Time for the Governor to stop this nonsense and start running for Senator.

Where in the U.S. Constitution does it even mention primaries or caucuses? Nowhere, of course. So, what is he referring to by constitutional reasons? Maybe, he's referring to the Iowa constitution (I don't know if it includes anything relevant), but no one except Iowans are bound by that--not the DNC or other states.

You know, of all the stupid things Richardson has said, this is by far the most obviously joking one.  I find it really disturbing that so many people thought he seriously believed that "the Lord" ordained the status of the Iowa caucus.  This is how we wind up with humorless candidates, or worse, candidates whose idea of humor begins and ends with nicknames for members of the press.

Or are liberal bloggers way too eager to draw conclusions about candidates based on out of context news articles?

This is no different than the Obama caves on Iraq ordeal.  How about we reserve judgment until the candidate is at least given a chance to respond or we risk becoming no better than the Drudge Report.

I used to support Mr. Richardson, as I believe that he has the best resume outside of DC, and has had the executive experience.  He is totally unable to stop saying stupid shit, however, and is now toxic.

He should run for the Senate.

...with his continued gaffes.

The Presidency, of course, is right out.

troops" fraud. I can't believe that the netroots believe in this pie-in-the-sky isolationism nonsense. Even more pathetic - they believe that Richardson is on their side on the issue, and that he is not just a panderer.pandering.

One thing that is admirable about Hillary and Obama is that they do not pander to the base, and - in the case of Obama - not to anyone else either.

I'm glad at least he meant it as a joke- although anyone reading it would not know and with our current President, it's easy to think someone would mean it literally.  It's still a strange thing to say, no matter what.

RICHARDSON V. HIS RESUME CONT'D:

By the time he got to the day's last public event, a speech at the Flamingo Library to the Stonewall Democrats of Southern Nevada, an audience member had to remind Richardson that France is a member of the U.N. Security Council.

For those not familiar with the Richardson resume, he was Clinton's ambassador to the United Nations.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/theplank?pid=117 600

Richardson is apparently a great retail politician on a one-to-one level, making small talk and such, which probably has something to do with his success as a diplomat.  He might well be the winner of the "have a beer with" contest.  

Not having seen the guy in person, I don't want to jump to conclusions, but it seems like he just might not come across as well in the stump/debate setting.

There's an aspect of this story that reminds me of the fake controversy over Al Gore's "union label" joke, but it also sounds like his delivery might not have been the best.

I would like to point out one thing about the supplemental, I interpreted his response to be more of a commentary on how many supplementals there have been. More of long-suffering sigh.

"Another one? Didn't we just have one? There have been so many..."

That said I have no idea how he meant it, maybe he didn't have a clue. Honestly I've been busy this past week or two and as such I barely know there's a supplemental coming up again myself.

whoever has been doing Richardson's ads absolutely needs to be hired by the eventual Democratic nominee.

as for Richardson himself, well, he can run for Senate, or maybe he'll get a Cabinet appointment. he's not going to be VP.

I have to disagree with your castigations and the premises thereof. Please read New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson's recently published article on how we must reconfigure the entire US Foreign Policy (printed in the Harvard International Review, yet this has hardly been noticed by any mainstream media).

You could conclude that Bill Richardson is changing the nature of the debate between the Democrat candidates and improving the international focus of their dialogue, not to mention being the strongest candidate to speak for ending the Iraq war immediately, something you perhaps would like to dismiss, so do please read on.

I hope you can share this important document with your friends, colleagues, and readers. It is a very important international policy breakthrough and deserves to be read and considered by every single American, the entire diplomatic community from every nation, as well as your insightful readers! I am not officially connected to his
campaign, but as a private citizen, I recognize the importance of this statement enough to send it to you.
Thank you, Stephen Fox
_____________

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson's International Policies, from Harvard
International Review

"New Realism: Crafting a US Foreign Policy for a New Century"
Governor Bill Richardson
Redacted from the Harvard International Review

US foreign policymakers face novel challenges in the 21st century. Jihadists and environmental crises have replaced armies and missiles as the greatest threats; globalization has eroded the significance of national borders. Many problems that were once national are now global, and dangers that once came only from states now come also from societies--not from hostile governments,
but from hostile individuals or from impersonal social trends, such as the consumption of fossil fuels. The piece does a credible job of laying out the problems before us and arguing that the Bush Administration has not taken the appropriate measures to deal with them.

The highlights of Richardson's plans:

First and foremost, the United States must repair its alliances. US leaders also must restore commitment to international law and multilateral
cooperation.

Promoting expansion of the UN Security Council's permanent membership to include Japan, India, Germany, and one country each from Africa and Latin America.

Ethical reform at the United Nations so that this vital institution can help many underdeveloped and destitute member states meet the challenges of the 21st century.

Expanding the G8 to include India and China.

The US government must join the International Criminal Court and respect all international treaties, including the Geneva Conventions."

On environmental issues, the United States must be the leader, not the laggard, in global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by embracing
the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, Lead the world with a man-on-the-moon effort to improve energy efficiency and to commercialize clean, alternative technologies.

Stop considering diplomatic engagement with others as a reward for good behavior.

Various efforts including ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

The United States needs to start showing, both through its words and through its actions, that this is not, as the Jihadists claim, a clash of
civilizations. Rather, it is a clash between civilization and barbarity.

Closing Guantanamo

The United States also needs to pressure Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and other friends in the Arab world to reform their education systems, which are incubators of anti-US sentiment.

Spend more to develop first responders and to drastically improve public health facilities, which, five years after 9/11, are not ready for a
biological attack.

The United States needs to lead the global fight against poverty, which is the basis of so much violence.

Encourage rich countries to honor UN Millennium goal commitments.

Lead donors on debt relief, shifting aid from loans to grants, and focus on primary health care and affordable vaccines.

Promote trade agreements, which create more jobs in all nations and which seriously address wage disparities, worker rights, and the environment.

Pressure pharmaceutical companies to allow expanded use of generic drugs, and encourage public-private partnerships to reduce costs and enhance access to anti-malarial drugs and bed nets.

Promote a multilateral Marshall Plan for the Middle East and North Africa.

I look forward to your reply,
Stephen Fox
stephen@santafefineart.com

None of these gaffes surprise me. Richardson has to be the most overrated of the major candidates for the Democratic nomination.  For a long time, everyone was high on him for his "impressive resume," but the people closer to his actual performance in those posts aren't always so impressed. I now that people who served under him as  Energy secretary were very unimpressed, and felt that he didn't even try to educate himself on the biggest long-term energy issues.

My best line from the comments today: "He is totally unable to stop saying stupid shit, however, and is now toxic. He should run for the Senate."

A few of Richardson's so-called gaffes weren't.

His failure to have memorized the G, i mean GL, i mean GBL, er i mean GBLT infalible bumper sticker orthodoxy was at worst a wash in my book.

This comment in Iowa was just a hyperbolic joke about the primacy of Iowa which is itself a hyperbolic joke.

Obviously there is that hitch in his retail appeal that causes problem for him on the stump.  I'll give you that, but you look l like a clown latching onto this Iowa thing.

The further we get from selecting persons who are actually qualified for high office, in favor of persons who are easy to package and sell, because they campaign well, the worse off we are. That's how the Republicans ended up with the current President. That was the thinking that made the Pennsylvania GOP throw a qualified former Lieutenant Governor under a bus, last time, to run a former star athlete for governor, instead.

I don't have a favorite among the current crop of contenders for the Presidential nomination. I can live with any of them. But it's somewhat discouraging to have to wonder if there isn't almost a negative correlation between "well-qualified" and "electable."