Richardson bites back


Bill Richardson, who has to be on the short list to become Obama’s VP, sets the record straight:

As I have pointed out many times, and most pointedly when I endorsed Sen. Obama, the campaign has been too negative, and we Democrats need to calm the rhetoric and personal attacks so we can come together as a party to defeat the Republicans.

More than anything, to repair the damage done at home and abroad, we must unite as a country. I endorsed Sen. Obama because I believe he has the judgment, temperament and background to bridge our divisions as a nation and make America strong at home and respected in the world again.

That “win at any cost” thing isn’t just wearing thin on us little folk. As her campaign has spun itself into a pretzel trying to find a slogan that works, apparently no one in Camp Clinton ever thought, “What if we just act nice?” If smarts and political acumen with a total lack of charisma made Presidents, we’d still be talking about President Phil Gramm.

But, as usual, the Cajun got something right, even as he was spouting nonsense:

If Richardson was going to turn on the Clintons the way he did, I see no problem in saying what I said. Because if loyalty is one virtue, another is straight talk. And if Democrats can’t handle that, they’re going to have a hard time handling a Republican nominee who is seeking the presidency with that as his slogan.

The problem with Carville is that he has the good ol’ boy definition of loyalty – “I’ll stand by ye whether ye’re right or wrong!” That kind of sentiment is fine for a couple of hayseeds plowing adjoining fields. But we are talking about picking the person who will likely be the next President of the United States. Anyone who puts personal loyalty over their objective measure of who is best for the job is a moron and a boob. That’s straight talk.

And I agree. It’s in too short supply. Too many people putting it behind loyalty instead of ahead of it.

Technorati Tags:

Sphere: Related Content