There are so many people who supported Biden, Richardson, Kucinich, and Edwards, now wondering what to do when their primaries come up. If our candidate is on the ballot, do we vote our hearts, or do we wait for our candidate to endorse? Do we bite the bullet and vote for one of the remaining two major candidates?

If the Democrats go into the convention with no clear front runner, what then?

What we can do is learn about the primary process, and make an informed decision. As I understand it, if a candidate gets 15%or more of the vote, they are counted towards delegates. If the total is under 15%, the votes get distributed to the candidates who get over 15%, so, a vote will go to Hillary or Obama unless the candidate gets 15% or more. Delegates translate to leverage while drafting party platform at the Democratic Convention.

If there is no clear winner after the first vote at the convention, the committed delegates are then freed from their obligations, and can vote for whatever candidate they choose.

if you are registered in New Mexico, or any other state where you are reasonably sure that Richardson could go over the 15%, I suggest that you do vote for Richardson, so that he can have the delegates, and the leverage that comes with it. If you are not in a super Tuesday state, and you think this is a good idea, you can join the group of a neighboring Super Tuesday State, and communicate this idea.

I may be a bit biased since I think of global warming from an environmental scientists point of view, but I cannot understand why Governor Bill Richardson is not higher in the polls. He is the only one with the vision AND experience needed to lead this country out of our self destructive path. The issue of our time has been reduced to an afterthought. It seems rational that the environment should be the most salient issue of the campaign, but it is mentioned more as a fad than anything else. Environmental and energy policy has a correlation with many of the "important issues" the candidates are talking about. Why must so much of our future be based on media hype and stardom?   Read More »

In 2004, Richard Gephardt went negative on front runner Howard Dean, and Dean counter attacked. Voters in Iowa were turned off. 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? Clinton, Obama and Edwards are locked in a tie for first place, and the race is starting to heat up. As reported by Iowa political commentator David Yepsen:

The 2008 Edwards doesn't sound much like the 2004 Edwards Iowa Democrats came to admire. Now, he sounds increasingly sharp-edged in campaign stump speeches that often border on class-warfare politics. He's started flaying away at the Clinton years in the White House. He and Obama talk about Clinton's support from lobbyists. Clinton has started pushing back about Obama's lack of experience, recently pointing out that living for a few years in a foreign country as a child hardly makes you a foreign-policy expert.

Back and forth it goes. At one level, it's a good thing. Democratic caucus-goers are entitled to vet candidates and see them probe one another's weaknesses before the GOP does it in the November campaign. But Democrats have to be careful about this stuff. Edwards' negativity mars the sunny, moderate image that served him well in 2004. Obama's attacks distract from the politics of hope he likes to preach. Clinton's attacks just undercut her efforts to change her image as a cold-hearted candidate.

Whom might benefit if it gets ugly at the top? Yepsen highlights Richardson:

Richardson holds a firm grip on fourth place in the race. He's done that with a combination of hard work - he's been in 98 counties - a positive message and some genuinely humorous television advertising earlier in the campaign. "I sense a lot of grass-roots momentum, especially in rural areas," Richardson said in an interview. He packed more than 200 people into the meeting room at the Saylor Township fire department on Saturday afternoon last week. They were mostly older and blue-collar union Democrats, the kind of folks who show up at caucuses. "We're getting huge crowds," he said. "I sense this race is not over. Polls show 50 percent undecided. There's a lot of fluidity. Iowans are known for making up their minds at the last minute."

How is it going for Richardson in Iowa? The Washington Post reported:

New Mexico Bill Richardson has barnstormed 95 of Iowa's 99 counties, wooing rural Democrats with his pro-gun record and urban caucus goers with his aggressive Iraq withdrawal plan. He has fielded questions on every imaginable subject, from term limits to the space station. The Richardson style is frank but casual. He leans forward in his cowboy boots, fists jammed in his suit pocket.

