Gov. Bill Richardson uses GOP-style talking points to attack another Democrat:
“Democrats, whenever we have a solution, we want to tax,” Richardson said. “I’m different. I’m a tax cutter.”
Curious. I know Democrats are sometime pegged as the tax-and-spend party, but I find it odd that a Democrat, running for president, would so willingly adopt the language of the opposition. Why Richardson would be proud of cutting taxes in a state that recieves more federal taxes than it sends to Washington D.C., strikes me as odd. If any primary voter was really concerned about cutting taxes, they’d probably be on the other team.
For the record, I’m supporting John Edwards, who was the candidate Richardson attacked with the statement quoted above. Richardson wants to pay for his healthcare plan by ending the Iraq War and repurposing the money while Edwards wants to repeal tax cuts for wealthy Americans to pay for his healthcare plan.
The federal deficit is so damned high that just about every single state receives more from Washington DC than they pay in federal taxes.
Looks like a bad attempt at re-branding to me. Rather than attacking Edward’s and taxation Richardson could have pointed to all the Republicans that have voted for him over the years and talked about why he can consistently win elections in a Republican leaning state.
Well, for the record, if I was voting today, Richardson would be my choice for sure. I might put Edwards at third after Rep. Kucinich
I don’t really understand where Richardson is going with this line of reasoning… he’s already gotten more good press from David Brooks and the Weekly Standard than any Democratic primary candidate ought to want. :)
Memo to the Governor: you’re supposed to tack LEFT during the primary, and then back CENTER for the general. (And I say this as a guy who likes Richardson)
At any rate, tax cuts aren’t quite the resonant issue they were 5 or 10 years ago. Just ask Tim Eyman!
I WAS ROOTING FOR RICHARDSON GIVEN HIS RESUME. NO MORE.
IT’S BETWEEN EDWARDS AND OBAMA FOR ME.
If you want to kwow what’s going to happen just watch around October or November; Al Gore will announce his presidency and he’ll run away with the nomination. He’ll select Obama as his #2 sealing the deal with the black and minority votes and bringing the critical mass of minority voters that will happen due to demography by 2016-2020 timeframe.
This will ensure Democratic supremacy for DECADES to come.
For those who didn’t believe my political predictions see how I bet JCH that the Dems would get BOTH houses of congress.
I wasn’t wrong then, and I’m not wrong now. Given the likes of Guilliani, Romney, or McCain and the way Bush and the Republcians have fucked themselves over, there is no better time than now for Gore to become president.
It will happen EXACTLY they way I’m prediciting. Give me the flak now neocons’ because you’ll be eating my crow later.
MTR: hows the Chis squared thingy workin’ out fer ya in the Iraq War surge? Ought to be good talking points on “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED DAY” huh?
Yeahhhhhhh, good luck with that.
More tham 100 BRAVE American soldiers died this month, but only Democrats care becasue we support the troops.
Their blood is on the hands of Bush, Republicans and they’re idiotic supporters. You PUSSIES know who you are!
Enjoy your “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED DAY” tomorrow as your failed liar in chief vetos supporting the troops.
The Republicans claim that if al Qaida knows we are going to pull out at a specific time if benchmarks aren’t met, they will just wait it out, and attack in earnest at that point.
Republicans, on the other hand, say they will do the same thing if benchmarks aren’t met, but they won’t give an “artificial time” for it.
Why would al Qaida have a different response to either plan? Do Republicans think that it’s too confusing to wait if you don’t have an exact date for a pull-out.
Is the National Discussion of this important point really on this stupid of a level?
Richardson has a nice resume, but lots of people hired on the strength of their resume bomb on the job — we all know that. A guy who doesn’t know which decade Roe v. Wade was decided in would get torn apart in presidential debates. Richardson isn’t ready for prime time.
@2 That isn’t true, Richard. Get back to us after you’ve researched it.
There is a very close correlation between how states vote and whether they’re takers or payers. With only a couple exceptions, blue states are net payers, and red states are takers.
This is a familiar pattern, of course. Here in Washington, the redder the county, the more they live off Seattle tax money.
PelletHead@11. Where’s the Beef? Wheeeeeere’s da beef? Show us your proof!
@4 Gibney’s endorsement is another good reason not to vote for Richardson.
