The Kubist
I watched the debate, even played along on Facebook. I've read the papers, and I've watched the blogs. So, I wonder, did America see what I saw from Governor Richardson last night?
I know that some saw a refreshing levity when it was needed most. The media have played this quip more than any other Richardson quote to date. Great, FINALLY some press coverage! America saw Bill Richardson's smile, his sense of humor, and his reaction to an uncomfortable situation, but did they also see the way his diplomatic finesse resolved the rather tactless decision of Edwards and Obama to gang up on Clinton in order to differentiate themselves? I saw Governor Richardson's leadership in action to bring people back together, but I wonder, did America see what I saw?
I know that others saw a comment about the Soviet Union that seemed out of context. Some have said it betrays a lack of understanding of today's world, others have spun it as a statement in the past tense, still others have just said that he must have been tired. But did America see Governor Richardson's seasoned commitment as an international leader to actually enhance America's security by working with the Russians to reduce our nuclear arsenals? Did America see what I saw?
I know others saw the Governor touting his resume once again, asking whether "experience" no longer mattered, or had become some sort of "leper" in this campaign. Some perhaps saw this as the Governor trying to get the debate back on his record, and his agenda. Others perhaps saw this as an attempt to derail the Obama express and it's promise of "hope." But I saw a man who honestly wants to serve America, rather than someone who looks to America to serve his or her visions, and I saw a man frustrated that those on stage with him could no longer see the wisdom of listening to the American people, rather than telling the American people what it is they need. I saw a man whose long and distinguished political experience has taught him how valuable listening can be, but did America see what I saw?
I know America saw a man who asserts that diplomacy is the first response to any difficult situation, and I know that in the post-9/11 context many Americans find such statements to be naive or dangerous. Yet despite these prevailing sentiments, I saw a man who was willing to say, once again, that principles and human rights, not brute force, should be the foundations of our foreign policy, and that these are the foundations that make us the leader in the "free" world, not the fact that we have the world's strongest military. I saw a man who remembers the "truths" Thomas Jefferson offered to us as "self-evident," and who is not afraid to stand by them, but did America see what I saw?
And then, after all of this, I saw a man who knows his campaign is on the line, and who knows that any mistake could be the last mistake, and yet this same man stepped forward to be the first (and really only Democratic candidate) to admit that, yes, he had made some mistakes in this campaign. Richardson admitted that he hadn't been quite right to enthuse about his favorite Supreme Court Justice, and then proceeded to explain how he made the mistake, and how he came to realize his error. That's really three admissions, and three strikes in the political arena, but I saw a man who remembered a fundamental assumption about the Presidency, embedded in Article I of our Constitution, and in the rhetoric of other great Americans like Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry. I saw a man who understands that the office of President of the United States is a very human office, and that only a very human being is deserving of it. I saw that man in Governor Bill Richardson last night, but I wonder, did America see what I saw?
I know that some saw a refreshing levity when it was needed most. The media have played this quip more than any other Richardson quote to date. Great, FINALLY some press coverage! America saw Bill Richardson's smile, his sense of humor, and his reaction to an uncomfortable situation, but did they also see the way his diplomatic finesse resolved the rather tactless decision of Edwards and Obama to gang up on Clinton in order to differentiate themselves? I saw Governor Richardson's leadership in action to bring people back together, but I wonder, did America see what I saw?
I know that others saw a comment about the Soviet Union that seemed out of context. Some have said it betrays a lack of understanding of today's world, others have spun it as a statement in the past tense, still others have just said that he must have been tired. But did America see Governor Richardson's seasoned commitment as an international leader to actually enhance America's security by working with the Russians to reduce our nuclear arsenals? Did America see what I saw?
