About Channel '08  |  Blog Partner: PrezVid.com  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed  (What's RSS?)

Richardson Lays Out Iraq 'Choice'

Bill Richardson wants to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq -- all of them.

Should you have any doubt, watch his latest video. The 4 minute, 30 second effort quotes extensively from the policy platforms of his Democratic contenders, Army field manuals, and his own proposal, which calls for a complete pullout of all American service members -- including residual forces.

The slick production includes black and white and color photos (some seen in previous Richardson ads), video clips, and newspaper clippings. It also features something the Richardson camp is proud of -- vocal blogger support.

Claiming the mainstream press has downplayed Democratic differences on an Iraq exit strategy, the campaign turns to Chris Bowers and Matt Stoller of Openleft.com, and Christina Siun O'Connell of Firedoglake.com to provide context.

"I was disappointed that so many Democrats supported residual forces," says Bowers. "Bill Richardson supports taking all the troops out of Iraq -- which is different from every other major Democratic candidate," he adds.

"No one" has stepped up and promoted a complete withdrawal, O'Connel says, while Stoller plays up Richardson's professional experiences. "He doesn't have to listen to the grand old wisemen of Washington," Stoller says.

Striking at the heart of an ongoing dispute between Clinton and Obama, Richardson's video ends by reminding viewers that his Iraq proposals provide "experience, and change."

The video is a preview of a 30-second TV ad set to hit New Hampshire airwaves on Wednesday.

-- Ed O'Keefe

By washingtonpost.com Editors |  September 24, 2007; 3:42 PM ET Bill Richardson
Previous: Romney's Consistent Message on Iran | Next: Obama Match Game

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



This is a great ad. I have been suprised how little attention the media has paid to Richardson's message about removing all of the troops from Iraq.

Posted by: Annie3 | September 24, 2007 04:53 PM

CALL YOUR SENATORS NOW AND DEMAND THEY VOTE DOWN THE LIEBERMAN-KYL AMENDMENT

In case you thought it was just an aberrant moment of lunacy last week when Lieberman pressed General Petraeus for an attack on Iran, just before the weekend he introduced an amendment to the defense bill to authorize exactly that.

He has drafted language that any impartial
observer would interpret as a DECLARATION OF WAR against Iran, and he is pressing for a vote as fast as possible.


Here is the language from the amendment:

(3)that it should be the policy of the United States to combat, contain, and roll back the violent activities and destabilizing influence inside Iraq of the Government of the Islamic Republic of
Iran, its foreign facilitators such as Lebanese Hezbollah, and its indigenous Iraqi proxies;

(4)to support the prudent and calibrated use of all instruments of United States national power in Iraq, including diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and military instruments, in support of the policy described in paragraph (3) with respect to the Government of the
Islamic Republic of Iran and its proxies.

The policy of the U.S should be to "combat" Iran with "all" "military
instruments"?!? You can be absolutely certain that those are the ONLY
words Dick Cheney and George Bush will see or care about.

Posted by: | September 25, 2007 08:02 AM

Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! vpxyoieoosvz

Posted by: vmfggxerrm | November 23, 2007 05:54 AM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




 
 

© 2007 The Washington Post Company