. . .His niche is the positive moderate, similar to Edwards circa 2004. Indeed, Richardson is trying to eat into Edwards' support among working class, small town caucus goers. "I think Edwards tends to attract the same people I need to attract," Richardson said. His events also draw large numbers of older women - part of Clinton's target audience. "I like her, but I think she's too polarizing," said Mary Kathryn Gepner, a librarian who attended a Richardson event in Mt. Ayr, and lists Edwards and Richardson as her first and second choices.

The following video will give you a sense of how Iowa voters are responding to Richardson. Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSUepIkRBOk

What vision is Richardson articulating for America when he speaks to Iowa voters? Richardson recently outlined his vision for our nation at the end of a speech on a new farm policy for America:

Unfortunately, in Washington today there's too much negativity. Negativity over health care. Negativity over immigration. But when I travel around Iowa, I see something different. I am reminded again that we are a positive nation, founded on inspiring principles.

I see a place where character is more than the contents of your bank account. Where leadership means more than a list of things you plan to do. Where your neighbor's word is more important than all the smooth talk in the world. I see a people who reward those who work hard; but also recognize that even the hardest workers cannot do it alone.

I see a nation attached to our land, but rooted in our values. I have a vision of America in ascendancy. It's a vision that all our people, whether they are in blue, red our purple states can share.

This is America. We landed a man on the moon. We built the internet. We beat the Great depression. We defeated the Nazis. We routed the Soviet Union in a global battle over the future of the planet. So my message for all those who are pessimists, those who are negative, those who are angry is this: We can do it.

To those who said I couldn't get those hostages out of Sudan -- I said I can. And I did it. To those who say we can't get a fair deal for our family farmers -- I say we can. To those who say we can't we can't revitalize our rural economy -- I say we can. To those who say we can't conserve our land and water -- I say we can. To those who say we can't spark a new energy revolution -- I say we can. To those who engage in the politics of personal attacks -- I say we can do better. If we work together, we can solve our problems. We can. And we will.

Finally, in news away from Iowa, Richardson this week picked up a significant labor endorsement in Nevada. Local 396 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) endorsed Richardson. Local 396 represents more than 2,400 electrical workers in the Las Vegas region. It is one of the most well-organized and powerful unions in Nevada.

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   Read More »

There is a recent article that points to more evidence of the current administrations censoring vital information on climate change. Previously, NASA's scientific findings were altered to paint a more rosy picture, this time it is the CDC getting edited. The information getting the scrub down this time is on how climate change could affect human health. This should have gotten more attention from the press as it pertains to our, and our childrens, well being rather than just the well being of the planet. Unfortunately, the current population is too naive to grasp the ramifications of widespread disease outbreaks, which could come about as a result of climate change. We have become complacent as our generation has not seen the likes of black death, cholera, or pandemic flu such as the one that ravaged humans in the time of WW1. The article can be found at the following link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21449759/   Read More »

What I like about Richardson is even if he hasn't got the perfect policy point at first, he's not afraid of standing up and identifying issues that should be at the top of the priority list and starting to talk about them. I think he always adjusts to new information and then corrects in the right way.

Take the water issue- Richardson is speaking and responding to the issue.(It is going to have dramatic consequences sooner rather than later!) However, no one else is discussing it because it's not even on their radar. With Bill you know what is on his radar and that he's chewing on it, allowing the public to chew along with him. He's not afraid of learning publicly and meanwhile the public discussion happens!

Keep on keeping on Governor!

Today, Chase Martyn of the Iow 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."   Read More »

There is a recent article about what our current administration is doing to try to stop the laudable acts of California and Northeastern states. As some of you may know California has passed legislation requiring the regulation of greenhouse gases, something our federal government has strongly opposed for love of big business $$. Many northeastern states followed suit and have adopted these rules. Unfortunately, the states need a waiver from the EPA for these rules to go into effect. The EPA has been considering this waiver and is expected to rule soon. It turns out that the federal government has been lobbying AGAINST the approval of the waiver. I cannot come up with a logical reason as to why they would try to stop something the people want and what is truly in the best interest of our country and national security. The article can be found at: http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/labnotes/archive/2007/09/24/can-climate-politics-get-any-dirtier.aspx   Read More »

Congressman, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Secretary of Energy and in his second term as Governor of New Mexico after a landslide victory in November 2006, Governor Bill Richardson is running for President to heal America and restore our place in the world. He possesses the experience, vision and leadership skills to be a great President.

