Trivial pursuit, political style

The 2008 presidential election will either be the campaign that gives this country its first president from Hawaii, or its first vice president from Alaska. Either way, the parts of the United States that are not part of the mainland will experience a boost.

Now all we need is to get a serious political candidate from Puerto Rico or Guam to run for office. Or perhaps Bill Richardson (born in California, his mother is Mexican and he was raised as a child south of the Rio Bravo del Norte/Rio Grande) has learned from his mistakes of 2008 and could run a more serious campaign for president in the future?

FOR WHAT IT is worth, the Alaska governor’s office gives us its view of the future of electoral politics. Sarah Palin’s official government website (at www.gov.state.ak.us/bio.php/) includes an official biography for gubernatorial spouse Todd Palin – her high school sweetheart.

The link to his portion of the site refers to him as the, “First Gentleman.”

And on a final (if somewhat disgusting) note, how much would one of Oprah’s eyelashes be worth on eBay? You know, one of the tear-soaked ones she wore at Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama’s acceptance speech?

-30-

EDITOR'S NOTE: Wasilla, Alaska, has managed to more than double its population during the past two decades (http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx) since local woman Sarah Palin got involved in politics, both as its two-term mayor and for the past 20 months as governor. Of course, the number of people who call Wasilla home still remains below 10,000.

Is Bill Richardson the Obama substitute for Illinois fair’s Democrat rally?

I understand Barack Obama is no longer just a junior senator from Illinois; he’s a man of the world (literally, a new Gallup Organization survey showed at least 60 percent of Europeans feel they have a stake in his election as U.S. president).

I also realize the Illinois State Fair has all the characteristics of a third-rate production that is best ignored, if at all possible. Many counties across Illinois, as well as the states that surround the Land of Lincoln, put on more extravagant affairs than what will take place in Springfield come mid-August.

YET I AM hoping that Obama can somehow configure his campaign schedule to be in Illinois come Aug. 13 – which is the day during the Illinois State Fair when Democrats are scheduled to hold a series of events meant to promote their electoral candidates.

As things stand now, the highlight of Democrats Day/Governor’s Day is that New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson will make the trip from his capital in Santa Fe to our capital in Springfield – speaking at a breakfast session being held for the Democratic Party’s county chairmen from rural Illinois.

Considering Blagojevich’s lack of popularity in the Illinois capital city, his presence will not be a big deal. In fact, it could be little more than an excuse for hecklers to exercise their vocal cords.

After meeting earlier this year with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Mexico President Felipe Calderon Hinojosa to discuss issues of international significance, what will be New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson's reaction to our capital city of Springfield? Photograph provided by New Mexico governor's office.

So if Obama doesn’t show, the Democratic Party’s presence at the Illinois fair will have to rely on a man with no local ties in order to have any sense of political glamour.

OBAMA HAS BEEN invited to the event, and it is traditional that the Democratic U.S. senators from Illinois would appear at the various rallies held at the fairgrounds – if not to promote themselves, then to give other Democrats running for office a chance to have candid photographs taken of them reveling in the glitz of Obama-mania.

Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., has already committed to appearing at the event. Of course, he’s a Springfield resident. He has no excuse for not showing up at the fairgrounds.

I would hope Obama doesn’t pull some sense of Chicago snobbery in deciding to blow off the fair on Democrat Day.

If anything, it would be a chance for the people of the part of Illinois outside of Chicago to feel like Obama has not forgotten they exist. Can anyone even remember the last time his campaign took him to somewhere in rural Illinois?

IF MY MEMORY is correct, it was when he made a brief appearance in Quincy when the flooding along the Mississippi River was at its peak. That was a moment that will live on forever in the memories of those emergency crew workers who were present at the time, but it’s hardly the feel-good moment that Obama ought to be trying to create for all Illinoisans.

Besides, I would think Obama would want to play up a chance to make an appearance or two with Richardson, who after his own presidential aspirations fizzled out endorsed Obama at a time when primary opponent Hillary R. Clinton was still a viable option.

