Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why Does Richardson Always Protect Hillary?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Bullet1987 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:22 AM
Original message
Why Does Richardson Always Protect Hillary?
In every debate when someone turns the heat up on her, he injects himself into the discussion and talk about how we shouldn't attack each other and what not. He didn't do that when Hillary was going after Obama or Edwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Big Blue Marble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:33 AM
Response to Original message
1. He does seem to protect her.
But I thought it was interesting that he blunted the experience attack when he reminded us that Kennedy
was only 42 when he became President. That effectively blocked Hillary from coming after Obama on the
immaturity issue at least for tonight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:35 AM
Response to Original message
2. he criticized Hillary for her comments on Obama one time
i think he is just like that or he is trying to score points with both for vp position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:35 AM
Response to Original message
3. And rumour has it the Clintonistas are pissed at him for his "back room" dealings
with Barack in Iowa.Hmmm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 06:39 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. well scratch him off the Veep list!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 04:59 AM
Response to Original message
4. Could be he's a practiced & principled statesman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 05:46 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Could be he's an old school GENTLEMAN.
Who can't to see ladies unfairly attacked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 05:04 AM
Response to Original message
5. I thought his joke about being in more civil discussions with terrorists holding
someone hostage hurt Hillary because she had just gone off. After he said that Hillary seemed to slump down in her chair as if she was a kid who had been scolded. If he was trying to protect Hillary he had bad timing on that exchange.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 08:35 AM
Response to Reply #5
13. The thing I wondered was whether he'd ever been in a hostage negotiation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Yes, he has
For one,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Richardson#U.S._Ambassador_to_the_United_Nations

In 1996, he traveled to Baghdad with Peter Bourne and engaged in lengthy one-on-one negotiations with Saddam Hussein to secure the release of two American aerospace workers who had been captured by the Iraqis after wandering over the Kuwaiti border.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 08:46 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Doesn't sound like they were hostages. Sounds like POW/suspected of spying situation.
Edited on Sun Jan-06-08 08:50 AM by AP
And when he said 'terrorists' I was think Al Quaeda, and not Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. I didn't hear him say "terrorists" at all
I thought he said "hostage negotiations" and the item I quoted would qualify in a general sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 05:23 AM
Response to Original message
6. He was in the Clinton Cabinet and is maybe angling for Veep?
He has to know at this point this is a 3 horse race and his chances are very slim. However he is a credible VP choice and I wonder if he's trying to hedge his bets by helping Obama and Hillary in any way possible.

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 06:10 AM
Response to Original message
8. He wants to be her VP or in cabinet
:shrug:

FWIW, my Dad was supporting Richardson in NH, but yesterday he told me he signed up with Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 06:49 AM
Response to Original message
10. I think he was trying to elevate the tone of the debate--not protect HIllary
Maybe I wasn't watching the same debate you were but it seemed to me that his comment was aimed at Clinton as much as Edwards and Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perry Logan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 06:49 AM
Response to Original message
11. Maybe he's just a good guy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 08:34 AM
Response to Original message
12. Why did Richardson call Russia "the Soviet Union"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chimpymustgo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #12
17. I picked up on that too. Richardson always comes across as out of step. nt
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
14. Because they are both DLC, down to the bone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 10th 2024, 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC