About
A progressive online community for the Granite State. More...
Getting Started
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


The Masthead
Managing Editors

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer

ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
NH Progressive Blogs
Betsy Devine
Citizen Keene
Democracy for NH
Equality Press
The Political Climate
Granite State Progress
Chaz Proulx
Susan the Bruce

NH Political Links
Graniteprof
Granite Status
Kevin Landrigan
NH Political Capital
Political Chowder (TV)
Political Chowder (AM)
PolitickerNH
Pollster (NH-Sen)
Portside with Burt Cohen
Bill Siroty
Swing State 2008

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Carol Shea-Porter
Paul Hodes
Jeanne Shaheen
Barack Obama (NH)

ActBlue Hampshire
Stop Sununu
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Bob Geiger
DailyKos
Digby
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talk Left
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

RSS Feed

Blue Hampshire RSS


Iraq
Richardson did not, of course, have to vote for the AUMF for Iraq, so it's not a close comparison. He had some reservations about going into Iraq (I've seen some quotes around the time of invasion saying he thought the diplomacy was a failure and would be a big problem), but I don't think you could call him a Dean-style, vocal critic at the time. However, I don't think you could say his position parallels Clinton in any major way since then. He has been significantly more critical of the war and the basic ideology behind it than has Senator Clinton. Of course, everyone on the Democratic side wants the war to be over, but Richardson has been more forceful and specific in calling for troops to be out now than has Clinton. He is also, to my knowledge, the only major candidate to make the explicit point that the invasion of Iraq is merely a symptom of some deeper, more fundamental problems with the establishment thinking on foreign policy. "Iraq is a symptom," he said at the DNC. "The disease is arrogance."

Senator Clinton reflects too much the establishment in DC which sort of says that the main problem with Iraq was in the implementation by Bush ("the mistakes were President Bush's" is her explicit message). This is a major, major difference between Senator Clinton and Richardson (and Obama and Edwards, for that matter, although Edwards's comments on Iran make me wonder about him a bit). And is, I think, the most important consideration when thinking of the candidates' positions on it.


Others have rated this comment as follows:
Alex Gallichon 4
Powered by: SoapBlox