Some have speculated that Obama will use the Richardson endorsement to try to appeal to the growing Latino voter bloc in this country, but it might actually make more sense to try to appeal to those establishment Democrats who would want to support officials with experience in federal government.

Richardson, after all, is the former energy secretary and U.S. ambassador to the United Nations under former President Bill Clinton.

A JOINT APPEARANCE between the two at the party chairman’s breakfast would give an event that theoretically is for the have-nots of the Illinois Democratic Party (the haves are all from Chicago) a jolt of excitement. It would give the rural Illinois Democrats their moment in the sunshine.

And just think of how kitschy it would be if Richardson managed to stick around Springfield for a few extra hours and partake of some of the fair’s events. The Obama-Richardson duo could do the fairgrounds, checking out the various exhibits and livestock shows.

It’s just too bad that the Democrat Day political events take place a couple of days after the hog- and husband-calling contests that have become a state fair staple.

For those who are not in the know about the fair, women get the chance to parody the hog calls used by farmers, bellowing and shrieking for their husbands to hop to it and come.

COULDN’T YOU JUST imagine the look of bewilderment on Richardson’s face (just a few days before presiding over a special session on universal health care) if he got to see Michelle Obama taking her crack at devising a unique call for her husband?

“Get over here, Barrrrrrrrr-eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeey.”

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: The Illinois Democratic County Chairmen’s Association breakfast on Aug. 13 in Springfield (http://www.sj-r.com/news/x209775847/Richardson-to-address-Democrats-here) has the potential to be one of the biggest campaign events Illinois will see this year, if Barack Obama can bring himself to include Illinois in his campaign schedule.

Bill Richardson all by himself in Springfield, Ill., barely warrants this mention in the (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-il-richardsonspeech,0,2557294.story) Chicago press.

Talk about political spin. Richardson says Obama will narrowly win the electoral college (http://www.alamogordonews.com/ci_9958652) votes from New Mexico come Nov. 4. Meanwhile, Richardson remains nearly $300,000 (http://www.lcsun-news.com/ci_9961199) in debt from his presidential campaign earlier this year.

Super delegate 'theft' an Obama concern

If I were in Barack Obama’s position these days, I’d be less worried about the upcoming primary elections and focusing my attention on keeping my super-delegates happy.

Those super-delegates are the party big-wigs in states across the country, and it is plainly obvious that they are going to be the ones who ultimately decide who gets the Democratic Party’s nomination for president in the 2008 elections.

I WILL GO so far as to predict that Obama’s presidential campaign will win May 20 in Oregon and June 3 in South Dakota, while opponent Hillary R. Clinton will win Tuesday in West Virginia, May 20 in Kentucky and June 3 in Montana.

About the only questionable remaining primary is the one scheduled for June 1 in Puerto Rico. Political amateurs presume Hillary’s “Hispanic love” will get her the victory, but anyone who carefully notices the results of Latino voters in other states will note there is a difference in the views of Mexican-American voters and Puerto Ricans who cast ballots.

The former group is the basis of Clinton’s large Latino voter majorities in most states, while Puerto Ricans who live on the mainland have shown slight support for Obama. There’s also the fact that one of the biggest Puerto Rican politicos in this country is Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., who has been an Obama supporter since the beginning of the campaign.

But the last three paragraphs are really nothing more than political trivia. It doesn’t matter who wins what state. Whether I turn out to be 100 percent correct (or wrong) in my predictions doesn’t matter.

NEITHER OBAMA NOR Clinton will get enough of the pledged type of delegates to win the nomination. The party powers that be are going to be the ones who decide who gets to run for president this year, and they will do so the last week of August in Denver – even though the primaries come to an end in early June.

I do not expect Clinton to drop out of the race. She has dipped into the fortune her and former President Bill Clinton have amassed through advances on book deals and the speaking engagements the potential first gentleman can charge for his time these days.

She is going to spend the rest of the spring trying to win every single delegate she can take.

Then, while many of us will have thoughts of summer vacations, Hillary will focus her attention on delegate “theft.”

SOME OF THE super-delegates have gone so far as to declare which Democrat they would support for president, but we need to remember there is nothing that legally binds them to such a declaration.

