hillary, so he must disagree with them that results matter more than talk.

Bill Richardson has been eyeball-to-eyeball in negotiations with our fiercest enemies, and won, e.g., release of US hostages. Has Hillary? (Or Obama? Or Edwards?)

North Korea's nuclear program poses a threat to world security. When North Korea decided it wanted to speak again to the US about a deal to relinquish its nuclear program, Hillary is correct when she says that they did not call Obama (or Edwards). But, they also did not call Hillary. They called Bill Richardson, invited him on a mission to recover American remains from the Korean War, which he accepted, and had to opportunity to grease-the-skids for the talks that appear to be headed to North Korea dismantling its nuclear program, if Bush et al. do not blow it again. Think of the implications for world peace. Consider how many times analogous situations might occur if Richardson were President of the United States.

Or, consider domestic issues. Bill Richardson fought for and won settlements totaling in the BILLIONS of dollars for radiation safety workers that the federal government, Democrats and Republicans, had ignored fo 50 years. When Edwards won his legal cases, he personally took 33-40% of the settlement. Richardson took not a single dime. And, Hillary has done what, exactly, in this arena? So far as I know, she worked for the largest law firm in Little Rock.

Richardson took a state that was 48th in economic growth and made it #6. He balanced the budget 5 times, cut taxes and increased investments in education and child health. Children now have healthcare in New Mexico, and all children can go to kindergarden. He even took junk food out of the schools. He made New Mexico the clean energy state, abiding by the Kyoto Treaty. How does Hillary measure up compared to this track record of delivering results that matter in peoples' lives.

As indicated in "How Handlers Have Hurt Hillary", Hillary's main problem is authenticity. Sitting in the debate next to the most experienced person by far and touting your own experience over Obama's (and Edwards') is hardly the route to authenticity.

Comments

[Plowboy]

Sad to say, the MSM can prevent most Americans from knowing of the worth of Bill Richardson.
They can also ballyhoo their "front runners" -- the ones they themselves created.
But they can't hide all the flaws of HRC; she exposes them herself all too often.

[VirginiaBelle]

Americans need to demand more responsibility from the media. Had the media made substance coverage more important than personality coverage; had the media made issue reporting more important than who said what about the other guy, we would be looking at a different election process. The media has treated this election like the preliminaries to a Super Bowl. It is not the responsibility of the media to predict how we will vote; it is the responsibility of the press to give us the information we need in order to vote responsibly. Until the media becomes more responsible, Americans will have to do their own research before they jump on a political bandwagon, especially if they don't know where the bandwagon is headed or how it will get there. Most Americans do not know about Richardson's accomplishments; nor have they been given vital information on the issues. They will vote for popularity, unless they decide it is time to revisit Kennedy's question. "Ask not what my country can do for me; rather ask, what can I do for my country." And we should be looking for the candidates who have done something for the country.

[mamacita]

Great article, Mr. Abrams, but it's too little, too late. Richardson has gotten ZERO COVERAGE to date, and is not likely to get any in the future. The MEDIA has decided that we only want Obama or Hillary.

I totally agree with you about Richardson. He's got the most experience, and I especially like his skills in diplomatic relations and negotiating. I think he'd make a wonderful president, but he doesn't have that rock star appeal, and the MEDIA won't cover him, so it ain't gonna happen--and it's a crying shame what the MEDIA has done to the people of the United States by neglecting to report on ALL the candidates in this campaign.

[Ryter]

Did you ever get so angry that you could cry? Do you think that is what happened today in NH?

What I really want to say is - thank you for the best articulation of why I continue to support Richardson. He wasn't the best looking guy up there Saturday night, but he sure is the best guy for the job. Most people are not getting the subtleties of Hillary's remarks in ignoring Richardson. They bite the bait and stop looking any further. Richardson refuses to go negative (often times to my chagrin). He continually takes the high road and won't make personal attacks. He has run a clean campaign.

How can we pour this information into the voters? After years of mean-spiritedness in the White House trickling down into our homes and personal lives, we may have completely lost our way. If Richardson doesn't get the nomination the democratic party is probably soon over. This is the best chance they've had in a long time to redeem the party while doing some good for the country.

Hillary's main problem is Hillary.

[lynnn]

moment sorry blah

[lynnn]

YOu point out a great mement in the debate.