I looked up Gov. Bill Richardson (a fellow I knew john excrement about) and I like what I saw.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

Looks like a non-nonsense, moderate, (in the true sense of the word, not an euphemism for "right-wing-with-a-D-after-his-name") principled person. Sort of like a civilian Wesley Clark.

And he has executive experience. If this furrinah's opinion means anything, the Dem ticket I'd most like to see now is Richardson-Obama. (But there's lots of other good combinations, mostly ones including Gore and/or Clark)

OK, that was my unsolicited opinion of the day. Make of that what you will.

[skipos]

1. I think Richardson is great

but I don't expect him to be a DU fave anytime soon. I think DUers won't like the Clark comparison's either. Me? I like them both. Not sure who I will back in 08 if Clark gets in.

[Deep13]

2. me too

He'll play well in the 'burbs.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

4. I'm aware the infighting often gets to ridiculous levels.

Although discussion of those two fellows seems to be less hysteria-ridden, on the average, than about the other possible candidates.

[Felix Mala]

3. He's bright and eloquent.

[wyldwolf]

5. fascinating

Bill Richardson is as DLC as they come. Fascinating that when the anti-"right-wing-with-a-D-after-his-name" crowd takes a look at one, they actually see someone special.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

6. I was thinking more about the likes of Lieberman, but since you mentioned it...

What is Richardson's position about the Iraq war? What was he saying circa 2003? And now? I didn't find references to that.

[wyldwolf]

8. quite honestly, positions on the Iraq war circa 2003 from non-Senators and congressman...

...are hard to come by. But on matters of policy, Richardson's policy positions are in the same realm as Lieberman's.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

10. Examples please? -nt

[wyldwolf]

13. NAFTA, GATT, WTO...

NAFTA critically important for US as well as Mexico
NAFTA was critically important, and not only for the reasons commonly cited by its supporters. Yes, the treaty would create the world's largest free-trade region, a market of 360 million people in the US, Canada, and Mexico. Estimates of NAFTA's economic impact varied, but the treaty promised to be a win-win-win for all three countries.

That didn't mean the absence of dislocation: while NAFTA figured to create more jobs in the US, some jobs would be lost. A key part of the final bill presented to Congress needed to include worker-adjustment programs and other so-called side agreements addressing such issues as labor standards and the environment.

I felt the treaty was crucial to Mexico. I thought NAFTA would create positive economic change and help to stimulate a broader political debate. I thought it also had the potential to affect the immigration issue: if Mexico's economy boomed, beter-paying jobs would provide Mexicans an incentive to stay home.
Source: Between Worlds, by Bill Richardson, p.112-3 Nov 3, 2005

Expand regional trade with Chihuahua
This morning, I had a very productive meeting with the honorable governor of Chihuahua, Patricio Martinez. If I am fortunate enough to be elected governor of New Mexico in November, I have pledged to Governor Martinez that I will work closely with him to increase trade and to help build a regional economy that is good for New Mexico-and for El Paso and Chihuahua.

Specifically, we have agreed to create a functional New Mexico-Chihuahua Economic Development Commission. The two of us will co-chair this commission that will include cabinet secretaries and business leaders from both states. We will meet monthly-and rotate between Santa Fe, and Chihuahua, and our respective border communities.

The purpose of this commission will be to increase trade. We will do this by developing, and implementing, a regional economic development plan with specific goals, timetables and assignments. The most important message I can deliver today is that we are one region.
Source: Campaign web site, RichardsonForGovernor.com, "Priorities" Oct 24, 2002

Supports NAFTA, GATT, & WTO
Q: Do you support broadening North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to include other countries?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you support the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you support the WTO?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you support imposing tariffs on products imported from nations that maintain restrictive trade barriers on American products?

A: No.

Q: Should a nation's human rights record affect its "most favored nation" trading status with the United States?

A: Yes.
Source: 1996 Congressional National Political Awareness Test Nov 1, 1996

[RaleighNCDUer]

64. That might have scanned better if the quotes were in chronological

order, rather than reverse order.