There is no reason why Clinton can’t approach those people who have talked up Obama and try to persuade them to back her instead. In some cases, she may very well appeal to past political favors – and may go so far as to twist some arms (so to speak) to force people to back away from their previous talk in support of Obama.

For some people whom she has denounced, Clinton may very well offer an “amnesty” of sorts – vote for Hillary and your treasonous talk of the past few months might be forgiven.

Who knows? Maybe even New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson will be forgiven if, in mid-July, he were to publicly say he suffered from a bout of springtime stupidity, and now sees the error of his ways and backs Hillary Clinton instead of Obama.

WITH SUCH PRESSURE ahead, it is no wonder that the super delegates who have yet to announce their preference (including Chicago’s very own Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill.) are going out of their way to be extremely close-mouthed.

A little bit of pressure from reporter-types asking them who they support is preferable to the hard-core press Clinton would put on them, if they came out publicly for Obama.

This is a campaign that will go down to the final days. Ultimately, the only thing from a super-delegate that will matter is how he or she casts a vote on that day during the Democratic National Convention when the role call of the states is taken.

Obama is going to have to baby-sit his super-delegates all throughout the summer to ensure there are not significant numbers of individuals who experience “changes of heart” and decide to change their minds.

NOW SOME PEOPLE might think I am over-reacting. Hillary Clinton would NEVER stoop so low as to try to steal super-delegates. It’s not like she would dig into past favors or perhaps dredge up some negative information about individuals to pressure them into changing their minds.

Yeah, right. That’s exactly what I expect to happen.

This is the person who has dug up the GOP playbook and started off many of the negative attacks that the campaign of John McCain will perfect in the autumn months, should Obama become the Democratic nominee for president.

Of course, we shouldn’t follow into the trap of thinking of Obama as “St. Barack.” If the primary season ends in early June with Obama having only a slight delegate lead and a couple hundred super-delegates refusing to say anything until the last minute, I expect he will make his own appeals to the Clinton-supporting super delegates – trying to see if he can get some of them to change their mind and back him come the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

THIS IS POWER politics at work, and Obama is capable of playing hardball as much as any other politico. If he weren’t capable of doing it, he never would have gotten elected in the world of Chicago politics.

This is, after all, the man who won his first bid for the Illinois Senate by getting the incumbent senator from his home district kicked off the ballot for filing inadequate nominating petitions – thereby allowing him to run unopposed.

Alice Palmer might very well have had flawed nominating petitions (not enough valid signatures of support). But a true “goo goo” (good government type) would have talked of allowing “the voters” to decide, and would not have had the nerve to use a technicality to ensure his electoral victory in 1996.

IT WOULDN’T SURPRISE me if Team Obama were, at this very moment, searching the books related to election law, trying to find some way to legally force Clinton into backing down, because he knows she isn’t going to quit any other way.

Basically, he’s looking to do her in, before she can do him in.

That is the level of politics to which the ’08 presidential primary has declined – and it also is the reason that this is one of the few election cycles of our lifetimes that will be remembered by historians.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Here is a weblog devoted to keeping track of how many delegates and super delegates (http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/) each Democratic presidential candidate has. This site is going to continue to change throughout the summer months.

Hillary R. Clinton must be making the American people happy. The latest Gallup Organization poll (http://www.gallup.com/poll/107029/Most-Democrats-Eager-Either-Candidate-Drop.aspx) shows three-fifths of the people surveyed do not want her to drop out of the primary election.

For those who think super delegates will overrule the will of the American people, it is important (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/14/superdelegates/index.html) to realize that the mood of the Democratic Party is split fairly evenly between Clinton and Barack Obama. Super delegates will be asked to break what essentially is a tie between the two.

To a politician, what constitutes loyalty?

How many of you remember the scene from the 1976 film “All the President’s Men,” where Dustin Hoffman as Washington Post reporter Carl Bernstein is berated by a low-level presidential aide for daring to ask her impertinent questions about the conduct of President Nixon’s re-election campaign.

“Have you ever heard of loyalty? Do you even know the meaning of the word?” the aide screeches, as her way of refusing to answer any questions that might imply her political boss acted improperly.

