"The Governor can’t manufacture money" is what one person said after I described how his cutbacks will harm our schools.  I replied, "Yes, but he can manufacture leadership."  

The preceding is from an Op Ed I wrote for my local paper recently.  I serve on a school board in San Leandro, California.  All Californians need to speak out against Governor Schwarzenegger's proposed budget cuts and pressure him and the Legislature to develop solutions to the revenue shortfall that do not harm our children.

Politics can be cruel.  So many people work so hard for months and months on a campaign, and then it ends abruptly when the votes are counted.  I supported Bill Richardson and am proud to have done so.  The Governor helped redefine the debate on the US exiting Iraq and pushed many other key issues including education and veteran's care.  He also reached out to and helped bring many Latinos into the political process for the first time. I wish him and all of his campaign staff the best.  

I am comforted though by the huge turnout for the Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire.  Who could have predicted Hillary Clinton would have received almost twice the number of votes as John Kerry received in Iowa in 2004 yet would still soundly lose?  No matter whom our nominee is, the turnout is a great sign the Democrats will be successful in November.

On Bill Richardson's recent push to restore the war in Iraq to the most prominent issue among the Democrats running for President, Chris Bowers writes:

While I know that everyone in American politics is supposed to have some ulterior motive behind everything they do in public, everything in my experience has indicated to me that Richardson's position on Iraq is genuine. Richardson isn't alone, either. The latest CNN poll on Iraqshowed public sentiment for total withdrawal sharply rising to 39%, a clear plurality nationwide. Further, residual forces wouldn't even be an issue in the campaign were it not for Richardson. No matter what happens when the voting starts, and no matter what you may think of Richardson otherwise, that is an important contribution to the campaign. And yes, it is one reason not to be cynical about American politics.

Through his campaign stops, press releases, TV ads and postings on blogs, Richardson has been relentless in raising the issue of Iraq and forcing the media and other candidates to not ignore it.

In Foreign Affairs, Bill Richardson writes:

The next president needs to send a clear signal to the world that America has turned the corner and will once again be a leader rather than a unilateralist loner. To do this, the new president must first end the Iraq war. We need to withdraw all our troops and embrace a decisive new political strategy that engages all the nations of the region, as well as the international donor community. Only when we have done this can we begin the hard work of rebuilding our military and our alliances and restoring our tarnished reputation -- so that we can move forward and lead the world in addressing urgent global problems.

What has Richardson received for his repeated calls during the campaign to bring home all troops from Iraq?  

The media tries to marginalize Richardson, calling him a candidate for Vice President and his plan for Iraq irresponsible.  Candidates such as Hillary Clinton that decline to pledge to bring our troops home even by 2013 are praised and endorsed in editorials.  

We elected a Democratic Congress to stop the war, and it's not happening.  I regret very much that those senators running for president weren't even there to cast their vote, they were out campaigning.  We gave the president $70 billion more to continue this war without any restraint or timetable to reduce the troops – it's basically a blank check.

That's what Bill Richardson said yesterday in New Hampshire.

Will Clinton, Edwards or Obama promptly bring the U.S. occupation of Iraq to end?  None of them have made an iron clad promise to bring our troops home.  Instead, all want to keep their options open and refuse to pledge to bring home all U.S. troops from Iraq by 2013.  

You have served magnificently. Now you are coming home.

Isn't that what we want to hear our next President say?  That's what Bill Richardson said yesterday in Iowa.

Have Obama, Clinton or Edwards ever said this?  They refuse to pledge to bring home all U.S. troops, even by 2013.  2013 is too late.  Why settle for a President that can't figure out today that the war is a disaster and unequivocally calls for the withdrawal of our troops?

Richardson criticized other candidates and the news media for shifting focus away from the war:

Perhaps they think that because fewer of our troops have died lately that Americans don't care anymore. Well, we do and I dare the media to tell the families of the 37 troops who were killed last month that this issue doesn't deserve front-page coverage.

In 2004, Richard Gephardt went negative on front runner Howard Dean, and Dean counter attacked.  Voters in Iowa were turned off and two candidates with positive messages, John Kerry and John Edwards, came from behind to win. Six weeks before the election Kerry was polling in the mid teens and Edwards was still in the single digits.