@6 Me too. Richardson just lost my support.
@9 The moment Republicans get involved, the discussion of any issue is at this stupid a level.
Iava site quote.
“To calculate the Ratings, IAVA reviewed all legislation voted on in the Congress since September 11, 2001. For each piece of legislation that affected troops, veterans or military families, IAVA took a position either in support of, or in opposition to its passage. The letter grades were derived, using the scales below, from the percentage of times that each legislator’s vote matched the official IAVA stance.”
Ok, GBS – Who derived the “official IAVA stance?
Committee of one, Paul Rieckoff? who knows?
We do know that the would be John Kerry is ambitious..Just like the real deal. All he needs now is a wealthy heiress to marry, and a presidential election to lose.
The american people can see who supports the troops and who doesn’t. Just ask the troops
Oddly enough, it seems that Governor Richardson is running against Senator Edwards. Somehow just having everyone agreeing with each other on every point seems a bit, well, pointless.
Which would be the whole reason for the primaries. Showing the differences between candidates. Realizing that while any of them would be a tremendous improvement over the current President, or any of the current crop of Republicans, they have differences.
Governor Richardson is more of a fiscal conservative than Senator Edwards. He is saying so, clearly and honestly, to the voters. He’s acknowledging a common perception about Democrats and showing that in his case, it isn’t accurate. I don’t see that as an attack, although seriously comparing him to the Republicans certainly is.
If a Democrat isn’t even allowed to acknowledge differences between the candidates, or even acknowledge that fiscal conservatism is acceptable within the Democratic Party, then we are likely to find ourselves in the very situation that the Republicans are in today, out of touch with the American public and heading out of office in disgrace.
The Republicans chase out anyone whose political philosophy isn’t pure enough for them. They call them “RINOs” and run them out of the party. For the most part, we’ve avoided that, although occasionally, someone on our fringes will condemn another Democrat as a “DINO”.
Are we starting that with Governor Richardson?
As predicted the right wing hate radio types are screaming mad that ABC is about to out all the perverts in the Bush Regime. If it were ABC running a bogus mockumentary about 9.11 the righties would jump for joy. Now that ABC has decided to act like a real news organization, well the righties are all upset.
GOP scandal number 289,312 and boy is this one gonna be good!
When Bill Richardson became governor, the top state income tax rate in New Mexico was 8.9 percent — even higher than what Ron Sims proposed here in his 2004 campaign.
Richardson cut it, the state has prospered, and as a Democrat he won a smashing reelection victory in a swing state.
What’s with you, Will: Has it become off-limits in the Democratic Party to debate tax policy? Must D’s automatically stand for higher taxes?
Why not let these issues be debated, and let millions of Democratic primary voters — and several thousand party caucus-goers here — decide for themselves who is right?
Why Richardson would be proud of cutting taxes in a state that recieves more federal taxes than it sends to Washington D.C.,
This usually means that New Mexico is willing to take on federal projects that other liberal states refuse. Typical.
Taxs cuts work everytime they are tried. The US taxpayer should unite and form a union. I wonder how many “scabs” would ever cross their picket line. heehhehehehehehe I betcha no liberal would.
Joel @ 20
Dems who cut taxes? I’m fine with it. Perhaps what I find odd is the fact that he uses that tax cut as a hammer on his fellow Democrats.
In that quote, Richardson tries to get ahead by stereotyping Democrats as tax-and-spenders. I think it’s cheap, and below-the-belt type stuff.
I don’t think too many Dem caucusgoers are going to be in a tizzy over a guy who doesn’t know when Roe vs. Wade happened and who’s reeeeally excited about cutting taxes.
Besides, Joel, if we’re debating the merits of pro-business Democratic govs, I’d take Gov. Mark Warner (VA) over Richardson in a heartbeat.
Speaking of unionizing workers, isn’t it about time that democrat volunteers unite for fair wages. I am all for that. While their at it give them back pay and healthcare. Dems are hypocrites.
In that quote, Richardson tries to get ahead by stereotyping Democrats as tax-and-spenders. I think it’s cheap, and below-the-belt type stuff.
Whnever a dems says, “I think it’s cheap, and below-the-belt type stuff”, it’s code for the truth.
Dave Gibney says:
Well, for the record, if I was voting today, Richardson would be my choice for sure. I might put Edwards at third after Rep. Kucinich
I hear you Dave. I hope there is a strong green party or socialist candidate. We progressives need better choices when it comes to our next president. Someone who would get us out of Iraq yesterday.
@14, Well, I thought I liked Mr. Lapin, and I probably still do :)
But I think maybe there’s a little kool-aid in the pond right now.
The next President (Democrat in 2008) is going to need to win in 2012 also. Of the current field, Richardson has the most gravitas to win and hold.
At the risk of kiss of death, Gore’s hat in the ring would change my outlook very fast. He was impressive in 2000 and is what we need now.
Wouldn’t it be better, for the Democrats, to hear and decide now whether to heed warnings on the tax front? Remember, Walter Mondale dealt himself a mighty self-inflicted blow in his 1984 acceptance speech by promising to raise taxes.
re 21:”Dan Rather says:
Why Richardson would be proud of cutting taxes in a state that recieves more federal taxes than it sends to Washington D.C.,
This usually means that New Mexico is willing to take on federal projects that other liberal states refuse. Typical.”
You’re so wise. (irony tag)
28
Yeah, but Mr. Mondale was the last democrat who was semi-truthful about how he would govern. The dems are all about “tax and spend” but are never honest about it.
Totally off topic, but Goldy was right….
WASHINGTON – The U.S. government said on Monday 38 poultry farms in Indiana were given contaminated feed containing melamine in early February, with some of the animals likely to have entered the food supply.
Details here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18405363/
Happy reading!
Library programs address global warming
The Seattle Public Library will host a program on global warming, “Climate Change: The Time Is Now,” at 6:30 p.m. Wednesday at the Central Library, 1000 Fourth Ave.
It’s the first of several events featuring a slide show based on former Vice President Al Gore’s Oscar-winning film “An Inconvenient Truth.” The film explores climate change and global-warming solutions.
The program also will be presented 2-3:30 p.m. Saturday and 6:30-7:30 p.m. next Monday at the Columbia Branch, 4721 Rainier Ave. S.; 2-3:30 p.m. May 12 at the West Seattle Branch, 2306 42nd Ave. S.W.; 2-3:30 p.m. May 19 at the North East Branch, 6801 35th Ave. N.E.; and 2-3:30 p.m. May 26 at the Ballard Branch, 5614 22nd Ave. N.W.
Doors will open 30 minutes before each program. Reservations are not required. For more information, call 206-386-4103.
Whatever happened to separation of church and state? Oh that’s right; this is a liberal religion so the rules don’t apply.
I fully support Governor Richardson and his statement on taxation. He has a point! Democrats can’t keep going back to taxation! It gives ammunition to the GOP and proves their point that we’re tax and spend liberals. Fiscally responsible democrats don’t raise taxes they eliminate bs beaurocracies that strangle our governments. Just ask western Dems who have done it! Brian Schweitzer, Janet Napolitano, and of course Bill Richardson! They get elected in red states by giving people a break! So, as a member of the party that gives people breaks I say embrace this way of thinking! NO NEW TAXES! DEMOCRATS MEAN IT!!!!
@2 “Richard Pope says: The federal deficit is so damned high …”
Whoooo is responsible for that, Dicky? Hint: Bush inherited a balanced budget.
It’s sooooo easy to pick on Dicky.
@17 “The american people can see who supports the troops and who doesn’t. Just ask the troops”
We’re going to find out in about 24 hours who supports the troops, and who doesn’t.
Democratic Congress: Approved funding for troops.
Bush: Will veto money for troops.
Pretty clear who the troop-hating fuckwad is.
@17 (continued) Only an idiot thinks sending young people to their deaths in an unwinnable meatgrinder is “supporting” them.
@17 (continued) Do you wingnuts even know what the “mission” is? What are we asking our soldiers to die for? Saddam is dead. Iraq has no WMDs. What is the mission? Is there one? Do you know what it is? Care to share with the rest of us?
@18 John, the Richardson flap isn’t about candidate positions; it’s about one candidate’s rhetoric. We have enough wingnuts spouting Democrat-bashing wingmyths that we don’t need any Democratic presidential candidates doing it too.
@19 Probably because their names are on that list, too. Hell, I’ll bet even Michelle Malkin is on that list! She probably moonlights as a sex worker. She seems like the type.