THAT VIEW OF “loyalty” has some validity in politics, although it is naïve to think of political people who are incredibly reliable and can be counted on in the clutch to return a favor you may grant them.

Loyalty to political people is more about what you are expected to do for them. Loyalty is demanded – it is rarely given out.

And on those occasions when a political person does show some loyalty, the recipient had better realize the bond is for life.

It almost brings to mind another 1970’s-era film, “The Godfather,” where in exchange for one act of retribution against some teenage boys on behalf of his daughter, the undertaker Amerigo Bonisera is eternally indebted to Don Corleone.

THAT IS THE mentality at work with political consultant James Carville, who used the Easter Sunday weekend to lambast New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson as “Judas” for not supporting the presidential aspirations of Hillary R. Clinton.

Carville, of course, is the political operative credited with getting Bill Clinton elected as president in 1992 (his appearances throughout “The War Room” make that documentary film a memorable one), and he remains loyal to this day to the Clinton family’s political aspirations.

So when Richardson – himself a cabinet member and appointee of Bill Clinton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations – came out last week in favor of Barack Obama’s presidential dreams, Carville showed his loyalty to the Clintons by accusing Richardson of forgetting his loyalty.

By Carville’s definition, Richardson should have either supported Clinton publicly, or kept his mouth shut. Basically, Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., is the model politico when it comes to someone who just can’t publicly get excited about Hillary.

EMANUEL WILL LIKELY go to the Democratic National Convention saying as little as possible, and will make his vote as a super-delegate in as low-key a manner as possible, particularly now that he can see what would be in store for him should he decide to back anyone other than Hillary.

Now some people might mock me for bringing up “All the President’s Men” and “The Godfather.” After all, this election cycle is real life, not reel life.

But that is what is sad about Campaign ’08.

It is generating political activity and storylines that would make for an entertaining movie. We would be able to sit back and laugh at just how incredibly half-witted our political people could be, all in the name of winning an election.

BUT THIS IS real. One of these people is going to be the next president of the United States, unless they do such an incredible job of beating up on each other that they cause John McCain to win by default.

Actually, even a beaten-up Dem could still probably wallop McCain – that’s how unpopular George W. Bush and the Republican Party is in this country outside of the most isolated, rural of communities.

Hillary Clinton, and potential first gentleman Bill, are the types of political people who will hold a grudge and engage in political payback to those people who did not back her presidential dreams from Day One of her campaign.

It is true that “politics ain’t beanbag,” and that any political person who is worth anything has a hard streak in them.

BUT THE KIND of behavior exhibited toward Richardson is an extreme. Having supporters of Hillary Clinton behave like Nixon supporters or Don Corleone – that’s not exactly the image any thinking person wants to have answering that telephone at 3 a.m. when all hell is breaking loose in the Middle East.

That could be the reason so many people allegedly view both Obama and McCain as more “honest and trustworthy” than Clinton. A Gallup poll from last week showed roughly two-thirds of people surveyed found Obama and McCain to be trustworthy, but only 44 percent trust Hillary – and 53 percent say the terms “honest” and “trustworthy” do not apply to her.

It could also be a factor in the even more recent Gallup poll (released Monday) that showed any lead Clinton had developed over Obama due to the incendiary rhetoric of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright (Obama’s personal pastor) had withered away.

That poll literally showed Obama with a 1 percent lead (47 percent to 46 percent) over Clinton – which is so close as to constitute a tie.

THE CLINTON CAMP is trying to spin this as evidence that Obama’s huge leads from last month are gone. But if the American people were really so offended by Wright’s rants in the name of religion as Clinton wants to believe, she ought to have taken at least a slim lead.

She hasn’t.

All it really means is that some of the moderate-to-conservative people who were publicly saying they might consider an Obama vote will probably use Wright as their excuse to stick with the Republican Party. Basically, many of those people were votes that Obama was never going to get because of the trend among potential voters who claim when talking to pollsters to be more liberal on racial issues than they really are.