I know others saw the Governor touting his resume once again, asking whether "experience" no longer mattered, or had become some sort of "leper" in this campaign. Some perhaps saw this as the Governor trying to get the debate back on his record, and his agenda. Others perhaps saw this as an attempt to derail the Obama express and it's promise of "hope." But I saw a man who honestly wants to serve America, rather than someone who looks to America to serve his or her visions, and I saw a man frustrated that those on stage with him could no longer see the wisdom of listening to the American people, rather than telling the American people what it is they need. I saw a man whose long and distinguished political experience has taught him how valuable listening can be, but did America see what I saw?
I know America saw a man who asserts that diplomacy is the first response to any difficult situation, and I know that in the post-9/11 context many Americans find such statements to be naive or dangerous. Yet despite these prevailing sentiments, I saw a man who was willing to say, once again, that principles and human rights, not brute force, should be the foundations of our foreign policy, and that these are the foundations that make us the leader in the "free" world, not the fact that we have the world's strongest military. I saw a man who remembers the "truths" Thomas Jefferson offered to us as "self-evident," and who is not afraid to stand by them, but did America see what I saw?
And then, after all of this, I saw a man who knows his campaign is on the line, and who knows that any mistake could be the last mistake, and yet this same man stepped forward to be the first (and really only Democratic candidate) to admit that, yes, he had made some mistakes in this campaign. Richardson admitted that he hadn't been quite right to enthuse about his favorite Supreme Court Justice, and then proceeded to explain how he made the mistake, and how he came to realize his error. That's really three admissions, and three strikes in the political arena, but I saw a man who remembered a fundamental assumption about the Presidency, embedded in Article I of our Constitution, and in the rhetoric of other great Americans like Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry. I saw a man who understands that the office of President of the United States is a very human office, and that only a very human being is deserving of it. I saw that man in Governor Bill Richardson last night, but I wonder, did America see what I saw?
Many thanks to Chris Hassel of Minnesota for Richardson for sharing these important observations on the sad state of American democracy! As the article points out, Bill Richardson's grassroots campaign for the Presidency is about far more than policies, it's about the very nature of our political system! Read on, and see why you should get involved!
The following snippet is from the recent edition of The Economist (October 6th-12th, 2007), the worldwide news magazine. This particular article centers on Senator Clinton's candidacy and deals with, among other things, the positives and negatives of a potential Clinton nomination and/or presidency. What it says about what one might call "Imperial (or Trademarked) Candidates" is revealing, and it should be pointed-out that the "Bush" and "Clinton" dynasties, if the "restoration" of the latter one were to occur, would represent an unprecedented grip on American power by two political families. If Governor Richardson were to be nominated, a lot of these negatives would be circumvented. Now is probably the time to shake things up in the White House, not restore a good deal of the old order once-removed. And, at any rate, are we so certain that the old order is as electable in the general election process as they once were? The following is from the article titled "Hillary Clinton: Ready To Run The Movie Again?," in the Briefing section of The Economist:
....If Mrs Clinton wins the White House in 2008, members of the Bush and Clinton families will have been president for 24 years on the trot. Over 100m Americans have never known anybody but a Bush or a Clinton in the White House. If Mrs Clinton wins re-election, that 24 years will swell to 28.
Americans are remarkably insouciant about this development. They should not be. It suggests that American political life is in the hands of a small group of insiders who are organised around semi-royal families. And it divides America into "players", who control political life, and "observers", who simply comment on it. The dynastification of American politics is happening at a time when economic inequalities are growing, and the "haves" are proving increasingly successful at transmitting their privileges to their children.
The other negative side is that it freezes American political life. One of the virtues of the American political system is that it is supposed to produce shake-ups whenever a new president takes over. Mrs Clinton will bring back the same cast of characters that everybody wearied of in the 1990s, from slick money-raisers like Terry McAuliffe to professional conservative-haters like Sidney Blumenthal.
Back in 1993 Jacob Weisberg, writing in the New Republic, accused the Clinton team of "Clincest"--being a "tight, hermetic and incestuous clique" who went to the same universities and hung out at the same Democratic gabfests. Mrs Clinton's election will not only perpetuate "Clincest" for another four or eight years; it will also add another dollop of ageing baby-boomer self-satisfaction. During a campaign speech earlier this year Mr Clinton remarked that he once told Hillary, when they were both students at Yale, that "I have met all the most gifted people in our generation and you're the best." This sort of attitude will be difficult to live with....