It looks like he went from a strong supporter to saying it didn't work out quite like we thought - but he never really says that.

So, has he admitted that NAFTA has turned out to be a magnificent disaster for all concerned?

[wyldwolf]

67. most people, when asked about it, have

last summer, Al Gore said he was still in favor of NAFTA but unforseen things than happened since caused it to not perform as expected.

[bigtree]

12. He takes an entirely different stance on Iraq than Lieberman

on many social issues, Lieberman actually has a great deal of liberal votes behind his name. So, I don't think the conflation is accurate or at all useful.

[wyldwolf]

14. what was Richardson's Iraq position in 2003?

Remember, the DLC is more than Iraq.

[bigtree]

16. why don't you spell out his Iraq position in 2003 for me?

you need to remember that Richardson has taken positions not supported at all by the 'DLC'.

[wyldwolf]

17. See post #8

MANY DLC members take opposing position to what other DLC members do.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

23. So, if we can't find any declaration by him about the subject back then...

...all we have to work with are his opinions NOW, correct?

[wyldwolf]

27. that is the point I was making

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

31. And that "now" position is anti-war. So? -nt

[wyldwolf]

35. as are most DLCers now.

Richardson has stated that we can no longer do any good in Iraq.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

36. Except Hillary. And Holy Joe. And probably others I forgot. -nt

[SaveElmer]

37. Hillary supports a phased withdrawl...

Has for well over a year...

Tried and true left wing tactic to smear someone by associating them with Lieberman on Iraq...sad!

[wyldwolf]

43. wrong again

Hillary's position now is exactly the same as Richardson's.

Good idea at the beginning. Bad idea now.

From Richardson's site:

Our next President must be able to get us out of Iraq -- I think that it's obvious George Bush is too stubborn to face the reality that our presence in Iraq isn't helping any longer.

Does that mean it helped at one time??

Like all of you, I am sure, I have struggled for a long time over Iraq. Like most Americans, I am saddened by the horrific violence that takes dozens, scores of innocent lives every day. And like most Americans, I believe that our country has a moral obligation to do what we can to help the Iraqis end that violence.

And because of that belief, it has not been easy for me to come to this conclusion: that the best thing we can do—for them as well as for ourselves—is to leave.

Why was it hard for him to come to the conclusion we should leave Iraq??

[bigtree]

45. perhaps he's concerned, as all of us are, about the aftermath

he answers your question anyway in his statement:

"I believe that our country has a moral obligation to do what we can to help the Iraqis end that violence. And because of that belief, it has not been easy for me to come to this conclusion:

[wyldwolf]

right, so why is the left intent on dogging one Democrat (Clinton) and praising another for the same

stance?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

58. Ooooo! FAR LEFT OOGA BOOGA! So liking Richardson and disliking Hillary is an indefensible position

held only by commie loonies?

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wyldwolf]

30. upon further examination

In introducing Bill Richardson to the 2003 DLC National Conversation, Will Marshall said, "...He backed a war to oust the Saddam regime."

When Richardson took the stage, he said, "...thanks for that great introduction. You read it just like I wrote it."

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=106&subid=122&contentid=251978

In Feb. 2003, on CNN by Paula Zahn, Bill Richardson declared, “I think there is such intensive pressure on both sides that only one more deadline, only one more chance for Saddam Hussein is going to be allowable. So I think the administration is wise in pursuing this course that says OK, total disarmament in two weeks and that’s it.”

[bigtree]

38. the right also uses the Zahn interview to paint Richardson as pro war

they also take clips out of context. heres a more complete view where he acknowledged that 'interests' were pressing for 'only one more chance' for Saddam. What Bill Richardson was trying to do at the time was highlight the efforts of the inspectors which he didn't think would be successful, but he encouraged that they be allowed to continue anyway. He clearly expected that there not be a 'rush' to war and that Bush should not proceed to any military action without the cooperation of the UN. He never advocated the unilateral, preemptive rush to war that Bush chose.