IT IS BECAUSE of that attitude from the Clinton camp that it could be difficult for the Democratic Party to unite behind whichever candidate winds up winning the party’s presidential nomination.

But that attitude is in keeping with the character of the Clinton campaigns of the past. That’s Bill Clinton, who in 1992 got hit with so such slime that a traditional candidate would have been devastated and forced to drop out early on.

Surrender is not the Character of Clinton, either Bill or Hillary.

THE SAD THING is that the Clintons, in their view of the campaign season, may very well be paying too much attention to yet another Hollywood film – “Primary Colors.”

That 1998 film starring John Travolta as a Bill Clinton-like presidential candidate who manages to win election to the White House despite running against an idealistic opponent and such despicable attempts by their other opponents to bury them in sleaze.

Somehow, I don’t think Campaign ’08 will give us the sequel, even though Emma Thompson might appreciate the chance to get some more acting work.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: James Carville and Bill Richardson are engaging in political rhetoric that would make for an entertaining Hollywood production. (http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/03/24/richardson_carville_snipe_from_a_distance/2595/) It’s too bad that what they’re doing is real life.

Barack is back (http://www.gallup.com/poll/105589/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Clinton-Back-Tie.aspx), or so his supporters would like to think. Personally, I wish I could take a mid-campaign vacation (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/24/obama-in-virgin-islands/) in the Virgin Islands.

Nobody knows who Rahm's presidential pick is

If I had been forced to put money down on a political issue, I would have been a loser on Friday.

I seriously believed that New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson would eventually come down on the side of Hillary R. Clinton in the fight among Democrats for the party’s presidential nomination.

RICHARDSON WAS THE former cabinet member in the administration of President Clinton who was under serious political pressure to come out and support the former first lady’s desires to be U.S. president.

When he dropped out of the presidential race following his lackluster performances in the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary (third place, behind Hillary and Barack Obama), he went back to his duties as New Mexico governor.

He kept silent on the presidential race, often saying that his endorsement (in and of itself) doesn’t mean much. That silence ended Friday when he formally supported Obama’s presidential dreams over Clinton’s fantasies.

Richardson was the first to admit the pressure he received from the Clinton camp, which considered him to be a friend and ally. We got to see the photograph of Richardson sitting with potential first gentleman Bill Clinton watching the Super Bowl earlier this year.

SO FOR RICHARDSON to come out for Obama is a big deal – in that his name is now “mudd” insofar as Bill and Hillary Clinton are concerned. Political people tend to think in terms of “loyalty,” and think that favors are not to be forgotten. Richardson’s political career will deteriorate if Hillary actually manages to beat Barack and go on to be Leader of the Free World.

It is that exact scenario that has caused Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., to keep his mouth shut ever since the primary campaign season began unofficially over a year ago.

Emanuel has even tighter loyalties to both Clinton and Obama – both of them think that Emanuel should have come out in support of their candidacy a long time ago, and he’s going to make an enemy for life regardless of who he publicly supports. (You can forget about asking him who he actually voted for back on Feb. 5).

Obama, who is fighting for every single delegate he can get, can’t even count on getting every single delegate from his own home state. Of the “super-delegates” from Illinois who could wind up picking the presidential nominee, one is refusing to back Barack.

THAT WOULD BE Rahm, who gets to be a super-delegate due to his elected position as a member of Congress from Chicago’s Northwest Side and surrounding inner suburbs.

For the record, he praises Obama and says his fellow politico from Chicago would make a wonderful Democratic candidate for the U.S. presidency.

But Emanuel is a suburban Chicago boy who owes his political career to the Clintons. Emanuel was a White House senior policy adviser during the Bill Clinton presidency who is credited along with Mayor Richard M. Daley’s brother, William, with helping to get the North American Free Trade Agreement approved by Congress.

It was those ties to the Clintons that enabled him to run for office himself, returning to Chicago where he defeated former Chicago Park District attorney and state Rep. Nancy Kaszak in a 2002 congressional primary that turned into a classic Chicago political brawl and could easily have become a progressive crusade converting Kaszak into a female version of “Mr. Smith.”

