I like Bill Richardson. Not "perfect" but...

[TreasonousBastard]

one hell of a resume and he seems to get the job done.

[Captain Hilts]

1. I likehim a lot too. Clark, BR and Dodd are my three faves. nt

[SharonRB]

2. If Gore doesn't run

Richardson is my second choice. I, too, think he has the experience we need in our next president.

[nevergiveup]

3. Obama/Richardson or

Richardson/Obama and I am happy.

[skipos]

4. I disagree with Richardson on some things, but he would be an excellent President

One of my favorite things about him is his love of diplomacy. Going to Darfur to negotiate a ceasefire (because Bush Inc. couldn't care less) as a governor is pretty unheard of. We will need someone like that to undo all the damage Bush has done to our foreign reputation.

[Jackeen]

5. I despair that he's not getting much airtime.

Hopefully since the NM primaries are fairly early on in the sequence, he'll do well and make his name a lot better known. He's not a heavy hitter like Barak or Hillary, but he is a moderate to appeal to the independent voters, not particularly polarising, may pick up the Hispanic vote, known as pro-gun... I think he's got an excellent shot at the General, if the primaries allow him to.

[Blue_In_AK]

6. I like Bill Richardson, too.

He would do great in Alaska - better than all the others. People up here like their guns and their marijuana. :evilgrin:

[FreeStateDemocrat]

7. I liked him too until I heard him on Tavis Smiley advocating Alberto Gonzales should continue as AG.

Some reason's he stated were that president should have whomever he wants as AG and that Alberto is highest ranking Hispanic in administration (stunned me that he said it, correct me if I had a senior moment since I had trouble believing what I heard). Very weak and troublesome logic that makes me reconsider his abilities to be an effective representative of our party in 2008.

[TreasonousBastard]

8. Somewhat disturbing, but not quite a dealkiller until...

we know the full context. He seems to have made a lifelong enemy of Byrd a while back, too, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

To me, a dealkiller would be if he turns out to be a hotdogging blowhard with better PR than results.

Anyway, nobody's perfect and we're looking for someone who's got the chops to do the job, not pander to every one of our pet peeves.

[bklyncowgirl]

9. How long ago was that? nt

[FreeStateDemocrat]

10. I saw it yesterday (3-22) but it was a taped replay on WMPT from maybe

the Wednesday night show.The content was current but I don't know the exact date it was recorded,you can probably research it at his site or at PBS. He engaged in a lengthy (and mostly weak) defense of Gonzales, pointing out that being the head of a cabinet agency leaves room for wiggle because of so many people operating under him and other similar BS that was very thin.

[TreasonousBastard]

14. How long ago was what? If you mean the Byrd thing...

when he was Clinton's Energy Secretary he got raked over the coals for the Wen Ho Lee scandal and Byrd started screaming that he was arrogant, incompetant, a liar and a thief, and anything else he could think of.

A little over the top.

[seasat]

17. Here's the transcript from the show.

(LINK)

Yeah, I know. I'm rooting for him, I like the guy, I know him. I hope he survives, but he's got to clean up his act and at least know what's happening in his department. He, at that press conference, said "Well, I didn't know anything about this." When you're heading a Cabinet agency—I did at the Department of Energy—and it's very hard to do that, 'cause you got thousands of people working for you.

...(answer to follow up)
They probably shouldn't have confirmed him. I don't think the president should have given him that job. He was White House counsel. He might have been an excellent ambassador to Mexico. He's very loyal to the president. I've had conversations with him on immigration. I thought he was very competent.

But he obviously was not engaged with his department. So, I do believe that if he doesn't come forth and testify and be frank with the American people and tell the Congress, then the president should remove him. But I just think, Tavis, that this is a presidential decision. You can pick your Cabinet. And if somebody's not performing, let him go.

And I don't agree with the president saying virtually that Alberto didn't do anything wrong, and that the Congress shouldn't have access to Karl Rove and to Harriet Miers. They should. But there's a human side to me. The guy's a very, very—came up from a very poor family, he's the highest-ranking Hispanic ever. Maybe I'm waiting a little more so that he cleans up his act before I join everybody else and try to, I guess, make some political hay out of this.

There's more at the link but it sounded like to me that though he disagrees with Gonzales on many issues, he personally likes the guy (having dealt with him over immigration issues) and is giving him the benefit of the doubt when Gonzales says that he didn't know anything about the firings. However, he does say that Gonzales should testify before congress and Richardson really complements David Iglesias.

This may also be a political calculation on Richardson's part since he is hoping on a boost from Hispanic voters and figures they may be turned off if he immediately calls for the firing of Gonzales. Gonzales is the highest ranking Hispanic ever in the US government. It also could be that Richardson actually speaks his mind and doesn't jump on an issue he doesn't agree with because of the potential political boost.

[bread_and_roses]

11. correct me if i'm wrong but isn't he

a big supporter of "free" trade. Sorry, havn't really followed him, so don't know much - just vaguely recall reading something a while ago that put me off interest in him.

[skipos]

12. He was

and that is my least favorite thing about him. I haven't heard him say anything about it recently, so I hope that he has changed his tune on it.

[bklyncowgirl]

15. I believe I heard him say that he now says trade agreements need labor & environmental standards

He said that NAFTA did not work out as well as he and other supporters thought it would.

That I think puts him in the same catagory as Al Gore--also a big NAFTA supporter.

Nobody's perfect.

[TreasonousBastard]

13. Probably, since he was also a bigshot in Kissinger's firm, but...

again, nobody's perfect and I heard him talking about his trade views-- he's doesn't seem to be a libertarian free-trader.

[seasat]

18. He voted for NAFTA and wrote some amendments to it.

Those amendments were for labor and environmental protections. The Bush administration has never enforced any of them. IMHO, the reasons that Richardson was for NAFTA were to lower illegal immigration and help in competition against other trading blocks like the EU. Here's a speech transcript where he discusses trade back in 1998 as UN ambassador (LINK).

Richardson, even back in the early 90's, insisted that trade with a country take into consideration their human rights record. He even said that it should be considered in voting for Most Favored Nation status (China). It always sounded to me that Richardson supported free trade with Latin America and Mexico but wasn't for freer trade with China. IMHO, our major problem with trade has come from China and India not Latin America. Here's a recent quote from Richardson on trade where he makes the same points as most Democrats regarding fair trade in a column by Andres Oppenheimer(LINK).

On the pending free-trade agreements with Peru and Colombia, Richardson said, "I'm a free trader. But I think free-trade agreements have to have stronger enforcements in three areas: wage disparity, worker protection and environmental protection." He said he would only support the pending trade deals if they contain stronger enforcement provisions in those areas.
...(Oppenheimer's comment)
My opinion: I'm somewhat anxious about Richardson's stand on free trade, which is clearly geared to please U.S. unions eager to protect their members from foreign competition, even if that comes at a great cost to U.S. consumers and Latin American economies.

BTW, he only worked with Kissinger McLarty Associates for one year primary as a consultant to businesses on international relations. Thomas McLarty was Bill Clinton's chief of staff.

[Forkboy]

16. He's a mixed bag,for reasons others are pointing out.

But I think he's better than some others that are running,and his quiet demeanor (at least from what I've seen of him) is a stark contrast to many of the other candidates.