Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Big 'n' Richardson
New
Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, whose presidential bid sunk like that
bus in The Sweet
Hereafter two-and-a-half months ago, endorses Barack
Obama. Jonah Goldberg
shrugs.
Is there any person in the Known Universe who honestly and sincerely will vote for Obama now solely because Bill Richardson has endorsed him? Could such a person exist?
Hey, I exist! When I followed around Richardson and read his book for this article, I started off expecting his reputation as a market-friendly, iconoclastic Democrat to be a charade. It was only 75 percent of a charade: Pretty impressive, as these things go. Congressman Richardson whipped against the proto-John Edwards Democrats to pass NAFTA, and Governor Richardson signed a medical marijuana law while keeping New Mexico government pretty lean (if not lean by Gary Johnson standards). His absolute worst moments have come when either 1)running for president (I'm talking more about his left turn in New Mexico than his campaign trail gaffes) or 2)working for Bill Clinton. And there's no chance of him doing either of those things now!
Also, Richardson's snub of the Clintons underscores what rotten people they surround themselves with. For example:
The preternaturally jolly [Terry] McAuliffe is a good mad to have spinning for you in a pinch. But his good cheer dimmed when I asked him about Bill Richardson, who appears to have made an 11th-hour deal to throw his supporters to Obama. “How many times did [Clinton] appoint him?” McAuliffe marveled. “Two? U.N. Ambassador and Energy Secretary?” He looked at me, half-glaring, awaiting confirmation. “I don’t know,” I joked, “but who’s counting?” “I am,” McAuliffe said firmly.
I wasn't on the fence between Clinton and Obama (I voted for Ron Paul in D.C.'s primary), but if I was, this would nudge me.
Edward|3.21.08 @ 5:52PM|#
Did you vote for Ron Paul before or after the racist newsletter revelations?
The Democratic Republican|3.21.08 @ 5:56PM|#
Edward, you illiterate, you could use the fancy thing called The
Internet to look up when the DC primary was, and then look up when
the latest newsletter stories broke.
Maybe you were just joking or being an ass. Take my response as an
indicator of just how un-funny you are.
Edward|3.21.08 @ 5:58PM|#
So, David, the fact that Ron Paul allowed to let such noxious shit go out under his name didn't bother you? Your'e one loyal lap dog.
|3.21.08 @ 6:01PM|#
As for McAuliffe's being unhappy: doesn't gov. Richardson's lack of political "payback" say a great deal about his character? As does the disappointment about McAuliffe's.
|3.21.08 @ 6:04PM|#
Edward, I suspect that if Mr. Weigel had a distaste for noxious shit, we all would no longer be suffering you.
Click \'n\' Learn|3.21.08 @ 6:14PM|#
It's going to be so fun when She wins. She'll spend most of her
time getting back at other bad people, She'll have little time to
be bad herself.
As for Richardson, he's definitely the Cosmo's Choice:
youtube.com/watch?v=i0YRHXoygRM
youtube.com/watch?v=MiszkrzoOs0
youtube.com/watch?v=CifLm6z32eA
youtube.com/watch?v=mN2o208PFhg
As the first one describes, he was shilling for a pan-American
group whose interests are at odds from the U.S. at the same
time as he was running for president of the U.S..
|3.21.08 @ 6:18PM|#
Ah, Click n' Learn and Edward in the same thread! [reaches for cyanide capsule].
Elemenope|3.21.08 @ 6:24PM|#
As for McAuliffe's being unhappy: doesn't gov. Richardson's
lack of political "payback" say a great deal about his
character?
Yeah it does; always kinda liked him anyways. Being from the
southwest (and being popular there) and being Hispanic, he'd be the
smartest VP choice for the dems (who will be going up a popular
southwestern honkey come November).
Best part, of course, is that white folks who don't pay so much
attention probably would assume from his name he's a fellow honkey
and vote for him anyways.
Rimfax|3.21.08 @ 6:29PM|#
The preternaturally jolly [Terry] McAuliffe...
Does everyone have goatees in your universe? I've never met him in
person, but I can only remember reading shrill quote after shrill
quote from him while he was DNC Chair.
|3.21.08 @ 6:47PM|#
Am I missing something? The govmeister has definitely darken up, he looks a lot more Latino now, it appears to me. Is there another election coming up for the Gov?
|3.21.08 @ 6:51PM|#
Did you hear? Steve Forbes had a article in Forbes magazine with racist comments. Its a good thing he's not running for president!! Just think, a Forbes magazine, that Steve Forbes makes money on, had racist comments. That must mean Steve Forbes is racist....I mean, it's his magazine, he should be editing every article that is published. Wait, I bet he wrote the racist article..