ZAHN: So, Governor Richardson, based on what you know has happened to the European Union, based on the debate that continues at the U.N., what are the chances that the U.S. will go to war against Iraq?

RICHARDSON: Well, I think the chances are very good. Now, the next step has to be, I believe, continuing our efforts at the United Nations to get a resolution, a second resolution that says that Iraq is in material breach, and secondly, that there will be serious consequences.

Now, I read again a French statement today that did not mention the word veto, which gives me some hope. But at the same time, I think it's very important that the United States probably agree to some kind of a deadline, maybe two weeks, where we concentrate on seeing if Saddam is going to disarm. I think the odds are that he won't, but that we move ahead and see if we can get additional reconnaissance flights, if some of those missiles with excessive range can be destroyed. And, third, if we can interview some of the Iraqi scientists outside of Iraq with the presence of administration officials.

I think for that, all of that to happen, Paula, I think it's probably not going to happen. So I think the odds are pretty strong that we will go to war, but it won't be probably for the next three weeks.


ZAHN: According to the "Washington Post" this morning, President Bush may support a deadline for Saddam Hussein to visibly destroy his chemical and biological weapons within a specified number of days, leading to what one of his senior administration officials called actual disarmament.

What are the chances of that working?

RICHARDSON: Well, I think the chances of that working are good because France and Russia and many others in the Security Council and the secretary general want inspections to keep going. Now, I think there is such intensive pressure on both sides that only one more deadline, only one more chance for Saddam Hussein is going to be allowable. So I think the administration is wise in pursuing this course that says OK, total disarmament in two weeks and that's it.

Now, the United Nations is going to be in a very tough position, the Security Council. Here the United States has gone twice for a U.N. Security Council resolution. It's willing to put out another deadline. International pressure is such where the European countries are starting very slowly to move our way. And so the U.N. credibility is at stake.

So this boxes the U.N. and the Security Council in. So I think it's a wise move. I, that makes sense. Give him one more chance to disarm. I think the odds are not very strong that he will. And after that period, you take action and you've got Security Council approval for what you're going to do next.

So I would suggest that course of action that you mentioned. I haven't seen that report. It makes sense.

[wyldwolf]

39. well, so does the left because I found the quote a leftwing site.

The quote was not out of context. His position was quite similar to the Democrats in the Senate who voted for the IWR.

[bigtree]

47. that's right. Against what Bush ultimately committed us to in Iraq

by unilaterally and preemptively invading

[BayCityProgressive]

9. He is against the war

and supports diplomacy with no talk of war for iran and N korea. he is by far more progressive on foreign issues than many Dems. He got rid of the tax on food in NM. He supports legalizing pot. He supports minimum wage with cost of living adjustments, and he is prolabor as far as domestic laws are concerned. On the really bad side he is a huge CAFTA/NAFTA supporter.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

11. Hm, doesn't look Liebermanesque at all. -nt

[wyldwolf]

15. Not so fast

Richardon on drugs:

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Bill_Richardson_Drugs.htm

[bigtree]

18. not so fast yourself

Medical Marijuana: New Mexico Governor Puts Compassionate Use Act on Legislative Agenda

1/20/06

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/419/richardson.shtml

In a surprise move, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson (D) announced Wednesday night that despite earlier statements to the contrary, he will include a pending medical marijuana bill, the Lynn Pierson Compassionate Use Act, on his legislative agenda for the 30-day short session that began Tuesday. The bill sailed through the Senate on a 27-11 vote and moved easily through House committees before falling victim to unrelated political squabbles and dying in the House last year.

Earlier in the week, Richardson had disappointed patients and advocates by saying he would heed the pleas of House Speaker Ben Lujan (D-Nambe) to not include the measure in the short session. Typically devoted to budget measures, the short session in alternating years is jam-packed with fast-paced legislative action. Lujan told Richardson there was not enough time to consider the bill.