Could we be soon witnessing a repeat of 2004?

Congressman, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Secretary of Energy and in his second term as Governor of New Mexico after a landslide re-election victory in November 2006, Bill Richardson is goal-oriented, assertive and confident.  He has the ability to quickly evaluate a situation but is not afraid to admit he has made a mistake.  Richardson will modify his course of action when necessary.  He takes a practical approach to governing, focusing on solutions to problems rather than ideology.

What about Bill Richardson the person?  We can learn much from the person that has known him for forty three years of his life, Barbara Richardson.  They met when he was 17 and she was 16 and gave him a ride back to his school from the nearby town.  

At the debate in Las Vegas, Richardson had one of his strongest performances to date in the race.  Under Bush the CIA has become global paramilitary force operating prisons in multiple countries.  Is this the image we want for America?  Richardson's answer is an emphatic "no."  Richardson stated America should be the conscience of the world, not the world's policeman.  

Richardson also showed his political courage.  He refused to join Edwards, Dodd, Biden and Clinton in embracing poll-driven politics on the issue of drivers' licenses for illegal immigrants.  

Bill Richardson is goal-oriented, assertive and confident.  He has served as a Congressman, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Secretary of Energy and is in his second term as Governor of New Mexico after a landslide re-election victory in November 2006.  

Here are five of many reasons why I believe Richardson possesses the experience, vision and leadership skills to be a great President:

1.  A Bright Vision for America

2.  An Ironclad Promise to Promptly End the U.S. Occupation of Iraq

3.  A Bold Agenda To Address The Pressing Challenges Facing Our Nation and Planet

4.  The White House and A Landslide Victory for Democrats Nationwide in 2008

5.  Comprehensive Immigration Reform In Accordance With the Values Upon Which Our Country Was Founded

It is time for those with the most influence on the blogs to stop touting the prowess of the Clinton political machine and return their focus to the defining issue of the 2008 Presidential campaign:  the path out of Iraq for the U.S.  Otherwise, Iraq may be the defining issue in 2012.

The Democratic front runner's plan for ending the U.S. occupation of Iraq is weak and vague.  Hillary Clinton refuses to commit to bring all of our troops home from Iraq by the end of her first term in office.  Clinton has surrounded herself with military and diplomatic advisers that believe the invasion of Iraq was justified and a military solution exists for resolving the war.

Clinton is not demonstrating the qualities of leadership we need in our next President to end the war in Iraq.  She talks like a dove in Iowa and votes as a hawk in Washington, D.C.  We should expect sizeable numbers of U.S. troops fighting and dying in Iraq for years to come under a Hillary Clinton Presidency.  

Whom do you trust to end the Iraq war?  Candidate A or B.

Candidate A pledges to end the war but has no plan to do so.  Instead, Candidate A intends to ask military and diplomatic advisers to study the issue and develop a plan after taking office.

For advice on presently, Candidate A relies upon persons that believe the war has gone wrong because of poor leadership by the Bush Administration but that the decision to invade was correct.  Many of these same advisers have supported the surge and see the U.S. intervention in Iraq continuing for at least another decade.  When directly questioned, Candidate A refuses to commit to bringing all U.S. troops home by 2013.  

Candidate B says as long as U.S. troops are stationed in Iraq the hard work of reconciliation among Iraqi factions is postponed. Candidate B has called for a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq now, pledges to bring all U.S. troops (both combat and non-combat) home promptly upon taking office and has offered a plan to achieve this.  

Candidate B is being advised by military and diplomatic experts that have been highly critical of the U.S. intervention in the Iraq and strongly advocate an immediate exit from Iraq.

Candidate A is Hillary Clinton; candidate B is Bill Richardson.  

Water-boarding is term that describes strapping an individual to a board, with a towel pulled tightly across his face, and pouring water on him or her to cut off air and simulate drowning.  

When asked directly last week whether he thought waterboarding is constitutional, Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey was evasive.  As noted by NPR, Mukasey "danced around the issue of whether waterboarding actually is torture and stopped short of saying that it is." "If it amounts to torture," Mukasey said carefully, "then it is not constitutional."