...Even more dispiriting will be the continuing polarisation of American politics. Mrs Clinton may have damped down Hillary-hatred for a while. But it is sure to revive if she starts appointing Supreme Court justices. And Mrs Clinton is still surrounded by the same fanatically loyal and combative staff that she had in the 1990s. America will be stuck not just in the same tired culture war, but also in the same culture war fought by the same characters. The potential for further alienation from politics, particularly after the Bush years, will be huge....
The following snippet is from the recent edition of The Economist (October 6th-12th, 2007), the worldwide news magazine. This particular article centers on Senator Clinton's candidacy and deals with, among other things, the positives and negatives of a potential Clinton nomination and/or presidency. What it says about what one might call "Imperial (or Trademarked) Candidates" is revealing, and it should be pointed-out that the "Bush" and "Clinton" dynasties, if the "restoration" of the latter one were to occur, would represent an unprecedented grip on American power by two political families. If Governor Richardson were to be nominated, a lot of these negatives would be circumvented. Now is probably the time to shake things up in the White House, not restore a good deal of the old order once-removed. And, at any rate, are we so certain that the old order is as electable in the general election process as they once were? The following is from the article titled "Hillary Clinton: Ready To Run The Movie Again?," in the Briefing section of The Economist:
....If Mrs Clinton wins the White House in 2008, members of the Bush and Clinton families will have been president for 24 years on the trot. Over 100m Americans have never known anybody but a Bush or a Clinton in the White House. If Mrs Clinton wins re-election, that 24 years will swell to 28.
Americans are remarkably insouciant about this development. They should not be. It suggests that American political life is in the hands of a small group of insiders who are organised around semi-royal families. And it divides America into "players", who control political life, and "observers", who simply comment on it. The dynastification of American politics is happening at a time when economic inequalities are growing, and the "haves" are proving increasingly successful at transmitting their privileges to their children.
The other negative side is that it freezes American political life. One of the virtues of the American political system is that it is supposed to produce shake-ups whenever a new president takes over. Mrs Clinton will bring back the same cast of characters that everybody wearied of in the 1990s, from slick money-raisers like Terry McAuliffe to professional conservative-haters like Sidney Blumenthal.
Back in 1993 Jacob Weisberg, writing in the New Republic, accused the Clinton team of "Clincest"--being a "tight, hermetic and incestuous clique" who went to the same universities and hung out at the same Democratic gabfests. Mrs Clinton's election will not only perpetuate "Clincest" for another four or eight years; it will also add another dollop of ageing baby-boomer self-satisfaction. During a campaign speech earlier this year Mr Clinton remarked that he once told Hillary, when they were both students at Yale, that "I have met all the most gifted people in our generation and you're the best." This sort of attitude will be difficult to live with....
...Even more dispiriting will be the continuing polarisation of American politics. Mrs Clinton may have damped down Hillary-hatred for a while. But it is sure to revive if she starts appointing Supreme Court justices. And Mrs Clinton is still surrounded by the same fanatically loyal and combative staff that she had in the 1990s. America will be stuck not just in the same tired culture war, but also in the same culture war fought by the same characters. The potential for further alienation from politics, particularly after the Bush years, will be huge....
If you follow politics, you know that Colorado is what the talking heads call a "purple state," split, more or less, between Republicans and Democrats, with a very healthy mix of independent minds scattered in the valleys, across the plains, and even in our major cities. Now this is true more than ever, and the reason has nothing to do with politics. It's ROCKTOBER, and Colorado's true purple colors are coming out in full as we prepare to welcome the Phillies for a visit to our mile high capitol city so that we can sweep them on home, and move on to the National League Championship Series!