Richardson is goal-oriented, assertive and confident. He has the ability to quickly evaluate a situation but is not rigid in his thinking and will modify policy when necessary. He takes a practical approach to governing, focusing on solutions to problems rather than ideology.   Read More »

For those that think the race is over - HRC has won and Richardson is just running for Vice President: Richardson is polling in Iowa at the same level John Kerry was the summer of 2003 (and far ahead of where Edwards was four years ago who finished a surprising second). Remember, almost half of the Iowa caucus voters in 2004 didn't choose a candidate until less than a month before the election. In New Hampshire, Richardson is at 12%, only 3 points behind Edwards in the latest poll.

Richardson was the only Democrat aside from Obama to show an increase in donations in the 2Q over the 1Q 2007. He has strong organizations in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada. He has enough money on hand to run competitive races in each of those states. HRC and Obama can't risk spending all their money on the early caucus/primary states or they'll have nothing for Super Tuesday on February 5th.

The only governor competing for the Democratic nomination, Richardson is uniquely positioned to win in November 2008. Over the past 30 years four governors have won the presidency. In the entire history of our nation, only two senators have accomplished that feat.

The dominant issue in the campaign for Democrats is the Iraq War. Of the top four Democratic candidates Richardson has the only crystal clear, unambiguous approach that most Democrats favor - a total withdraw of our forces. Richardson understands the path the U.S. must take to get out of Iraq. For the Senators our withdrawal will be a long and slow march. The intervention will continue for years to come if one of them is elected President. See the recent New York Times article on this question: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/us/politics/12dems.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Once Democrats in Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire focus on the race and this particular issue, Richardson's poll numbers will further improve.

Richardson is one of four persons in America that will be the Democratic nominee for President. Richardson is a master at retail politics. The more people get to know him, the more support he generates.

Here is a website that compares the 4 main democratic candidates (Obama, Clinton, Edwards, and Richardson) on their energy stance. Notice how much more aggressive Bill Richardsons views are on how we address energy policy areas. I think it is this type of leadership and bold steps that is absolutely necessary as we head into the inevitable energy crisis. We need Bill Richardsons forward thinking to help transition away from oil.

This would be a great easy reference to print out and use as talking points when discussing Bill Richardson with people.

The site is: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/3/05910/48951

Yeah!

Richardson has more than a clue! He's come out as opposed to the Desert Rock Energy Plant proposed in the four corners on Navajo land. That's a stand up guy! He could ignore this issue and no one outside the four corners would notice for years to come, but this is one of the most predatory proposals that has come to New Mexico and the four corners in years. The Navajo children are already 16 times more likely to get cancer in their lifetime than other children due to the power plants already in existence. This plant would put more mercury and CO2 into the atmosphere driving up those statistics and jeopardizing the planet. No more Dirty Coal!

Way to go Governor!

Being the sole Democratic candidate for President with executive branch experience, voters can evaluate Bill Richardson from the unique stand point of an actual record of implementing policy on key issues, not merely the speeches he has given.

On the issue of climate change, Richardson has offered the most aggressive plan of any candidate, proposing to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2050. But will Richardson be true to his word if he's elected President? Richardson is proving by his actions as Governor of New Mexico on global warming that the answer is yes.   Read More »

Essay on Energy and Energy Policy.

1- Current Problems
2- Current Efforts and Proposed Solutions
3- Comprehensive Approach
4- Who can help?


1- Current Problems:

What are the current problems in Energy today?

