Looks like another day of garbage by the media. Is Richardson not aware of how the american public votes. Does this guy believe THIS public actually would ever read a history or political book? or the biggest joke of all, that THIS public would look at a voting record and know his experience? The media is a joke in this country and bloggers make a decision to vote based on what the hear on CNN, MSNBC and Fox. What is Richardson doing? Is he not paying attention? The other cable (spewing station) has actually declared the "Regal" one the PRESIDENT?

What a hateful, spiteful, miserable lot we are. To hear the pundits…'it sounds like the candidates are listening and really beginning to care. Oh, barf! I know this will get posted. I had the nerve to list actual voting records. Cand. A voted No on abc and Yes on xyz and it was held for moderation. So apparently it is inappropriate do discuss facts or records but you can HATE people you have never met, read a book by or about, or reviewed the record of and get posted. Read what you are writing! You have exactly the government you deserve.

Richardson sounds like Hillary now. Poor Richardson, your campaign theme is clearly not working. Are you trying to echo Hillary? It's a waste of time, because she will not have the opportunity to select you as VP.

I like you Bill Richardson, but the word experience was redefined by the Bush administration. The world around us is changing and we cannot afford to play nurse maid to a broken system based on experience. Our great country needs a booster shot for change to meet the challenges now and in the future.

BILLIONS of dollars of ads?! Wow, Huck. You're obviously flustered. Talk about being desparate!

In the roundtable "debate" Sunday night on Fox, Gov, Richardson responded to a question about national security by saying that he would have face to face negotiations with the "Soviet Union." Now, that really would require some change. The Soviet Union disappeared in1991, some 17 years ago. Maybe he could link those negotiations with attending the presidential election in Pakistan that he talked about recently that, he said, would occur next month. As Hillary Hindenburg corrected him, the Pakistani election is to choose members of parliament, not the president. Oh, the humanity!!! PS: Does anyone else think that Richardson looks and sounds like Lou Costello from Abbott & Costello?

It is ashame that Richardson is running now with some other people who are really big names and political powerhouses. If it had been a year where it was Richardson, Biden and someone else, it would be a hard choice between Richardson and Biden. Richardson could be doing better; I think that he needs a little more charisma to do better. It is unfortunate that he has been polling so low. The NJ primary is coming up soon and I will make the effort to review Richardson as well as others before I vote.

Don't vote? Don't complain!

My dear friends and gentle people, I meant to say the Democrat debate that was on ABC on Saturday night NOT on Fox on Sunday night. These debates are getting difficult to keep track of. Instead of water-boarding the bad guys down in Gitmo, the military and CIA folks should force them to have to listen to these debates over and over and over again. I'd bet within days, they would tell us everything they know about anything. Oh well, by tomorrow, the torture will spot for a little while as Richardson, Clinton drop out and Barack takes the field. The surprise of the week will not be Hillary's fold but McCain's. The New Hampshire voter will go for character and "hope" over costly change or worse, no change at all. Hillary's "back to the future" campaign and McCain's "I'll be whoever you want" approach are flat themese this year and a vote for character and novelty (read: Obama) cost nothing and risks less. Most, if not all, the pols ignored the lesson of the day, i.e., the slogan of NH: "Live free or die!" That also, my dear friends and gentle people, means living free of taxes. The way to win NH is to promise less, not more, for more always costs someone something. Go in peace and sin no more.

I knew I shouldn't have let her read those Sylvia Plath poetry books…this is all my fault.

If a man (Richardson) is incapable of constructing a syntactically correct sentence, then he is most likely incapable of rallying the American public behind any of his policies. I think he'll be history after New Hampshire.

McCain is all about WAR

We do not need another WAR

McCain's solution is always more troops.

Mitt Romney policy of engagement and econoimic muscle makes more sense.

McCain is a War Time President he wants to get his hands on that war machine.

Hate to be cynical but, as a life long republican, I feel I have nobody to vote for. Then I wonder…does it really mattter who is in office? After all, the political machine, which is Washington, just keeps churning, with little progress compliments of life long politicians. Now in my 40s, I remember alternative fuels being discussed when I was in grade school. Still, there has been very little, if any true progress in this area. BTW, does anyone think it is realistic to deport 12 million illegal immigrants? At what cost? How will this effect the economy and who will provide the much needed labor many immigrants provide? And do you you really believe that left on their own accord, all americans are going to go and secure their own health insurance? Who has the time, intelligence,resources to shop for health insurance? Those of us already paying for it! Bad idea. And when dit Mitt get so cozy with the pharmeceutical companies? Curious. Democrats aren't much better. I would never vote for Billary and Obama lacks the experience…and an original thought. Richards is hilarious. A bafoon but comedy central. Please someone, tell me who deserves my vote.

Bill Richardson should just drop out. God he is annoying.