What does this have to do with Bill Richardson for President? Well, if you caught him on ABC World News last night, you know the Governor loves baseball, and you gotta believe he's watching this race to the pennant with the same intensity he's watching his own polls. Why? The answer is simple: the whole country is falling in love with the Rockies' "kids from nowhere gotta believe" story, and there's a lesson in that for our campaign here in Colorado.
If someone had asked you, two months ago, who do you like for the NLCS, the "front runner" sure wouldn't have been the Rockies! Yet when it mattered in a clutch do or die game vs. San Diego, they came through. Now they're on a roll, putting up impressive numbers against the Phillies on the road, and everyone is taking notice.
So, when someone asks you who's going to emerge as the winner after the February 5th Super-Duper Tuesday, don't let them tell you the front-runners have it in the bag. Tell them you believe, and tell them that Bill Richardson, THE dark horse story of this election, is going to come through in the clutch, play a game that would even make his hero, Mickey Mantle, proud, and bring this nation together once again behind a story that is, truly, the American dream!
What does this have to do with Bill Richardson for President? Well, if you caught him on ABC World News last night, you know the Governor loves baseball, and you gotta believe he's watching this race to the pennant with the same intensity he's watching his own polls. Why? The answer is simple: the whole country is falling in love with the Rockies' "kids from nowhere gotta believe" story, and there's a lesson in that for our campaign here in Colorado.
If someone had asked you, two months ago, who do you like for the NLCS, the "front runner" sure wouldn't have been the Rockies! Yet when it mattered in a clutch do or die game vs. San Diego, they came through. Now they're on a roll, putting up impressive numbers against the Phillies on the road, and everyone is taking notice.
So, when someone asks you who's going to emerge as the winner after the February 5th Super-Duper Tuesday, don't let them tell you the front-runners have it in the bag. Tell them you believe, and tell them that Bill Richardson, THE dark horse story of this election, is going to come through in the clutch, play a game that would even make his hero, Mickey Mantle, proud, and bring this nation together once again behind a story that is, truly, the American dream!
If you caught Bill Richardson on the News Hour with Jim Lehrer last night, you no doubt saw the kind of answers to questions that make Richardson such an attractive candidate. Tough, pragmatic, and yet visionary solutions to the problems America faces, put forth in a straightforward language that American voters should prefer to Senate double-speak. Yet, in the end, there was that same old question: Will the American people elect a candidate who asks for sacrifice for the betterment of the nation? Will the American people elect Bill Richardson?
Will we? I don't know about you, but to me it seems like this is the theme of this election! I honestly believe that the American people are finally done with the notion that you can drive monstrous SUVs without consequence, invade other countries without consequence, or float billions of dollars in bad credit without consequence. Why would I believe this? Because the American people are starting to feel the consequences themselves: whole paychecks consumed at the pump, more and more wounded, maimed, and dead American soldiers returning from Iraq, and more and more Americans losing their homes. For SOME, the indulgences of "Son of Bush" were fun while they lasted, but I think that the majority of Americans are ready for a calm, responsible statesman at the helm, one who can right the ship of state, and take us all forward together.
The question, then, isn't whether America is ready for Bill Richardson, but whether those of us supporting him from the beginning are ready to introduce Bill Richardson to America? Will we?
Will we? I don't know about you, but to me it seems like this is the theme of this election! I honestly believe that the American people are finally done with the notion that you can drive monstrous SUVs without consequence, invade other countries without consequence, or float billions of dollars in bad credit without consequence. Why would I believe this? Because the American people are starting to feel the consequences themselves: whole paychecks consumed at the pump, more and more wounded, maimed, and dead American soldiers returning from Iraq, and more and more Americans losing their homes. For SOME, the indulgences of "Son of Bush" were fun while they lasted, but I think that the majority of Americans are ready for a calm, responsible statesman at the helm, one who can right the ship of state, and take us all forward together.
The question, then, isn't whether America is ready for Bill Richardson, but whether those of us supporting him from the beginning are ready to introduce Bill Richardson to America? Will we?
Coloradoans for Richardson!