- Energy consumption is increasing at a higher rate than production

- Oil Reserves are limited and get more expensive to find and extract

- Most Energy generation or consumption is harmful to the environment

- Energy inefficiencies wastes a huge percentage of materials extracted.


2- Current Efforts and Proposed Solutions:


A- Energy production:


- Pressure producing countries to increase production, control sources of oil. This approach is costly, militarily and it's debatable whether it pays off both in financial cost and cost in human life not to mention its effect on History going forward. It also can not be sustained for very long anyway. This tends to be a republican approach. Oil companies love this one. But its very transactional and momentary.

- Nuclear Energy. Due to historic catastrophic accidents Nuclear Energy adoption has slowed dramatically. And the relationship to Weapons has created international tensions.

- Green sources: solar, wind, water; everybody seems to like these solutions however the cost of green energy is much higher. There is a current debate about whether that is due to interference from oil companies or whether it's just a physical limitation.

- New technologies: Fusion, Hydrogen. I am not an energy scientist and don't really know the status of these technologies. If anybody knows, please add some info in the comments section.


B- Energy consumption:

- Pressure consumers to cut down on consumption. This approach has not worked historically. The number of people that buy into this principle has not been big enough to put a dent in the consumption increase rate. The democrats and environmentalists tend to favor this approach. Oil companies hate it.


- More Efficient Energy consumption: Hybrid cars, new light bulbs… This effort seems to be helping especially since you get the same result just with a little less gas or oil.


3- A Comprehensive Approach:

A few years ago a revolution in telecommunications and information sharing was created with the creation of the Internet and the Web. The differences in these fields from before the Internet to after the Internet could help us devise an approach for Energy.

A- Before the Internet:

Telecommunications was centralized and controlled by a government or a monopoly. Huge central offices acted as the aggregator of all communications. The connectivity was "star" shaped and had single points of failures

Before the internet Information sharing was done mostly through a one way broadcast systems: TV station, Newspapers, Books.

Information storage was centralized: Big Libraries, Archives, Blockbuster...

Information generation was controlled by a small number of people: Magazine Editors, TV Executives, Famous Authors, Movie Producers, and Governments

The connectivity was "star" shaped and had single points of failures: central office failing, major cable, broadcast tower, printing press…

B- After the Internet

Information storage, generation, and distribution became much more elemental and at the reach of everybody. The number of information generators exploded with millions of web sites, blogs, forums…

Connectivity became much more robust with rerouting, interconnected networks...
The cost of generating and transmitting information dropped dramatically.
The amount of information shared increased exponentially.
The possibility of censorship decreased.
Competition Increased.
Government regulation decreased.
And the Internet is not controlled by big players only.


C- How was the Internet created technically?


The internet is a set of protocols created by groups like IETF and W3C. They created protocols that let devices and networks, operated by different people, communicate with each other.

Once those standard protocols were created, People created products that use them, small networks started forming. They then connected to each other and formed today's Internet

The creation of the Internet did not require major government investments. It was enabled by the creation of the open standard protocols.

D- How does is apply to Energy?

Energy today has centralized extraction (mostly governments and huge cartels)
Generation, distribution, storage is centralized and controlled by a small number of people.

Distribution and transition is "star" shaped, proprietary, regulated, and has single points of failure. Long transmission distances create huge inefficiencies

What if just like I can generate a web site that my cousin in Brazil can read, I can generate some energy that my neighbor down the street can use? What if I can store some energy that my neighbor's car can run on tomorrow? What if my lights at home consumed some energy generated by my neighbor's solar array, some energy from my other neighbors exercise bike and some energy stored in batteries at the convenience store down the street. What if there was no such thing as a blackout any more.

Energy can be generated, collected, stored, and distributed everywhere around us, by all of us. If you add up all the energy generated by people exercising, it would make a difference in the total energy consumption. If you would decrease the long hall inefficiencies of power lines, it would make a difference. If I can charge my neighbor for energy created by my solar array, it may give me more incentive to get one. If a small business can install a small power station in a neighborhood and compete with the big power company with the same ease as creating a web site, competition will increase and transmission efficiency would help their business case.