Kolohe|3.21.08 @ 6:52PM|#
while keeping New Mexico government pretty lean
I seriously think that a good part of Richardson lack of electoral
traction was that he himself was not lean. If he undertakes a
successful Huckabee-esqe fitness kick, he will realize great gains
of his national political stock in the next open cycle.
|3.21.08 @ 6:53PM|#
Couldn't you use Jonah's snide comment about any political endorsement? Is it just me or has he gotten more tiresome (which is surprising) since his book got published?
Geotpf|3.21.08 @ 7:25PM|#
Click 'n' Learn | March 21, 2008, 6:14pm | #
It's going to be so fun when She wins.
Obama will be ahead in pledged delegates at the end. There is
basically no way that Clinton can overcome his lead in those. And,
as the pledged delegates go, so do the Superdelegates. This is
factoring in a 57-43 PA win by Clinton, as predicted by the MYDD
link above (which sounds accurate).
Basically, Clinton can't win. She lost sometime during Obama's
11-win streak before Ohio/Texas. All this is just the dead cat
bounce.
|3.21.08 @ 7:36PM|#
Goldberg is being deliberately obtuse (what a surprise, eh?) -
the Richardson endorsement may not sway many ordinary voters, but
at this point they don't really matter any more, since Clinton has
little to no chance of catching Obama among pledged delegates. But
the endorsement could affect the decisions of super-delegates, who
still do matter a great deal.
The really big names in the party have been sitting on the fence
for months, presumably hoping the process would come to a natural
end. Richardson is the first to jump off, and given his past
association with the Clintons, his choice is especially
significant.
Colin|3.21.08 @ 7:37PM|#
Obama should pick Richardson if he wins the nom. If he doesn't lift his Hispanic numbers, he can't win the general.
|3.21.08 @ 7:51PM|#
Are you sure that is Richardson? What ever happened to the
Hawain guy on Hawai Five-O?
The token ...Chu, that's it.
Looks like him with a goatee.
Anyway, if the MSM didn't tell every single time that Richardson
was a latino, would ever have guessed? Seriously!
|3.21.08 @ 8:01PM|#
This is one of the best things I could have hoped for. After
Richardson dropped out, I realized that he was by far the best and
most qualified candidate on the Dem side. Ever since, I have been
praying for an Obama/Richardson ticket, and this is a great first
step.
I like Richardson because in addition to social libertarianism and
foreign policy restraint, his record as governor of New Mexico has
been pro-gun and anti-tax. His immigration stance is a heck of a
lot better than Ron Paul's.
He was ranked by the Cato Institute as the most fiscally
responsible Democratic governor in the country. It will bring a lot
of crossover appeal when he can show that he was actually MORE
fiscally responsible than either Romney or Huckabee. If McCain
picks a governor as his running mate, Bill Richardson could stand
up and show that he has a better record on taxes and spending than
they do! That would be a laugh.
If Obama picks Richardson as veep, I will seriously consider voting
Dem in 2008. Fingers crossed for a Richardson presidency in
2016...He's not a perfect candidate by any stretch of the
imagination, but he's a good start to put the Dems on the path they
should have been on a long time ago. The Democratic Freedom Caucus
- the small libertarian wing of the Democratic Party - had endorsed
Richardson, by the way.)
|3.21.08 @ 8:10PM|#
Stick a fork in her. She's done. Bill Richardson just ended the
race for the Democratic nomination.
The fantasy of the Hillary Clinton superdelegates/stealing
delegates/owning the party and winning the nomination in a back
room was always an experssion of "the paranoid style of American
politics."
Hi, Lonewacko.
|3.21.08 @ 8:33PM|#
"How many times did [Clinton] appoint him?" McAuliffe
marveled. "Two? U.N. Ambassador and Energy Secretary?" He looked at
me, half-glaring, awaiting confirmation. "I don't know," I joked,
"but who's counting?" "I am," McAuliffe said firmly.
But, but, but ...
Hillary is her own woman. She is not riding on the coattails of her
philandering husband, but on her own accomplishments. That
is exactly why Terry McAuliffe is correct in bring up the
appointments that Bubba...
Oops, that didn't sound quite right. Let's try that again from the
top.
Hillary is her own woman, ...
Damn, the ultra-feminists must be shitting nails about now.
|3.21.08 @ 8:35PM|#
Lonewacko, Edward, it is late and I am tired. Please look up some of my previous obscenity laden diatribes directed at your worthless asses. Thank you.
|3.21.08 @ 9:05PM|#
I think Obama is going to win, too, but he's only got about a
Pennsylvania lead on her. And he looks to lose there. I'd say that
any authoritative "done" statements will need to wait.