THOSE CLINTON TIES also allowed the relative newcomer to Congress to get the position of chairman of the House Democratic caucus – which put him in a position to oversee the coordinated effort in 2006 that led to Democrats gaining control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Rahm Emanuel is a political heavyweight because of his ties to the Clintons – both Bill and Hillary. Some people might think the fact that he didn’t immediately come out in support of Hillary is a sign of political ingratitude.

But he also knows that coming out in support of the Clintons will irritate the Obama backers of his home district, and also totally miff those people who six years ago voted for Kaszak because they feared Emanuel was so D.C.-oriented in his view that he would neglect their Chicago concerns.

EMANUEL MIGHT VERY well be facing the toughest political dilemma of the 2008 election season.

If he picks the loser, his career will instantly shrivel up and die. Even if he picks the winner, he’s going to make an enemy of the loser, which is bad because neither Hillary Clinton nor Barack Obama is going to wither away when they lose.

A “President Obama” would be wise to consider Clinton for a high-ranking, significant post in his administration (and not vice-president, that job requires nothing more than a pulse).

A “PRESIDENT CLINTON” the second would need to respect Obama as a new heavyweight political player in the U.S. Senate – one whose support will be needed if she wants to accomplish anything during her stint in the White House.

I fully expect Emanuel will wait until the absolute last minute possible before letting us potential voters know whether he’s a “Clinton man” or a “Barack backer.” We may very well have to wait until the Democratic National Convention in Denver when he casts his super-delegate vote for one or the other.

Emanuel wants a friend in the White House and an ally among his congressional colleagues. Making the wrong choice now could ensure that he gets neither.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: Rep. Rahm Emanuel gave his advice earlier this week to both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton as to how they should go about trying to renegotiate the terms (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120588246877846793.html?mod=googlenews_wsj) of NAFTA.

Emanuel is the lone Illinoisan of significance who won’t publicly back Barack Obama’s presidential aspirations. (http://www.wbbm780.com/Obama-Secures-Illinois-Super-delegates--Except-for/1838217)

What does Richardson give to Obama?

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson’s greatest support to the Barack Obama presidential campaign will come in the weeks following the Democratic convention in August. He could be the key to swaying the Hispanic vote to give Obama a chance come November.

For those interested in knowing more, details on this issue can be found in a commentary at The South Chicagoan (http://southchicagoan.blogspot.com/), the Chicago Argus’ sister weblog.

-30-

He talked tough with Saddam, but Richardson couldn't pick between Yankees/Red Sox

As a political junkie, I began thinking about the 2008 presidential election just a few moments before John Kerry formally conceded defeat to President Bush back in ’04.

Before Obama-mania and back in the days when Hillary R. Clinton was just as inexperienced a U.S. senator as she now claims Barack Obama to be, I was wondering just who the Democrats would come up with to try to succeed W.

My first instincts were to look toward New Mexico. I came into this election cycle seriously inclined to back the presidential dreams of Bill Richardson.

So when the Richardson campaign acknowledged that he had done poorly enough in Iowa and New Hampshire to bring the presidential charade to an end (a formal announcement is expected Thursday), I felt a touch of sadness. I am compelled to have a moment of silence for the now-deceased Richardson campaign.

…….. Shhhhhh! ……… Okay, the moment is over.

Just where did it go wrong for Richardson, the Irish/Mexican-American who was raised as a child in the U.S. expatriate community that exists in Mexico City and went on to be a member of Congress and a key advisor to former President Bill Clinton as Energy Secretary, before returning to his adopted home state and winning two terms as governor?

I can already hear the Richardson camp followers saying the only thing that went wrong with Bill’s campaign was poor timing. He had to go up against the dueling “historic nature” campaigns that have defined this year’s Democratic presidential primary.

Will 2008 be the year the United States gets its first woman as president, or will it be the year that an African-American person assumes the role of Leader of the Free World. (For those who hate having to acknowledge racial angles – even when completely relevant – think of Obama as the first Hawaiian to run for president).

Compared to those standards, Richardson’s campaign was downright boring, even though we’re talking about a man whose childhood was spent in Mexico and who knows firsthand what it is like for a Mexican to have to suddenly adjust to life “en los Estados Unidos.” His family had some wealth, and he was sent to the U.S. for prep school and college.

