I think the game has ended for Richardson......

The following day of the campaign, Richardson concluded his stump speech by highlighting his commitment to Iowa, to the confusion of the New Hampshire voters in attendance.

Seriously, though, I finally understand now why Richardson kept repeating the phrase "I'm a governor" over and over in the early debates; he was worried that he might forget otherwise.

I think giving Kim Junk Ill 8000 nuclear fuel rods is a bigger boo boo than any of that BS

You forget he said Iowa was in the top ten states that are terrorist targets (since when is exaggerating a states terrorist risk normal pandering? Did he think Iowans would be upset if he said we are a low state risk, that we would feel we weren't being respected? Strange!) And that he said the Lord wants Iowa to be the first caucus state. Just what we need another President who knows Gods will! His backing out of the Hawkeye Labor Council at the last minute, because he needed his sleep before the ABC debate the following morning. Only Obama and Edwards are younger than him, and yet Biden, Dodd, Clinton & Kucinich were able to make both events!  

Richardson is the ONLY one who has the ideas and experience to be President.
I think that stupid union should change their name so as not to make him look foolish. So what if he gets things wrong, he has the best plan for health care, without a doubt, and no one can deny it. His resume is shinier than Edwards' hair, prettier than Mitt Romney's wife and he speaks Spanish! What more could you want? he's even a Governor of a state, and they make great Presidents, which is impossible to deny.
The MSM just doesn't tell you all the GREAT things he doesn't get wrong, which are many. When he stopped at that diner and BOUGHT HIS OWN COFFEE, where was the MSM? He had EXACT CHANGE! Wake up people and smell his coffee!
He has experience and exact change. He has the best health care plan and he said so himself, and if he wanted he could say it in Spanish.

I THINK THEY ARE ALL NINNEYS.  ONE IS NOT ANY SMARTER THAN THE OTHER.  OH THEY THINK THEY ARE BUT LOOK AT THE SITUATION OF THIS COUNTRY, AND I DON'T MEAN THE WAR EITHER.  GOD'S LAW SAYS HOMOSECUALITY IS A SIN AND IT IS A SIN, NOT A CHOICE.

Next thing you know, Richardson will do one of those political ads like Gravel did......

George--I applaud your wonderfully satirical post.

Say good night, Gracie ........

Dave, Tn:  'I think giving Kim Junk Ill 8000 nuclear fuel rods is a bigger boo boo than any of that BS'

Actually, we DIND'T give any nuclear fuel to N Korea
I think you're becoming delusional, Dave, Tn !!
Was it that *aa kicking tha Cal gave the Univ of Tennessee a few weeks ago ?
Did that send you over the edge ??

Jerry - If he does, he'll probably throw the rock in the wrong pond.

Papa Bear needs more sleep.
Gaffed as he is, he'd still make a better president than our current 2-term gaffe.

We've had a president for nearly eight years that's stumbled so badly most of the time there are books written about his bloopers. Not only books, but sequels! It's hard not to make a mistake when the press is waiting for your every fall in public.
And George, the kind of mean sarcasm you're dishing out is just another form of repressed anger. Say what you feel, that's more clever

Anyone who thinks homosexuality is a sin is a closed minded bigot who should stick to the bible instead of politics! (Got it Sharon? You're a moron!)

We here in NM feel for Bill, truly we do.

Having traveled extensively out of state for extended periods of time, I can feel Bill's pain.

It's the lack of good ol' New Mexican Hatch green chilis.

Don't leave home without it. So send him back home, please. Preferrably not in a box.

I agree that Richardson is dropping the ball left and right. All the same, it certainly wouldn't hurt him if the media, like NBC would publish giant articles about him and other 'second tier' candidates like they do for Hilary. Nice of MSNBC to point out a Richardson flaw, but where is his full page article outlining his policies, or those of Gravel, or Kucinich, or Biden?

Sadly, for all of Richardson's accomplishments, these kinds of gaffes remind voters of George W. Bush, and not in a good way.  When Bush made these kinds of gaffes at first, a lot of voters thought it made him seem more human and they didn't penalize him for it.  But later it contributed to thoughts that Bush was incompetent.  And that's why Richardson's stock value is falling precipitously.

Which candidate will fill the void for Democratic voters who are not into the so-called "Big 3" of Barack Clintedwards and are looking for a veteran or accomplished statesman?  This leaves Biden and Dodd, unless Gore jumps in.

http://theseventen.blogspot.com

Richardson is the only candidate with a real job.  Being Gov. is a 24/7/365 deal.  He can't take time off from his regular work to campaign.  Senators don't show up for work and who cares.  They are not doing anything anyway except finding excuses on why they voted for the war.  Not saying Richardson is the person to be President.  Just realize that he has other commitments to take care of.