Obama 08

Get real Bill…it's your RECORD as U.N. Ambassador and Energy Secretary that marks you as unqualified to be U.S. President….maybe in an European socialist country, but not here.

It took 14 comments before ANY real reference to Gov. Richardson's record - and still nothing specific. Mr. Williams - what about Richardson's experience as Secretary of Energy, U.N. Ambassador (or for that matter, unofficial diplomat, Governor and Congressman) do you find that marks him as unqualified to be U.S. President? I'd like to hear it.

As best I can tell, Governor Richardson is by far the most qualified person running on either side to address the numerous complex issues ahead. He has demonstrated executive experience. If this race were a job interview for the CEO of the largest business in the world, Obama wouldn't even get in the door. "My husband was a great CEO" would be laughed out of the room.

Folks: Obama may be a lot of things, but you cannot know - he is a good speech. Beyond that there is nothing by which to judge his future performance. If he turns out to be the nominee, I hope he is a great President. My vote, however, will not go to the good speech or the pretty face or even the populist. Governor Richardson has my support because he has demonstrated the ability to address the domestic and international problems facing America. The world is full of people who can raise our spirits with a good speech; who can tell us what we want to hear. In my humble opinion, you are fools to base a vote for President on such qualities.

Just like to say I'm not the hard core political enthusiast, with that being said it appears that Bill Richardson would have had a better chance at the presidency (as mentioned by S.B. Stein E.B. NJ) if the big players were not playing, but they are and his face value doesn't impact America as he would like, his career history should and that DOES speak volumes. Facts are Obama will ultimately be a revised version of Bush, he will "about face" on many of his promises. Clinton will be an upgraded version of husband, since she learned from his experiences. Edwards does have a strong message since he adheres to what the masses regard as just - he could be a JFK waiting to happen? Probably not, McCain is without a doubt a reincarnation of Regan. I just wish Ross Periot was running,

Newsflash, Bill…

People don't want experienced, proven leaders. If they did, Biden would be the party's nominee. They want a song and dance man, the newest novelty on the market. Obama is a political iPhone. He looks good now, but you can't really comment on how great he is when he's done absolutely NOTHING of significance besides give some nice speeches. If he wins the election, heaven help us.

Bill Richardson is a fairly recent former Secretary of Energy, he did nothing to put anything in place to guard against the current energy crisis in the US. In fact he has offered nothing during the debates regarding eneregy conservation…but he has experience. H. Clinton feels she has experience because she was married to Bill Clinton while he was governor of Arkansas like Huckabee and the President. Well if that is the case Nancy Reagan should run because she was married to Ronald Reagan while he was governor of CA and President… The fact is Edwards and Obama are winning for a reason. The fact is that there are more forward thinking folks in this country than H. Clinton and some old Washington insiders tend to credit… Obama is the right candidate for right now in America. If President Kennedy had not had a vision of men landing on the moon within a specific time period where would we be as America. So why knock Obama when he like Kennedy is trying to inspire and present a positive inclusive vision for the country to move towards. Instead, those who often live their lives thinking inside the box try to hold on to stale and broken ideas. Experience is great but Bush supposedly had a lot of experience he is even an ex-president's son look at where he has the country…

For the undecided independent voters, “America needs this movement” of change in order for it to survive.

The question is, am I willing to accept change, or will I compromise the very thing I have wanted to see take place in a very long time? Change. No one knows that better than our military men and women who fight every day to bring change to a nation, that is in bondage to a system that no longer works for the good of us all.

For 10-40+ years the “experienced,” allowed the unthinkable to take place in our country (i.e. lack of secure borders; illegal immigration; 9/11; no health care; education failure; the exportation of our jobs; dependency on foreign oil/ financial aid; global warming (Al Gore was right there, they ignored him); sex scandal, sub-prime mortgage debacle, etc.). They did not do any of what they are promising us again.

With their global initiatives, foreign nations invest in our economy. WHO WILL EVENTUALLY OWN AMERICA? America is at stake of being taken over.

Remember "Humpty Dumpty.” Look at everything that has happened with the “experienced.” Others will control America. We need a change from all the “experienced” who has gotten America in this shape for lack of judgment to say, “No to corporate greed and power.” If you can, get a copy of The Wall Street Journal, September 26, 2007 issue or visit http://www.augustreview.com. Then you will know the truth about why they are fighting so hard to get back in.

Remember Lot’s wife. WE CANNOT AFFORD TO LOOK BACK. America will not survive. We need someone who is really going to bring us together as a nation. This is a once in a life time movement for us; to have “an audacity to hope,” and regain our respect and integrity as a beacon of light and hope to the world.

Iowa showed us the way. Will we follow?

Anyone even thinking of voting for Richardson should just look at the New Mexico state tourism board's latest PR campaign. It features aliens talking at a copier. If the type of people that would elect Richardson would put major money into an insulting series of TV commercials like that, what does that say about the credibility of their elected governor????