As stated by Bill Richardson,

Waterboarding is torture, and anyone who is unwilling to identify it as such is not qualified to be the chief legal officer of the United States of America. If I were in the U.S. Senate, I would vote against Mukasey unless he denounces such specific forms of torture.

What about the Democrats in the U.S. Senate and other Democratic Presidential candidates?  Will they oppose Mukasey unless he denounces the use of torture by our government?

Bill Richardson ordered New Mexico firefighters today to assist in bringing the devastating fires in Southern California under control.  He noted, "Neighbors should help neighbors in their time of need."

This is another illustration of Richardson's leadership skills in operation.  Richardson's vision of neighbors helping neighbors, however, is not limited to domestic matters. Last week Richardson gave a well received speech in Iowa on the role the U.S. can play in improving the welfare of the planet and human race.  Richardson stated:

A hungry world will also hunger for scapegoats. A thirsty world will thirst for revenge. A world in crisis will be a world of anger and violence and terrorism.

Today, President Bush asked Congress for another $46 billion to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and finance other national security needs.  That will take total spending for the Iraq War close to 1/2 trillion dollars.  We are spending about $10 billion each month fighting the war in Iraq.  

Will the major Dems Presidential candidates (Obama, Clinton and Edwards) continue to leave open the door to our intervention in Iraq until 2013 or will they call for an immediate end to the war now?  The candidate I'm supporting for President says end the war now:

Americans are fed up with the President's stalling and Congressional failure to act. Frankly, it is well past time we make a choice. And the only responsible choice left to us is to get all of our troops out of Iraq, with no residual forces left behind--no combat forces, no non-combat forces. As President, I will do it. I will get all of our troops out within a year after I take office - sooner if we can get it done safely.

Today, Chase Martyn of the Iowa Independent reviewed a major policy speech by Bill Richardson earlier this week on how to improve the welfare of the human race and our environment.  Martyn is no supporter of Richardson, noting "I expected would be ridden with gaffes, pie-in-the-sky policy proposals, and poll-tested mumbo jumbo. Having not seen Richardson stump in person for a period of two months, I had no idea what I was in for."

Martyn came away highly impressed.  Martyn described Richardson's speech as "bold and informative."  He added: "I dare say he sounded presidential."

In his speech, Richardson set forth  a global agenda to address the welfare of the human race, linking climate change, poverty, international disease and war.  Richardson stated:  "A hungry world will also hunger for scapegoats. A thirsty world will thirst for revenge. A world in crisis will be a world of anger and violence and terrorism."  

Bill Richardson has repeatedly called for a prompt and complete withdrawal of ALL U.S. forces from Iraq.  He reiterated his position in an essay published this week entitled "It's Time To Make A Choice In Iraq," stating:

Americans are fed up with the President's stalling and Congressional failure to act. Frankly, it is well past time we make a choice. And the only responsible choice left to us is to get all of our troops out of Iraq, with no residual forces left behind--no combat forces, no non-combat forces.

As one would expect with a former ambassador to the UN, however, Richardson's platform for change in U.S. foreign affairs however is not limited to bringing our troops home and ending the Iraq War.  Yesterday, Richardson set forth a global agenda to address the welfare of the human race, linking climate change, poverty, international disease and war.  

Richardson stated:  "A hungry world will also hunger for scapegoats. A thirsty world will thirst for revenge. A world in crisis will be a world of anger and violence and terrorism."

Remember playing with silly putty as a child?  In May, I wrote a diary stating Bush's surge should be called the silly putty strategy and was doomed to fail.  

You squeeze the insurgents in one area but they are not defeated.  Instead, they redeploy and attack in another area where U.S. forces are spread thin.  

Today in a biting essay in the Washington Post a group of former Army captains call for the immediate withdrawal of our forces  from Iraq.  They note: "Though temporary reinforcing operations in places like Fallujah, An Najaf, Tal Afar, and now Baghdad may brief well on PowerPoint presentations, in practice they just push insurgents to another spot on the map and often strengthen the insurgents' cause by harassing locals to a point of swayed allegiances."