Anthony Palmer, have you checked out www.explorehuckabee.com? I checked it out, out of curiosity. He is for all Americans. He has a long list of qualifications. He, and his wife, have done a lot of good-for the sake of doing good. He sincerely want to serve America.

no more religious fanatics please... the founders of this nation separated church and state for good reason; to protect STATE form CHURCH.  As Barry Goldwater put it "these people have no place in democratic politics.... they are so sure they're right that compromise is seen as a loss.... democracy doesn't work like that".  Aside from compromise, democracy also requires logical and rational thought... someone who is so diluted they base her or his reality on fairy tales conjured by people thousands of years ago who believed the stars were pinholes in god's blanket... is simply not fit to lead.

The  MSM has decided that they want verbal gaffes to be their narrative for Richardson...so we're basically stuck hearing about every mispronunciation, momentary slip up, or error instead of hearing about policy positions, accomplishments, etc.

I've seen several politicians campaign in person in my lifetime and I know that they ALL make little mistakes from time to time.  Even people like Hillary and Romney make mistakes, but because that's not the "rap" on them, we don't hear about them.

Ellen Pugh, Ladson SC

No one doubts Richardson has experience, is intelligent, etc. However, he keeps screwing up on the campaign trail. Also, he has lots of "plans" but no substance. He says as President he would be a champion for education (because you know the other candidates hate education). He vows to have a minimum teacher wage of 40,000. (which given 3 months off in the summer would be in effect 53,333 starting wage) However his website and stump speech don't say how he'll accomplish this. Will it be an unfunded mandate like NCLB, or will the federal gov't step in and pick up the difference in pay between what a local school district and state can pay? This like all his other plans consist of mere platitudes. Apparently Gov. Richardson doesn't think voters will go beyond the sound bites and ask how the promises will be accomplished. Sorry, this time voters can't afford not to question the promises.

Molly, you are delusional if you believe that teachers only work 9 months of the year.  That is as tired and misinformed an argument as I have heard in years.  And are you implying that even $53,333 is too much money to pay a teacher?  Without teachers, how do all those people working in more "worthy" professions get the skills needed to get those jobs?  Gov. Richardson is a visionary on this issue, and you are a dinosaur...

Kelly says: Molly, you are delusional if you believe that teachers only work 9 months of the year.


It's more like 8 months.  2 weeks at Christmas, a week in the spring, and all those so-called teacher conference days.  12 weeks off in the summer.  8 months.

Molly - Teachers salaries are computed based on 12 months, not accounting for time off in the summer.  I believe that is reflected in the fact that they receive paychecks year round.

Kelly, Roswell, NM states:

"Molly, you are delusional if you believe that teachers only work 9 months of the year.  That is as tired and misinformed an argument as I have heard in years.  And are you implying that even $53,333 is too much money to pay a teacher?  Without teachers, how do all those people working in more "worthy" professions get the skills needed to get those jobs?  Gov. Richardson is a visionary on this issue, and you are a dinosaur..."

I have great respect for teachers, my mom was a teacher, and 3 siblings have education degree's two of whom teach in Iowa public schools. I have served on two Catholic school boards, and can assure you the teachers felt I was their biggest champion on the board. In Iowa in addition to having 8-12 days off over Christmas (depending upon what day of the week 12/25 falls)a week for thanksgiving and spring break (not all districts, but most larger Iowa school districts have a week for both thanksgiving and spring break )teachers in Iowa (which is the audience Richardson keeps speaking too) have almost three full months off in the summer. (Unless they teach at one of the rare Iowa "year round school", although they don't have more school days under that schedule, it is just spread out differently)

This is not a slam on teachers. I friend of mine who teachers has a plaque in her living room that says "The three best things about teaching are June, July and August". It's a joke, she lovese teaching and I hear she's great at it, but she does love the summer off. Almost all male teachers I know have summer jobs while school is in recess. Do I think 53,333 a year starting teachers salary is too much? In Iowa where the cost of living is much lower than it is nationally I would have a hard time justifying a salary of that magnitude as a minimum starting teacher's wage. That is higher than starting attorney wage in most Iowa law firms. I know legal assistants who have worked at the same firm for over 25 years whose salary doesn't approach 53,000 annually. So with that background. i.e. the realities of Iowa, I do think it would be hard to justify that high an annual salary, that is not the same as saying I don't believe teachers are worth that, those really are too separate issues.

But my problem with Richardson's call to have a minimum teacher's wage of 40,000 is I don't believe him. As Governor of NM what is the minimum teacher pay? I know it has increased (when he was elected Gov. NM ranked 46th in teacher pay, and according to his website they are now 29th.), but his website doesn't say what it increased to. Does NM have a minimum teachers pay of 40,000? Richardson has never said how this minimum wage would be paid, normally local school districts set teacher pay (subject to individual state rules/regulations). Is Richardson's plan an unfunded state mandate, in which case how many cops, etc would a state have to lose to be able to pay the minimum wage. How large would class rooms have to get in order to pay the minimum salary. If you had a 20% reduction in the number of  teachers in a school district in order to pay the minimum salary, the teacher's job would be dramatically more difficult, and education (especially in elementary schools) would suffer. And if the Federal gov't would provide assistance to states under Richardson's proposal (it's pretty hard to even call it a proposal, it is a blanket statement, with no specifics) unable to meet the minimum wage, how much would that cost.