@21 “Why Richardson would be proud of cutting taxes in a state that recieves more federal taxes than it sends to Washington D.C.”
Yeah, he’s stealing the Republican states’ thunder. All the wingnut states do it. He shouldn’t try to emulate them.
Joel et al. — Joel, I know you’re an old hand in the news business, and nobody’s fool. You know as well as I that things like roads, schools, and public services cost money. Less taxes = less roads, schools, and public services. There are two questions here. One, what is a happy medium between tax burdens and services? Two, how is that tax burden distributed? Taxes are a sore point here in Washington because we tax the daylights out of the people least able to pay while the affluent are allowed to skate. We aren’t spending too much on roads, schools, and public services here; we’re simply taxing the wrong people for them. You know that as well as I. I’m not very familiar with New Mexico but I suspect that state, despite its 8.9% income tax, didn’t have too many roads, schools, or public services either.
7.
Al Gore couldn’t afford his massive carbon credit debt, not to mention maintenance on his 4 energy sucking homes on a mere president’s salary. It would be a massive pay cut for him.
He’d also have to mothball his private jet while he took over Air Force 1.
But this would be a much more fun to watch race with him in. Hillary would make the “Saturday Night Live rendition of her look like a tea party.
Watch your back AL!
Post#29 – Headlice Loocie – You’ve used (irony tag) before. More proof harry poon is headlice loocie!
Hey Moonbat!s, coming to a libtard state near you:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/200.....P79IVvaA8F
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/n.....E_ID=55417
Interesting? No separation of church and state cry from the ACLu? Ohhhhhhh they are backed by the ACLU!
Watch for a stuuuuuuuuuupiiiiiiiiid clueless rant about the story being in WND. That’s okay clueless, I got it without bias and slanting.
Edwards is all smoke, no substance. He has NEVER GOVERNED. Richardson is a footnote now, but once the posers are exposed, he will be the man of substance that everyone who has sense enough to know that Hillary will never be President, will flock to.
Hey Moonbat!s, coming to a libtard state near you:
http://comment.independent.co......496657.ece
Political Correctness and multiculturalism. Two bulwarks of the libtard left loonies!
Cheesecake Factory anyone?
Since you Moonbat!s look to Europe to frame your positions, I figure you can see what is in your future!
It’s not too late to change course. Elect Hilary stay on course!
Interesting. I think Richardson is now very consciously trying to corner the libertarian-liberal vote.
Yes, PelletHead, the April 15 deadline came and went and where was the bill?
Then your Moonbat!s add 20 Billion $$$ of pork which has no use to the Pnetagon. Yes, a new tone in congress.
CNN reporters said the potential pullout calls from your party will send Iraq into Chaos. CNN – Clinton News Network, even sees the potential effect.
49
I think Gore/Richardson would be a great Green/libertarian party candidate. It would give us forgotten progressives a much need choice and a voice.
re 50: Only psychopaths still believe in this war.
re 50: You have been wrong from the beginning — about everything.
It was Reagan who started that crack epidemic in black neighborhoods so he could fund his secret war in Central America.
You are a traitor to your own people, PudWax.
Will:
Each of the campaigns have positions that the other campaigns see as “bashing”.
Senator Edwards has stated that anyone that voted for the Iraq war should either publicly repudiate or confirm their vote. This was a pretty clear shot at Senator Clinton (and a cheap one at that), and a number of her supporters are pretty angry about it.
Of the folks reasonably likely to be nominated, I’m probably leaning more towards either Senator Edwards or Senator Obama. I’d like to see Vice President Gore get into the race, but that seems less and less likely as time passes. I’d like to see Governor Richardson get in, but he really has little chance of getting the nomination.
The main point in favor of Governor Richardson is that he is from the more fiscally conservative wing of the party, and since the Republicans aren’t willing to give us an honest opposition, he may be the best we can get as a balance to our liberal wing.
Oh, and as for fiscal conservatives being for the “other team”, you should realize that the Republicans have been throwing them out as fast as they can find them for many years. They’ve talked fiscal responsibility while spending like Sailors on a short liberty for as long as I can remember. Lots of fiscal conservatives are Democrats. I’m one of them.
