So I finally checked out Bill Richardson's presidential exploratory webpage, since the media hasn't been feeding me too much about him. I have to say I am pretty excited by what I found out. He is a former ambassador to the UN, former head of the Department of Energy, and now two term governor. He seems to have plenty of experience as an executive, and has strong foreign policy and energy credentials, which right now go well together.
Also, I find his message pretty compelling. His foreign policy vision is sound - more diplomacy without backing off our military strength, renewed efforts to fight Al Qaeda and international terrorism, and of course energy independence. He has made two trips to Sudan for negotiations, met with Saddam before the war to negotiate prisoner releases, and met with the President of Mexico to discuss immigration issues.
Since we are talking about it, his immigration policy is pretty strong as well and he isn't afraid to use tough language about standards for any legal immigrants that are granted amnesty or let in as guest workers (although at times the language did seem a little too tough). I of course love his message of bipartisanship (which to me just means less animosity), but I am a sucker for that. And his healthcare and economy talking points seem to make sense. (Although anyone thinking he can replicate his economic success in New Mexico should take caution. I think it is much easier to attract businesses as a governor because when you lower taxes you can steal businesses from other states. I don't think that works as well on a national level.)
The one place where I do disagree with him though is on Iraq. I don't agree with the rhetoric about forcing Iraq to take control of their own security. It is a little ridiculous to expect a country to stop violence that we have created, and step into a vacuum with a military and police that we disbanded. The reason they haven't stepped up yet is because they lack the capability - pure and simple. As I see it, a significant troop draw-down in the near future will only lead to a much worse civil war between Sunnis and Shiites - and more power to Iran and / or Al Sadr in the end.
Overall though, I really do like Richardson. He seems very smart and thoughtful, which is important. Also, his policy recommendations seem realistic and progressive. And, even though I don't think experience is always the most important criteria, he does seem to the best qualified of the major contenders. My hope is that his message actually gets a real chance to be heard. This might not be possible though since Hillary, Obama, and even Edwards are talking over everyone else right now.