We are all stunned by Michelle Lindsey's recent announcement to step down from her role as state coordinator for the Richardson for President grassroots campaign here in Colorado in order to pursue the formation of a Young American's for Richardson group nationwide. Michelle has been a guiding light in our efforts--one of the first lit here over a year ago--and any of you who have worked with her know that her talents are many. Both Michelle and Mara Meaney-Earvin, Deputy Grassroots Director for the national campaign, have spoken to me about assuming Michelle's duties here in Colorado, but I think it is safe for me to say that Michelle's foundational contributions are simply irreplaceable. Their arguments make sense--I'm centrally located and a member of the Steering Committee for the state campaign--but I am nonetheless saddened by the decision and humbled by the prospect.
Bill Richardson is the candidate of experience and change. Yet to weather this change the grassroots campaign in Colorado is going to need all of your experience, and that of many others we've not yet identified. I firmly believe that an effective grassroots organization should be as flat as possible, with local leaders empowered to use their experience in their own communities in order to drive the change we desire. Yes, I will continue to be a central distributor of information from the national and state level campaigns, and yes, I will serve to coordinate discussions of issues as we encounter them over the next five months. I will represent the concerns of our grassroots organization to the Steering Committee, and I will keep you informed of plans being made at the Steering Committee level using the Richardson for President web-site network. However, if our local groups in Boulder, Colorado Springs, Durango, Fort Collins, Grand County, the Grand Valley, Greeley, and Pueblo take the initiative to get organized and appoint county and/or precinct leaders, then we'll be ready for the next phase of the campaign: an all Colorado tour featuring surrogate speakers from the Steering Committee, and grassroots caucus training with the support of the national campaign's new Deputy Field Director, Ray Glendening, who will be joining us for an all-Colorado summit in Denver on October 12th. I can't replace Michelle, but together we can make sure that Colorado nominates Bill Richardson to be the Democratic nominee for President on February 5th!
The first step is for all of us to discuss what is needed to be more effective in getting the word out, and in growing our groups. Ray will help, and I encourage all members of any of the Colorado groups to step forward with your opinions, ideas, and hopes for this campaign, remembering as Michelle always did that "Richardson Brings Hope," and that this is why we support him. Please, do so either by chiming in on my Richardson for President campaign blog, "The Kubist," which is attached to my user profile, or by emailing me directly at kubikhan@msn.com. I will work to incorporate any and all suggestions I receive into a draft document for Ray by early October, and I will make sure this document is made public prior to that meeting so that, whether you can attend or not, you are part of the planning that will change America.
Most people wait for their whole lives to make a difference--we have five months to do so! Join us in honoring the foundation Michelle has given us, and in building a "house united" for Bill Richardson, one that will stand as a testament to his commitment to a renewed and revitalized America.
Tim Kubik
Grassroots Coordinator
Denver, Colorado
Richardson for President
We are all stunned by Michelle Lindsey's recent announcement to step down from her role as state coordinator for the Richardson for President grassroots campaign here in Colorado in order to pursue the formation of a Young American's for Richardson group nationwide. Michelle has been a guiding light in our efforts--one of the first lit here over a year ago--and any of you who have worked with her know that her talents are many. Both Michelle and Mara Meaney-Earvin, Deputy Grassroots Director for the national campaign, have spoken to me about assuming Michelle's duties here in Colorado, but I think it is safe for me to say that Michelle's foundational contributions are simply irreplaceable. Their arguments make sense--I'm centrally located and a member of the Steering Committee for the state campaign--but I am nonetheless saddened by the decision and humbled by the prospect.