New Technology does not have to concentrate on creating energy on a massive scale any more. We can explore technologies that just create a little energy.

I think that an effort to standardize on the following items would help reduce the Energy Problems we have today:

- Small Multidirectional Distribution Meshes (nets)
- Micro billing for consumption and generation
- Integration of small generation and storage devices to these Meshes
- Connection back into the backbone distribution grid with proper accounting

Incentive would be created for people to collect, store and distribute energy from processes they run everyday and from devices in their homes and businesses. This will in turn, create incentive for manufacturers to create devices that do the same. A health club can make an extra $5000 dollars a month as a small power station; a farmer can incinerate his mulch and make $1000.

History teaches us, that if we create enablers. Human ingenuity will exceed all our expectations.

Is this a far fetched idea or can it work? I am sure that the people who started the effort of standardizing the Internet protocols did not imagine the success that their work would create. Will it work for energy? Is it worth a try?

4- Who can help?

I was involved (although not in the early stages) at IETF and W3C. I do understand how standardization works. I have contributions to existing standards. I have been thinking about this idea for Energy standards for a long time now and do believe that it can decrease cost, increase efficiency and create a new industry. If anybody is interested in helping, please let know. We can create an effort to start this work.

Any comments and suggestions are welcome and appreciated.

There is a study recently released that goes against what many of the CO2 induced global warming critics have been spewing. That is that sun flares and increased solar activity is the cause of global warming and NOT CO2 emissions from human sources. Even with the recently release IPCC report on climate change there was something like 2000 scientists backing the theory that humans are the cause of global warming and unfortunately the news stations, pathetically trying to be fair and balanced, had A scientist on saying it was solar activity and not CO2 emissions that are the cause of global warming. I cannot for the life of me see reason in a lone scientist against 2000 being fair and balanced. Regardless this article Link
is important in addressing the skeptics and will hopefully enlighten them in that they are dead wrong.   Read More »

Baghdad is Iraq's largest city with 7 million residents. Iraq has 15 other major cities, hundreds of smaller cities and towns and thousands of villages with another 20 million people in a nation the size of California.

We don't have enough troops now in Iraq to bring peace and stability to the country - and never will absent re-instating the draft and sending over 600,000+ soldiers, which of course should not and will not occur.

How then will withdrawing the bulk of our forces but keeping residual troops in Iraq - as several Democratic candidates for President have advocated - achieve anything other than continued American deaths? Which Democratic Presidential candidate has the best plan for getting the U.S. out of Iraq? In my opinion it's Bill Richardson.   Read More »

Highlighting his considerable foreign expertise, Governor Bill Richardson last week set forth a path to avoiding military confrontation with Iran over its nuclear program. Richardson called on the Bush administration to stop threatening Iran with "incendiary rhetoric," and instead recognize our interests in engaging Iran diplomatically.

Richardson's week ended with a well-received speech before Latino leaders in Florida. Decrying the tone of the debate in the Senate on the immigration bill and how Latinos are portrayed in the media, Richardson asked:

Do you notice that when they depict immigrants, they have someone crossing a wall, jumping as if they are criminals? How about the farmers who break their backs working or those who are cleaning the toilets and working at the hotel where we stay? How about the American media covering the immigrant who died protecting his country?

Also of note, Pollster.com added Richardson to its Top Democrats charts, joining Clinton, Obama and Edwards. Charles Franklin of Pollster.com stated, "For other Democratic candidates, we've not seen a substantial upturn anywhere. Richardson stands alone in that respect at the moment."

For a full review of Richardson's week, continue reading.   Read More »

Recently senators reached a deal to address CO2 emissions via a cap and trade situation. One of the key republicans to admit CO2 emissions needs to be addressed was John Warner. View article: Link
This is a step in the right direction to have senators (regardless of party) come together and address an issue that has for so long been ignored.   Read More »