But Wednesday night, Richardson made clear he disagrees. "After speaking with many seriously ill New Mexicans, I have decided to include this bill on my call. This issue is too important, and there are too many New Mexicans suffering to delay this issue any further," he said in a statement.

The medical marijuana bill would allow patients suffering from certain serious illnesses to get recommendations from their doctors and apply to register as protected patients with the state Department of Health. The department would be charged with drafting regulations regarding safety, security, distribution, and the licensing of producers.

"We are so proud to have a Governor who's willing to stand up for compassion," said Reena Szczepanski, Director of the Drug Policy Alliance New Mexico, which has taken the lead role in moving the legislation forward. "We are so thrilled to have a chance this year and we have every reason to expect success."

"I thank the Governor for giving me another chance at life," said Essie DeBonet, who suffers from serious side effects due to HIV/AIDS medications. "I pray for him, and I'm so thankful because I might not have another year to wait for this bill."

[wyldwolf]

22. Not so fast YOURself. "Legalizing pot" and allowing medical marijuana aren't the same thing.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

24. Again, a vast improvement on the current hysterical WoD policy. -nt

[wyldwolf]

28. yes, but still...

...a centrist/DLC inspired policy.

[bigtree]

48. is legalizing for medicinal use a "a centrist/DLC inspired policy?"

[wyldwolf]

49. you bet it is.

While the DLC has no specific position on it, high ranking DLC officials say, "I can't imagine anyone here (DLC) having a problem with state licensing of medical marijuana, and while not embracing "decriminalization" of drugs (meaning recreational use), we have long opposed the "mandatory minimum" drug sentencing that stuffed the prison system with non-violent offenders in the 1980s and after."

Ed Kilgore

The centrist position is a combination of both left and right. The left generally proposes legalization or decriminalization of recreational drugs. The right opposes that and want to put offenders in jail. The center recognizes the need for medical marijuana and opposes mandatory sentencing of drug offenders.

[bigtree]

25. It's not a 'moderate' stance

I think that was your drift

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

20. You managed to find something I don't like about Richardson, but it's not what you expected.

This Drug Court idea is good, albeit a bit harsher than I'd advocate. Better than the current "jail 'em all" policy for sure.

What I didn't like was his support for the death penalty, especially for something other than murder.

[wyldwolf]

26. did you think I was expecting something of you?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

40. You showed me something, therefore you expected me to be aware of something. -nt

[bigtree]

7. I like where Bill Richardson stands and the issues he's chosen to champion and represent

DLC is a policy think tank, not a cult

Richardson and everyone else should be judged on their record, accomplishments, and intentions instead of just lazily wrapping them up in some label they don't even subscribe to.

mispost response to wyldwolf

[wyldwolf]

19. I don't require an explanation of what the DLC is since I am pro-DLC..

...and quite familiar with the organization, it's policy proposals, and it's members.

[bigtree]

21. I just don't think that's how Richardson would identify himself

and I think the 'DLC' has become shorthand for folks looking to marginalize these candidates into their own ideological pigeon holes.

[wyldwolf]

29. you don't think a dues paying member of the DLC would identify himself as such?

Here he calls himself the first DLC governor and a Democratic leadership governor, a New Democrat, an Hispanic governor

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=106&subid=122&contentid=251978

[bigtree]

32. I think he said Democratic leadership governor, but I get it

He made this one speech so he's going to be tagged with it. You notice that this is virtually the only one that's presented when this issue comes up.

Is he beholden to every organization where he 'pays' dues?

