Underdog!
As noted in my previous blog entry, the mass media has set the stage for voters more than one year before the primaries. Voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina have been told repeatedly that the battle for the Democratic nomination is between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, with John Edwards as the wildcard. Obama and Clinton are fund raising machines. This has allowed them to get their message across, and score hours of free advertising through the evening news and editorials.
By now, we all know the stories of the heavyweights. They are polished. They are coached by the most expensive and experienced campaign staffs available. Their speeches have been tested through focus groups, and are based largely off of what polls tell them that John Q. Public wants to hear.
Does a guy like Bill Richardson have a chance? Who is Bill Richardson?
Richardson is the current governor of New Mexico, reelected with sixty-nine percent of the vote (not easy to do as a Democrat in a Red state). He served as a Congressman for fourteen years, and later was the energy secretary (Energy will be an important campaign issue). Unlike Obama, he has foreign policy experience. Richardson was U.N. ambassador and also worked in the State Department.
Perhaps most importantly, Richardson is not a senator. No senator has been elected since 1961. The last two Democratic presidents, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, were southern governors.
Richardson, who is Hispanic, was born in California and raised in Mexico City. He is personable, well spoken, and approachable. This could make him a favorite among reporters.
A Hispanic governor from a red state with foreign policy and energy experience.
Introducing the next Vice President of the United States…
posted by CitizenPatriot at 1:50:00 PM
5 Comments:
I feel SO INCREDIBLY TERRIBLE saying this. I know it makes me a bad person...maybe it's just a social stigma I've come across...?
But I just can't see a hispanic man being VP. I know that the United States has elements of many different cultures and ethnicities, but I guess my views perpetuate traditional, conservative attitudes.
I say this shamefully, but I stand by my opinion. The VP will not be Hispanic.
2:26 PM
Wow Hannah...please give a reason why you think a Hispanic can't be VP (presumably President), and why an African American can?
I look forward to hearing back from you
6:05 PM
I suppose I am biased against Hispanics because I continue to believe that they should be in Mexico (despite knowing the fact that people who live in Mexico are Mexicans). I also believe that (perhaps against moral judgement) Hispanics are not as "American" as others. Yes, I am being incredibly racist -- Yes, there are many Hispanics at Stevenson, plenty of whom I am friends with; yet, my opinion stands still.
The social stigma of an American is someone who has ancestors from America. I am very much against illegal immigration; additionally, I believe that legal immigration should be strictly regulated. African Americans, on the other hand, have been in America for centuries. While their homeland is Africa, they have been dutifully fighting and benefitting our society for ages. From 1950 to the present, the Hispanic population has increased by 23 million (a total of 27 million today; a significant percentage of whom are illegally here. However, I must admit that 13,000 Hispanics did fight in the Civil War, and have also contributed to America's success and well-being. In contrast, 180,000 African-Americans fought for us in the Civil War.
I do not believe that our upcoming President should be of a descent that has hardly been prominent for half a century.
9:26 PM
This nation is the greatest nation in the world not because it has historically regulated immigration but because the nation has embraced it (for the most part). The Pennsylvania Dutch, Boston Irish, and San Fransisco Chineese were essential to this coutry's success. They all recieved harsh treatment upon thier arrival but quickly became part of the American way. The Irish built the railroads in the east; the chineese built the railroads in the west. Without those railroad systems the United States would not be the worlds only remaining super power.
Immigration is not the serious threat that it is made to be. This nation has a 4.6% unemployment rate. That is extremely acceptable.
The danger of this illegal immigration to ordinary Americans(not you or me Hannah) is not that they are hispanic. Its that they are forcing wages to go down to compete with the immigrants willing to work for peanuts, coupled with the knowledge that people who aren't coming here to work are coming into the country. The gap between the rich and poor continues to rise and the decreased wages aren't helping anything.
The United States was founded as an agrarian nation. It then shifted to industrialization and now it is/has becoming/became a service economy. Our economy is based on restaurants and landscaping companies. This decrease in the cost of labor may in fact be a blessing as it is forcing the powerful unions notably the pipefitters and motor vehicles to give up some of their demands on Industrial corporations. This may in fact lead to a new era in industrial prowess and allow us to have a fighting chance against the Chineese slave labor. Companies may move thier factories back to the United States because it will be cheaper to do everything in this nation.
Miss Hannah WEISS if you choose to insult my fellow Americans and try to resurect Antiquated laws (Grandfather clause)and spread racist ideals; I will have no choice but to disagree and argue with you and then risk and possibly lose my life fighting for your right to say it.
Speaking of fighting, if i were you i'd get my facts straight. you'll notice a great part of the U.S. military is hispanic. They've been fighting for us since they got here.
It's U S
us
not u
12:46 AM
I don't disagree with your rebuttals, John, and I certainly am not spreading racist ideals; however, your assertion that immigration is not the "serious threat that it is made to be" is completely fallacious. Particularly, illegal immigration is a threat - especially to the unwealthy, minorities, and children. The taxes paid by immigrants do not in any way cover the cost of services received by them. How can we provide health insurance, social security, high quality education to our own people if we are being slowly drained by the floods of immigrants entering our nation? Obviously, your insertion of the fact that immigration is not dangerous because many are hispanic is completely true; however, when did I assert such a claim? I simply connected the ties between hispanics and immigrants, never saying that immigration is taxing because many are hispanic. Perhaps, John, your claim is true; the total effects of immigration on consumers and taxpayers is insignificant, yet, the general effects on unskilled workers and taxpayers in high-immigration is detrimentally negative. From what I have gathered, immigration is responsible for 44% of the decline of wages for high-school dropouts. According to additional research, a very large percentage of those without a degree are african-american citizens. How can our nation support these citizens and help them to thrive, perhaps assisting them in the prosperity of their education, if their wages are currently being intermittently lessened because of the growing number of immigrants? Did you know that an average of 800,000 immigrants come to the U.S annually? Did you know that in addition, 400,000 illegals sneak in? Indeed, educated workers' wages may rise, but is that as imperative as assisting the less fortunate, the less educated?
To intergrate this into my initial assertion, I add that yes, immigration is not strictly related to Hispanics, and yes, immigration is not completely and solely negative; however, it does have harmful effects on our society.
*Richardson voted against a bill to reduce illegal immigration rates by increasing border patrol.
*Richardson voted to increase foreign worker importation.
*Voted for the continuous stream of unskilled workers, further decreasing the lower-class's wages.
In response to your claim that I supposedly am affirming the historical grandfather-clause, I ask you: do you honestly think that a comparison between a vote and a nomination for our President is comparible? I don't believe that our nation's leader should be of a descent that has not been historically affluent, such as I would not encourage a person of German descent to run in Italy, no matter if he or she were a legal citizen (and a number of racial and cultural substitutions can be inserted - in case I am again falsely accused of being racist).
Again, I don't believe that a man of Hispanic descent should be elected as our United States President. Perhaps in many years, but not yet.
I stand by my views, John!
12:10 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home