Yet (0.00 / 0)

Yet, Governor Richardson has indicated support for Senator Clinton's position on Iraq, at least in September 2005 before he announced his campaign. The link for the interview is here.

AMY GOODMAN: Cindy Sheehan has been going around the country speaking out. She lost her son, Casey, in the war. You are the first governor to have your state, New Mexico, provide life insurance for national guardsmen on active duty. But I didn't want to ask about that.
I wanted to ask: as she travels leading up to the big anti-war protest that'll take place in Washington, D.C. on Saturday, on the 24th, she came through New York. And there she was fiercely critical of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and her authorization of war, standing with the President to authorize the invasion. What are your thoughts about that. She is saying Democrats enabled this as well as Republicans. It was not just President Bush.
GOVERNOR RICHARDSON: Well, look, I believe that Senator Clinton has a sound policy on Iraq. I believe that her-- she is calling for an exit strategy, for a sensible policy. You know, I want to tell you that in those days when there was information about weapons of mass destruction, when there was information about Saddam Hussein and his very torturous activities with his own people, I could have seen a senator taking the vote that he or she did.

---

by: gradysdad @ Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 07:31:38 AM CST

[ Parent | ]

September 2005? (0.00 / 0)

That's quite a bit "before he announced his campaign." That was 18 months ago ... not exactly relevant to their positions today.

More importantly, that is clearly a loyal guy giving cover to another prominent Democrat. "I could have seen a senator taking the vote that he or she did" is hardly a ringing endorsement. The only explicit endorsement he gives is that she is calling for an exit strategy.

But, of more relevance, Richardson has been calling for withdrawal for a while now, wants all troops out this calendar year, and is calling for a repeal of the original authorization. Clinton is essentially looking to cap the current troop number and says she'll remove troops as President. Their policies are not the same at all.

Worse still, when asked about the war in South Carolina yesterday, she said:

To underscore a point, some people may be running who tell you we don't face a real threat from terrorism," she said. "I'm not one of them. We have serious enemies who want to do us serious harm

That's the worst thing I've seen any Democrat say since Lieberman got the boot from the party, I think. I was actually one of the rare people who didn't have strong feelings about Clinton, but statements like that are making me pretty negative toward her (note: relative to other Democrats ... I'd still enthusiastically vote for her over McCain/Giuliani/etc)

---

by: BriVT @ Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 09:09:27 AM CST

[ Parent | ]

Same Article (0.00 / 0)

In that same interview he said very clearly that he was against withdrawal of troops and setting a deadline.

AMY GOODMAN: Let me ask you about Iraq, your feeling about the war right now and what should happen. Should the U.S. withdraw immediately?
GOVERNOR RICHARDSON: No. I believe setting a deadline and withdrawing immediately is not sensible policy. I think we need to have an exit strategy. We don't have that. I think we need to find a way to send a message to the international community that this is not just America, that we need international support. I believe that we've mishandled our relationship with our allies, with the United Nations.
I believe that it's important that we have an Iraq policy that we're either going to finish the job or we're going to exit. And, right now, we're muddling through. What I believe we need to do is have a sensible military, economic, political, foreign policy assessment of what our goals and objectives are. Our objective, I believe, should be to start pursuing as rapidly as we can an exit strategy. Do we have a deadline? Do we pull out immediately? No.

Does that mean he has changed his mind on the issue?

---

by: gradysdad @ Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 10:54:46 AM CST

[ Parent | ]

Again, September 2005 (4.00 / 1)

He was against withdrawing troops immediately in September 2005. That doesn't mean he has to be against withdrawing troops for the rest of his life. The situation is different. Expecting someone to have the same position on withdrawing troops is not very logical.

"It's important that we have an Iraq policy that we're either going to finish the job or we're going to exit." That's what he said. It's entirely consistent to have the thought in 2005 that there was still some chance of "finishing the job" with the US military having a role while having the thought in 2007 that troops now can not help us move forward in Iraq in any way and should be withdrawn as soon as practical.

Most importantly, though, looking at what he believed in 2005 compared to what Clinton believed in 2005 isn't really the point. You said his policy in Iraq is basically the same as Clinton now (has closely paralleled, I think you said), and that's just not true and hasn't been for some time.

---

by: BriVT @ Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 11:47:22 AM CST

[ Parent | ]