What I think is relevant is where Richardson stands on the issues. It's clear that he's been more than pragmatic in finding solutions which work. Some supported by 'moderates' and some supported by 'progressives'.


from the speech: http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=106&subid=122&contentid=251978

If we present the American people with a pragmatic and optimistic Democratic vision with a strong candidate, we can win. This election will be won on ideas. The long-term economic health of our country is going to be determined by sound fiscal policies that grow our economy and balance our budgets. Why not talk about the important issues that no one is talking about? Healthcare, and finding ways that we give tax credits and incentives to those people that put their families on a healthcare plan, or give tax credits to employers that are taking those steps. What about education? If you do a poll -- and I know we pay a lot at the DLC for great pollsters -- education is an issue that nobody talks about: paying our teachers better but demanding more, early childhood education, family and medical leave to balance family and work, finding ways that we deal with truancy. One of the biggest problems with America is kids not going to school and parents not taking responsibility. And I'm here to talk to you about my state because we're actually taking these steps.

Democrats. We've shown that it's possible to pursue a progressive Democratic agenda which cuts taxes and provides economic incentives for business while at the same time improving education, exploding childcare availability, protecting the environment, and fighting discrimination, and balancing the budget. You know, in New Mexico Republicans can't call us anti-business because we're not, because today in an effort to reform New Mexico's education system it is business leaders that have joined the Democratic Party in passing massive education reform that moves money from administration and bureaucracy into the classroom, into computers, into kids learning. We restored collective bargaining for our hard-working state employees to show them that they have to be partners in rebuilding our state. We moved teachers' salaries from 49th to 29th in the country in one fell swoop. And this is how we paid for it: we said to school administrators and bureaucracy, this money is not going to come out of the New Mexico budget; it's going to come out of your administration and your bureaucracies and it's going to go and add to 6 percent and every teacher is going to get that raise. And that happened.

So what can we be as Democrats that perhaps is a lesson in New Mexico? In New Mexico Democrats are pro-environment, pro-education, pro-affirmative action and pro-business. And business, as I said, is becoming increasingly Democratic. Businesspeople trust us because we have been fiscally responsible. We paid for these tax cuts. We've brought government efficiency, making those tough, tough decisions.

So I'm here to say to you that with new ideas and a vision and hard work and the electioneering capabilities that I know the DLC has -- and DLC leaders that I know stretch across all regions of the country, but are addressing problems -- that we can win this election. And that the DLC, by making a huge outreach to minorities, as I see here, is an ingredient for success, but recognize too that minorities in this country -- it is unacceptable that there is one Hispanic governor. It is unacceptable that there are no African-American United States senators. It is unacceptable that women have not achieved the highest levels of leadership in our party. So we have to unite around the many things we believe in. Whether we call ourselves liberals or we call ourselves moderates, we have to be a party of values, of inclusiveness, of environmental sanity, of gender and racial equality. We're the parties of JFK and FDR and Bill Clinton, of clean air and water, and we should be proud of it. We also should be proud to be the moderate party of sound economic management and fiscal responsibility and a friend of the economic engines -- the businesspeople of this country.

[wyldwolf]

34. why don't we put this to rest now and do an issue by issue comparison?

I mean, Richardson is listed as a DLC member, he admits to being a DLC member, his policies are straight out of the DLC playbook, but he somehow ISN'T a DLC member because you've decided you like him.

So, let's to an an issue by issue comparison of Richardson with other DLC members.

[bigtree]

42. Liebernam for instance is pro-choice, votes progressively on the environment

on healthcare, on many civil rights issues . . .

Richardson's policies, as he demonstrated in his celebrated speech, are a mixture of some of the DLC's ideals with sound progressive Democratic principles and practice. It makes no sense at all to merely label him as DLC and move on.

I've no interest in pulling up all of the votes from his congressional days and comparing them to the DLC. I've looked them over, and he was mostly in lockstep with the Democratic majority in the House which operated progressively.

As governor of a Western state, he's presented a mixture of pragmatic policies and social remedies that reflect the pragmatism of most Democratic governors.

What I don't understand is why he's only tagged with the DLC label when he's legislated and governed pragmatically, without much regard to ideology.

[wyldwolf]

44. dupe post

.

[wyldwolf]

46. ...as does Richardson's

..but taken AS A WHOLE, Lieberman's record is more "progressive" than Richardson's (and Hillary's more so than them both) UNLESS their CURRENT positions on Iraq is the deal breaker and nothing else matters.