When asked why I’m a Democrat, I normally tell people that it’s because I’m in favor of balanced budgets and smaller, less intrusive government. Republicans talk about those things, Democrats deliver them. Folks are finally beginning to see that.
@54 and to Joel and Will
Richardson’s cheap shot has nothing to do with REAL tax policy and a lot to do with inept campaigning a la Gregoire. Rememebr her campaign against Sims??? What dis she achieve by accusing Ron of tax and spendism? She achieved gettng elected at the cost of then being unable as Guv to support sensible tax reform.
Richardson is doing the same thing. He COULD and SHOULD do what Edwards has done on health care … make a detailed proposal for tax reform. Then I would cheer or at least look harder.
Same goes for Edwards self serving attack on Hillary for not admitting she screwed up on that vote. Suppose he did become Prexy? What would happen to his strategic choices as a result of this campaign?
Remember the Straight Talk Express? That approach will work . Tax reform is hard to do, but we do need it and the candidate who offers the best ideas does ALL the candidates a service.
BTW Obam now leads Hillary in the Rasmussen.
Methinks we is gonna have the first President with the following properties:
Raised by a single Mom.
Editor of Harvard Law Review.
Father not an American citizen.
African ancestors AND Irish ancestors.
0r … the second youngest man to be elcted.
… the third part Irish president
Obama!
OMG!!!
I agree with Joel Connelly!!! How the heck did that happen?
#53 said “You are a traitor to your own people, PudWax.”
Thanks again Headlice Loocie.
Voice Of Chalk Scratching, why do you continue to inflate your “hits” with all these multiple personalities?
Headlice #53 said: “It was Reagan who started that crack epidemic in black neighborhoods”
Oh really? He signed the executive order? I’m sure all those drugs flowed through Mena, Arkansas, approved by Governor Clinton on their way to Maxine Waters’ district right Headlice?
Just like Kennedy and Johnson turned a blind eye to Southeast Asian drugs coming in during the Vietnam War?
Hmmm…?
The religion of peace strikes again:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new.....lmer30.xml
Now we know why Pakistan lost in Cricket!
re 50: You have been wrong from the beginning — about everything.
It was Reagan who started that crack epidemic in black neighborhoods so he could fund his secret war in Central America.
You are a traitor to your own people, PudWax.
Bears repeating. No denial from you. Just excuses and deflection.
re 50: How many of your brothers and sisters lives were ruined so that Reagan could kill 200,000 Salvadoran peasants and Catholic clerics?
You are a psychopath, PudWax.
AFTER DUBYA HAS THROWN THIS COUNTRY ANOTHER TRILLION OR SO INTO DEBT FUNDING A NEEDLESS WAR IN IRAQ?
HOW’S THAT GOING TO BE PAID OFF? HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR DECENT HEALTH CARE FOR RETURNING VETERANS OF DUBYA’S FOREIGN ADVENTURES.
REVIVING THE CLINTON TAXES ON THE WEALTHY IS A GOOD FIRST STEP. ANOTHER IS TO GO AFTER ALL THE TAX-DODGING INDIVIDUALS AND CORPORATIONS.
PAYING YOUR FAIR SHARE. WHAT A CONCEPT!
re 58 “Puddybud Who Left The Reservation says:
Headlice #53 said: “It was Reagan who started that crack epidemic in black neighborhoods”
Oh really? He signed the executive order? I’m sure all those drugs flowed through Mena, Arkansas, approved by Governor Clinton on their way to Maxine Waters’ district right Headlice?
Just like Kennedy and Johnson turned a blind eye to Southeast Asian drugs coming in during the Vietnam War?
Hmmm…?”
Who in the Kennedy or Johnson administrations was indicted and convicted of supporting secret terroristic wars with criminally acquired money? None.
Who in the Reagan administration? Oliver North, for one.
And, Nixon illegally bombed Cambodia.
Republicans are bloodthirsty criminals — and you are a Republican.
I’d like to know why Will, someone who fashions himself a progressive blogger is quoting tax statistics from what appears to be a right-wing think tank to portray Richardson in a bad light?
If you disregard the statement about being a non-profit, non-partisan entity, the foundation is staffed by a bunch of right-wingers.
I’m with Joel and Andrew Lewis on this one.
Full disclosure: I blog at Washington for Richardson and am organizing support for him in Washington. I am not on the campaign payroll.