Bill Richardson is the candidate of experience and change. Yet to weather this change the grassroots campaign in Colorado is going to need all of your experience, and that of many others we've not yet identified. I firmly believe that an effective grassroots organization should be as flat as possible, with local leaders empowered to use their experience in their own communities in order to drive the change we desire. Yes, I will continue to be a central distributor of information from the national and state level campaigns, and yes, I will serve to coordinate discussions of issues as we encounter them over the next five months. I will represent the concerns of our grassroots organization to the Steering Committee, and I will keep you informed of plans being made at the Steering Committee level using the Richardson for President web-site network. However, if our local groups in Boulder, Colorado Springs, Durango, Fort Collins, Grand County, the Grand Valley, Greeley, and Pueblo take the initiative to get organized and appoint county and/or precinct leaders, then we'll be ready for the next phase of the campaign: an all Colorado tour featuring surrogate speakers from the Steering Committee, and grassroots caucus training with the support of the national campaign's new Deputy Field Director, Ray Glendening, who will be joining us for an all-Colorado summit in Denver on October 12th. I can't replace Michelle, but together we can make sure that Colorado nominates Bill Richardson to be the Democratic nominee for President on February 5th!
The first step is for all of us to discuss what is needed to be more effective in getting the word out, and in growing our groups. Ray will help, and I encourage all members of any of the Colorado groups to step forward with your opinions, ideas, and hopes for this campaign, remembering as Michelle always did that "Richardson Brings Hope," and that this is why we support him. Please, do so either by chiming in on my Richardson for President campaign blog, "The Kubist," which is attached to my user profile, or by emailing me directly at kubikhan@msn.com. I will work to incorporate any and all suggestions I receive into a draft document for Ray by early October, and I will make sure this document is made public prior to that meeting so that, whether you can attend or not, you are part of the planning that will change America.
Most people wait for their whole lives to make a difference--we have five months to do so! Join us in honoring the foundation Michelle has given us, and in building a "house united" for Bill Richardson, one that will stand as a testament to his commitment to a renewed and revitalized America.
Tim Kubik
Grassroots Coordinator
Denver, Colorado
Richardson for President
It's the oldest trick in sales: raise prices for a few months due to 'market forces,' and then end it all with a 'price cut' that claims to be the deal of the century. Savvy American consumers rarely fall for this kind of hucksterism anymore, so why should American voters? Cutting the troop levels in Iraq back to their original numbers isn't a 'drawdown,' its business as usual. Maybe the Bush Administration can get Congress to 'buy' this one so members will look good next fall, but we voters shouldn't. If the surge is working, President Bush should stand behind it, and so should the Congress. If its not, maybe its time the Democrats in Congress listened to Bill Richardson, the only presidential candidate with the executive experience necessary to make an offer that will truly change the situation in Iraq: a multilateral, multi-faceted diplomatic initiative backed by an all-Muslim peacekeeping force, and all U.S. troops home in 6-8 months. It's what the country voted for in 2006; shouldn't we consider a Commander-in-Chief who can execute the people's will?
Remarks I shared during the Governor's visit to Denver this Monday:
When people ask me why Coloradoans should support Bill Richardson, I reply: 1) He's Western, which means he understands our local issues here in Colorado (the environment, immigration, education, transportation, and the unique issues of Western economies). 2) He's a governor, which means he's electable because he already knows how to lead. 3) He has more foreign policy experience than any candidate on either side of the aisle. To sum up, when you look at the issues facing Colorado and the country--the war in Iraq, education, the environment, and the economy--how can you fail to miss the "extra large" leadership potential of Bill Richardson for President?
When people ask me why Coloradoans should support Bill Richardson, I reply: 1) He's Western, which means he understands our local issues here in Colorado (the environment, immigration, education, transportation, and the unique issues of Western economies). 2) He's a governor, which means he's electable because he already knows how to lead. 3) He has more foreign policy experience than any candidate on either side of the aisle. To sum up, when you look at the issues facing Colorado and the country--the war in Iraq, education, the environment, and the economy--how can you fail to miss the "extra large" leadership potential of Bill Richardson for President?
I've decided to use this space to post my thoughts on why Bill Richardson should be President. My hope is that Richardson supporters in the Denver and Colorado community (or elsewhere!) will be able to check in and get ideas for letters to the editor, or help us to refine our message here in Colorado. I hope you like the "Kubist" perspective!
Posts By Month
Posts