I might've voted for Richardson if it had been between him and
McCain. Maybe not, but it was a possibility. I won't vote for Obama
or Clinton.
johnl|3.21.08 @ 9:15PM|#
Wasn't there something Richardson did in 2001, something about putting a memo in his pocket, that was so over the top crazy he can't be put on a national ballot? Or was that some other ex-Clinton appointee?
|3.21.08 @ 9:35PM|#
johnl, you're thinking of Sandy Berger.
Pro Lib, his lead in total delegates is about the same as the # of
delegates from Pennsylvania, that is true. And he's going to lose
Pennsylvania, that is also true.
But of the, IIRC, 138 delegates in Pennsylvania, he's guaranteed to
win 60, she's guaranteed to win 60, and it's really the split of
the remaining 18 (all numbers extricated from where the sun don't
shine) that they're fighting over. Even if she whomps him, we're
talking about a total pickup of less than 20 net delegates.
johnl|3.21.08 @ 9:37PM|#
I'm thinking of Sandy Berger. The documents stuffed into pockets, the billing records in sock drawers, ... There are just too many sitcom stock joke elements around the Clintons.
|3.21.08 @ 9:40PM|#
Ah, my mistake. I was thinking Pennsylvania was a winner-take-all state. Well, his chances of being ahead in the delegate count are all the better then. It'll be close enough to be an interesting convention. And much can happen between now and then. The real killer to me is that HRC is simply a poor campaigner. Obama sometimes makes newbie type mistakes, but he has his act together more than she does.
|3.21.08 @ 9:50PM|#
The DNC doesn't allow winner-take-all states. That was part of
the democratic Democratic reforms in the 70s.
I don't think the superdelegates are going to let it go to the
convention. They are primarily interested in the fortunes of the
party, and they can see how McCain's numbers are rising as he gets
to start his general election campaign while the Democratic
candidates are still flailing away at each other.
|3.21.08 @ 10:13PM|#
No, I know, I'm just used to thinking of the GOP in
Florida.
I think it would be a good idea, strategically speaking, for the
Democrats to start working on the general election.
johnl|3.21.08 @ 10:49PM|#
I think I know what's tying this all together. Berger hid classified documents in his socks. Hill misplaced billing records in her sock drawer. And the Clinton's cat was named Socks. It all makes sense now.
|3.22.08 @ 9:10AM|#
Isn't McAuliffe the same guy who was allowed to buy shares in
WorldCom (or maybe Global Crossing) before it IPO'ed? He ante'd up
$100,000 and sold his shares after the IPO for $18 million dollars,
IIRC.
That sort of thing happened to the Clintonistas quite regularly,
oddly enough.
McAuliffe is a typical, dirtbag leach on society. The fact that he
dislikes Richardson puts Richardson a notch or two closer to God,
in my opinion.
|3.22.08 @ 9:24AM|#
Best part, of course, is that white folks who don't pay so much attention probably would assume from his name he's a fellow honkey and vote for him anyways.
sigh. Honkeys obviously will only vote for fellow honkeys. How else
would Obama win the Dem primaries in Idaho (the evil, white devil
capital of the US) and Wyoming?
some guy|3.22.08 @ 12:06PM|#
The DNC doesn't allow winner-take-all states.
I humbly predict they will, next time 'round. Just a hunch.
Not that I'm not enjoying the fact that the Dem's all-inclusive
consensus-politics might just lose them the election. I'm also not
enjoying the fact that McCain is the best the 'Pubs can do. "Let's
see...who can we get that's just as old as Bob Dole but was in a
different war?" Ugh.
|3.22.08 @ 2:49PM|#
Damn, Bill Richardson looks like a hell of a nice guy in the picture. Looks count in 21st century politics. That's just an observation.
Neu Mejican|3.22.08 @ 3:00PM|#
wayne,
sigh. Honkeys obviously will only vote for fellow
honkeys.
I guess this is like nigger.
As I have had it explained to me...
Nigger does not equal black man...only certain kinds of black men
(and even, potentially non-black men).
Honkey would, therefore, not refer to white men, but rather only
those white men with a certain degree of "honkiness."
Or something.
|3.23.08 @ 12:57AM|#
As I have had it explained to me...
Nigger does not equal black man...only certain kinds of black men (and even, potentially non-black men).
Since today is Easter, you could test your theory by attending a
local black church service and giving testament to your belief that
most African Americans are good people, but there are some N-----s
in attendance. If you actually try this, I want to say it has been
nice arguing with you.
[/sarcasm back at you]
|3.23.08 @ 1:03AM|#
"Damn, Bill Richardson looks like a hell of a nice guy in the
picture. Looks count in 21st century politics. That's just an
observation."
I agree.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245