Your description of Richardson can be applied to ALL DLC members. I don't know any two DLCers who agree 100% on everything.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

59. Has Richardson ever kissed Bush's ass like Lieberman did? -nt

[wyldwolf]

68. oh, I see. Being nice to Bush is now the crime, not just agreeing with him

You sure have turned this discussion into a meaningless vitriolic one.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

76. Declaring that Lieberman kissed Bush's ass is vitriol since when? It's the truth. -nt

[wyldwolf]

77. OK. So being nice to Bush is the crime, not just going along with him.

[SaveElmer]

41. "Is he beholden to every organization where he 'pays' dues? "

Exactly the point many have been making...

The DLC is a think tank, with no loyalty oaths, secret handshakes, or any other requirement of its members.

So the next time I get a post that says Hillary, or any other DLC Democrat, is lying about the reason they voted for the IWR...and using some statement from Al From as proof of this...

I can point to your post!!!

[wyldwolf]

50. very good point.

[SaveElmer]

33. It is breathtaking...

The lengths people will go to deny the obvious...

Bill Richardson is DLC...as DLC as they come...yet now that some of ouor anti-DLC friends have committed themselves to saying positive things about him, they either have to go through a contortionist act to try and convince us that he really isn't DLC (all evidence to the contrary), or admit for once they really took a look at a DLC candidate and liked what they saw!!!

[bigtree]

53. the label is worthless and inaccurate

He's a mainstream Democrat who has legislated and governed pragmatically.

[SaveElmer]

56. And a member of the DLC...

In fact a proud member of the DLC...who has adopted as his own many of the positions of the DLC...a mainstream organization that advocates governing pragmatically - to put it another way.

Surely you aren't unaware of the blind hatred by most here at DU towards the DLC...a label that for most automatically disqualifies him from consideration

That he is DLC is entirely relevant

[bigtree]

60. so why doesn't he get equal credit for positions which are advocated by 'progressive' groups

and policy organizations?

other 'organizations he's a proud member of:

Big Brother/Big Sister of Santa Fe
Past Chair, Border Governors' Association
Chair, Democratic Governors' Association
Chair, Freedom House
G.I. Forum
Hispanic Council on Foreign Affairs
Santa Fe Chamber of Commerce
Santa Fe Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
Santa Fe Jaycees
Past Chair, Western Governors' Association.

He also worked as a business consultant in Santa Fe and served on several boards including the Natural Resource Defense Council and United Way International.

[SaveElmer]

62. Well here on DU...

No one seems to care about those groups...or despise them the way they do the DLC...

I like Richardson...and I am glad you are not simply taking the tack so many do that DLC membership is an automatic disqualifier....but it is also not right to deny the he is a proud DLC member, and that a substantial number of his positions comport to that organization...

And I dare say the DLC and the organizations you mention overlap far more in their positions than the anti-DLC crowd here would care to admit!

[bigtree]

65. they are examples of oraanizations which eschew the labels of 'right and left'

and try to find common ground between views

[SaveElmer]

71. Well then...

I think we are on the same page here...!!!!

[wyldwolf]

74. I saw the same thing here about Mark Warner and Tim Kaine

The left have been programmed by the mighty overlord KOS and others that the DLC CAN'T win and DOESN'T win that when it is pointed out that they do, in fact, win and win often, the left goes into instant denial.

Here are a few DU words of wisdom on Bill Richardson from 2004 when he was being considered for the VP.

Revcarol wrote:

I can't IMAGINE as more horrible ticket, except Bush/Chene;y or Bush/Giuliani.

Want to keep the U. S. occupation of Iraq going?
Want to lose ever more jobs to NAFTA and the WTO?
Want to be beholden to the movers and shakers of the DLC?
Want to alienate labor forever?
Want to just tweak the Patriot Act a smidgen and let Richardson off the hook for blatant racial/ethnic prejudice?
Want to put the Democrats in the corporate advocacy column?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=267960&mesg_id=268767

...and Warpy wrote:

... he's a DINO

He campaigned on dropping the state sales tax on food in New Mexico. What did he DO? Dropped income tax rates on the rich, who already had so many loopholes that NM was smack in the middle of the tax continuum when the final rate they actually paid was tallied.