If you want to see additional body bags in your town or city, then vote for the inexperience canidate.

I am a born and raised card-carrying Member of the G.O.P., but if — heaven forbid— I were a Democrat, I would be out working for, campaigning for and voting for Bill Richardson. If the Democrats were smart — they are not, believe me — they would nominate Richardson for President. He is the ONLY Democrat that I could or would accept as my next President. He served in the House, where I met him when I worked as a Staffer for a former Member of the House. He was a wonderful Ambassador to the U.N. as well as Secretary of Energy. He is now serving the people of New Mexico well as their Governor. He delas with budgets, staffing, departments, etc. He has all the qualifications that make a good President and he "says it like it is". Hillary is on her way OUT…Edwards time has come and gone…and this country will NOT elect Obama…hey, Demos…get smart and nominate Richardson. He is a nice guy, that should not finish last!

Richardson like Hillary??? He's nothing like her. He's likable, has actually done it, and he's a Governor. If the moronic masses actually had a clue, they'd go with Richardson.

But the media flash and endless hype of Barack Hussein Obama is fooling them.

Hillary's the one who sounds desperate. Bill R. is totally right.
The media has really ruined this one for us.

Diane,

I'm one of those smart ones. I've backed Bill Richardson from the get-go. He's the only electable candidate the Democrats have. He's a Governor, likeable, charismatic in 1 to 1 situations on the trail, and the only one the GOP fears. I know this. But the stupid kool-aid drinkers are buying this Obama crap hook, line and sinker. He'll get beat in the general easily.
We Democrats have allowed a few starry-eyed dreamers and the deplorable media to select our nominee for us. I'm angry.

After listening to the democratic debate, Obama's and Edwards's motto should be we are not really qualified, “but we did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.”

Edwards is also way too inexperienced and truth be known, has just as much experience in the Senate as Obama. Lastly, Edwards is a loser from the last presidential election.

Any current member of Congress is part of the status qou who are you kidding? Obama idea of change is having lobbyist buy members of Congress drinks and bar foods while standing up. The economy would go to ruins under a Obama or Edwards administration because of taxes.

Bill Richardson is the only Democrat candidate who is for lower taxes and balancing the budget, a real energy revolution, and a real Iraq Plan with a Middle East strategy, period. Its the economy.

Bill Richardson is the viable candidate based on strategic votes. If Democrats want to win in the general election, they must win the West in states like New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, Montana, Wyoming, and Texas (South Texas). It is not likely for the Democrats to win in Fall 2008 with Obama or Edwards leading the ticket because they simply cannot carry the Rocky Mountain West.

Ajay Jain That was really wonderful and I enjoyed it so much I have read it several times.
I am sure there will be a place for him in Obamas' Presidency. He is a decent man.
Bye Bye Bill…see you later!

I have to say, I'm not very impressed by the level of vitriol emanating from the proponents of "change."

Governor Richardson is the most qualified candidate of all Democrats.
Too bad Democrats are fooled by fake promises of change.

A quote from Paul Abrams, M.D., J.D, because I couldn't have said it any better myself:

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.

It is interesting how some point the finger at Bill Richardson for the current rise in oil?

Bill Richardson has not been Secretary of Energy for the last 7 years, what has the Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham and Samuel Bodman been doing in the last 7 years?

Bill Richardson actually negotiated with OPEC to raise oil production which resulted in lower prices during his tenure.

The facts are Bill Richardson is not accountable for the current rise in oil prices, Secretary Bodman is, and the current Secretary of Energy, and who is part of an administration that believes in the free market.

Pointing the finger at Bill Richardson for the current rise in oil price is lame and meaningless.

Step aside American Idol, hello American Candidate! Only Bill Richardson has not only the skills and experience to create change, but the personality to bring people together. To bring home hostages. To negotiate with dictators like Saddam Hussein.

Hillary said, "When North Korea wanted to talk to the U.S. about reliqueshing its nuclear program, they didn't call Obama". They didn't call Hillary, either! No, they in fact called Bill Richardson. Great article here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/news-flash-clintons-back_b_80332.html

Teh fact that richardsons supporters can quote line and verse of policy success after success tells you who his percentage of support is from. Unfortunately wonks are a minority.

On the fuel oil shortage people forgot to mention the usuing of the strategic oil reserve despite clintons commerce secretary arguing it wouldn't lower fuel oil rates to "LOWER" fuel oil rates for the northeast. Although they are ona different scale of high now.

It's not like a secretary of energy can just decide to spend billions on clean energy "President Clinton" and his apparently co president Hillary would have had to press an energy bill and funding through congress to do that. Sure blame Richardson not Clinton for there being no energy revolution during Clinton's presidency. As secretary you can apparently expend funds and create incentive programs without congressional and presidential authorization.