This may sound juvenile, but Richardson’s ethnic ties were part of the reason I was initially attracted to his campaign.

In today’s political climate where some people obsess over illegal immigration and have downright un-American ideas about who should be forbidden to become a U.S. citizen, it would have irritated them so much to have a U.S. president who technically still could claim Mexican citizenship (Mexico allows dual citizenship under certain circumstances), even though he was born in Sacramento, Calif., and formally chose U.S. citizenship when he turned 18.

I would have found it amusing to hear people like conservative pundit Ann Coulter rant and rave about a “foreigner” being elected president. Think I’m kidding? I have heard her try to tag Obama as not really American because his father came from Kenya.

More important though, I am a person who is impressed by substantial government experience.

On paper, the Richardson campaign should have blown away all challengers. He should have been able to clobber Hillary, Barack, John Edwards and all others.

I was particularly impressed with the idea that Richardson is a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. He represented U.S. interests in negotiating international deals opposing international terrorist and the spread of biological weapons. He also supported measures meant to increase the status of women in Afghanistan and several African nations.

As a member of Congress, he was a part of U.S. delegations that won release of hostages and other prisoners in places such as North Korea, Iraq and Cuba.

Obama may be able to make an argument that his experience with international issues is not significantly less than Clinton. He cannot make that argument against Richardson. On international affairs, Bill leaves Barack and Hillary in the dust.

So what went wrong? It didn’t help that Richardson could be dreary and dull on the campaign trail, bringing little buzz among the public. When combined with the lack of serious fund-raising efforts on his behalf, it became all too easy for Richardson to drown in the political sea of Obama and Clinton.

He also tried at times to engage in double-talk, sinking himself deeper with his attempts to avoid making controversial statements. Take his appearance on the long-running NBC program “Meet the Press” back in May 2007, where he sounded indecisive on so many issues.

It may have been host Tim Russert’s attempt to end the show with a “softball” question about baseball that was the “knockdown” pitch for the Richardson campaign.

Richardson, who went to prep school and college in Massachusetts but rooted for New York Yankees center fielder Mickey Mantle as a kid, claimed to be a fan of both the Yankees AND the Boston Red Sox.

To non-baseball fans, Richardson came off as indecisive. To baseball fans, he became a prevaricator of the highest grade, since the hard-core fans of those two teams have developed a hatred of each other that often prevents rational though from taking place.

To this day, Richardson gets mocked on baseball-related Internet sites, particularly because he also exaggerated about having been a prep school baseball star on the verge of signing a contract to play ball for the old Kansas City Athletics.

That was when I quit paying serious attention to Richardson. While I still respect his resume, my attention is on trying to figure out Clinton, Edwards and Obama.

Some people think that whoever wins the Democratic nomination for president would do well to pick Richardson as a vice presidential running mate. Some conspiracy theorists, including a blog writer for the New Republic’s website, hint of some covert deal by which Richardson’s departure from the race was meant to boost Hillary’s chances of taking the Hispanic vote in upcoming primaries.

I don’t know if I buy that theory, although I think any Democrat would be bolstered by Richardson’s presence and experience.

At the very least, a Clinton/Richardson ticket would give baseball fans a field day for sarcastic criticism. Richardson is the Red Sox fan who tries to claim Yankees fan allegiance in the same way that Hillary is a life-long Chicago Cubs fan who says she really likes the Bronx Bombers as well.

That much sap about baseball is almost enough to make me think of voting Republican. At least with Rudy Giuliani, we know his Yankees fan status is legitimate.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: The Albuquerque Tribune would like to see their hometown politico become vice president (http://www.abqtrib.com/news/2008/jan/09/bill-richardson-would-make-good-vice-president-new/) in the same way the Chicago Argus wouldn’t object to Obama or Clinton winning a four-year residency or two in the White House.

Here’s a transcript of the “Meet the Press” appearance that sank the Richardson campaign. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18818527/page/6/



Photographs provided by New Mexico governor's office