This year he made a big show of ending that sales tax on food, but made a bigger show of calling it "revenue neutral" because he hiked the sales tax on everything else to compensate for it. The tax cut to fat cats was NOT revenue neutral, and he found he had to dip into the primcipal of the state's emergency fund to compensate for it.

Give a break to poor and working folks, and you have to stick it to them elsewhere. Give a break to fat cats, and pretend like it generated something besides a shortfall.

That's Richardson.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=423942&mesg_id=424267

Edzontar:

Too conservative. DLC poster boy. Not a good pick for me.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=368695&mesg_id=368713

lcordero:

Not a good idea. New Mexico is almost split down the middle. The Greens have been getting a lot of votes and have been targetting the slimier turncoat Democrats for elimination...even if it puts a Republican in office.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=368695&mesg_id=368725

BL_Zebub:

Richardson's on FAUX News even more than Holy Joe Lieberman! And Sean Hannazi calls him a "friend". That alone makes him ineligible.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=368695&mesg_id=368733

Snivi Yllom:

DNC/Clinton bathtub ring (note: he probably meant "DLC") He's got the same baggage that makes me sour on many of the candidates.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=368695&mesg_id=369172

Armstead:

Blech. That would signal that the takeover of the Democratic Party by the moderate Republicans of the DLC would be complete.

Anticoup2K4:

No more DLC sellouts. Not now, not ever.

And what is up with all these "We must run DLC and only DLC because nobody but DLC can win" threads anyway?

Looks like you fucking traitors know your days are numbered, huh?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1334167&mesg_id=1334597

[SaveElmer]

78. Brother that is priceless...nt

[wyldwolf]

51. I'm going to kick and recommend this post, anyway...

...because I like Richardson and I find it amusing how some are trying to deny his DLC credentials because they've decided they like him, too.

[bigtree]

54. I don't deny them, I think the label is misleading and irrelevant

and used, mostly, as shorthand to denigrate and pigeon-hole the candidates.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

57. I believe wyldwolf's point is something else.

It's something along the lines of, "if you like Richardson, then you must like the DLC in general, and Hillary and Lieberman in particular! They are GOOD!"

[bigtree]

61. wyldwolf and I are pretty much on the same political page

we just disagree on the significance of his DLC association.

[wyldwolf]

69. then you'd be wrong. I will say, in regards to you...

...that you have a complete mental block if you can't see Richardson is just as centrist, and in many cases more conservative, than Lieberman and Clinton.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

55. It's funny how you got so worked up with DLC this, DLC that...

when what I took a swipe at in the OP wasn't the DLC at all, but the general habit of passing right-wing positions as moderate.

[wyldwolf]

70. I think the only worked up one here is you.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

72. "I know you are but what am I?" and its variants are tiring. -nt

[wyldwolf]

75. it must be past your naptime, then.

Here's a quote from your worked up self:

"Ooooo! FAR LEFT OOGA BOOGA!"

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

79. It is a synthetic representation of your idea of what "the Left" is.

Namely, a nonexistent evil bogeyman.

Calling Democratic opposition to another Democrat that's more to the right "far left" is laughable in the face of it. Some (thankfully tombstoned since then) boneheads liked to throw that smear at, for example, Ned Lamont last year.

"Ooga booga" is actually polite in comparison to how horribly skewed that view of the political spectrum really is.

[wyldwolf]

80. and you're a fine representation of it

[Nimrod2005]

52. I REALLY LIKE HIM....NT

[Ninja Jordan]

63. john excrement?

weird

[SaveElmer]

73. Polite way to say...

Jack Sh*t

[Ninja Jordan]

81. Why not say 'Jack Excrement'?

Why do we have to drag John into this?