My problem is not with teachers, or not valuing teachers, or not believing they are underpaid and under appreciated (I whole heartedly believe both), my problem is I don't like having my intelligence insulted. When a candidate says they are going to do this or that, and they don't say how they'll achieve their promise, I have a hard time believing the promise is anything more than political pandering.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa writes:

"Molly - Teachers salaries are computed based on 12 months, not accounting for time off in the summer.  I believe that is reflected in the fact that they receive paychecks year round."

Actually Carrie, the salary is computed both ways, at least in the school district my sisters work in. The teacher is given the option of being paid on an annual basis, or while school is in sessions. Many (probably most, I'd be guessing)teachers choose to be paid monthly, or bi-monthly, but some choose to be paid larger amounts, but are only paid during the school year. (no summer checks) The only teacher's my sister knows who select this method are teachers whose spouse makes a lot of money, or some male teachers who earn more at their summer job, than they do teaching. Being paid only during the school year can also benefit beginning teachers. The first 12 years my sister taught she always received a RIF (reduction in force) notification (enrollments were declining at the time). A co-worker who was paid during the school year only was able to file for unemployment during the summer, because his position was eliminated, and he wasn't still being paid. It worked in his favor because he usually was the first RIF'd teacher notified of an opening, which stopped the right to unemployment benefits.

Regardless of whether a district requires the payments be monthly or bi-monthly, or allows for teachers to receive larger pay checks during the school year only, because the schools calendar, and requirement for 180 days of school per academic year (whether traditional school calendar or "year round") a teacher has at least three months when they are not required to work (I'm not counting in service days, because that is work). Right or wrong, because of this fact, most people consider this when determining whether teacher are properly compensated, or at least those are the ones who write the paper.

Molly - I agree, it should be taken into consideration.  The point is, as I said, that it is incorrect to say that $40,000 starting salary for teachers would be equal to the $53,333 you cited for a full year.  The salaries paid to teachers take into account the fact that they only work 9 months (give or take) out of the year.  Put another way, if they taught 12 months of the year, they would be making more money.  

I WANT GOOD AND WELL QUALIFIED CANDIDATE- WE HAVE THAT EXPREIENCE DURING THE CLNTONS- IW ANT THAT BACK NO OHRR CANDIATE CAN COMPETE HILLARY THE CLNTONS.
CARING/GOOD/LEADER AND KNOWLEDGEABLE AND SMART AND TALENTED.I WANT YOU BILL AND HILLARY- TAKE CARE THIS CRUMBLED AMERICA UNDER THE REPUBLCIAN PARTY AND THE BUSH ADM.I CANT WAIT THAT BUSHES GUY GO AWAY.

What are you talking about Priscela?? Could you be more coherent in your post?

I dont care about his verbal flubs, the guy probably goes to sleep in one state and wakes up in another one being ushered on to the campaign stage. I am sure all the other candidates are having just as many verbal errors.  I am voting Richardson in the primaries and hopefully in the presidency.

Joshua Durant,Oklahoma writes

"I am sure all the other candidates are having just as many verbal errors. I am voting Richardson in the primaries and hopefully in the presidency."

Actually they aren't having verbal errors or you would read about them. And they all travel to many states in the same day. It isn't that difficult to remember the name of the union you are speaking to, especially when you are asking for their endorsement. And even if you were having a brain freeze, all he had to do is look up and see the banners with the union's name on it. I have never seen a meeting of a union that didn't have at least one prominent banner displaying its name.

Also I don't know when Oklahoma votes, but Richardson has said if he doesn't beat at least one of the top three (Edwards, Clinton or Obama) in Iowa he is out. Richardson claims to be climbing in the polls in early states, while I can't speak for other early states he isn't doing so in Iowa, even Kucinich had more supporters at Harkin's steak fry Sunday despite no Iowa office, and the fact he wasn't invited to speak. Unless Edwards, Clinton or Obama self destructs in a really big way there is absolutely no way for Richardson to come out ahead of any of them. And unless he "changes his mind" he will be out after Iowa. He doesn't have to drop out after a likely 5th place finish (maybe even 6th) in Iowa, but I think he'll keep his word.

Well, I have to say, he made several references in his speech to the fact that he had chartered a plane specifically to come see us. He could have gotten the name of the union right. You could see the jaws dropping around the room when he said it--and he had given a well-received speech, up to that point.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):