Richardson has arguably the best resume of any candidate for the presidency in the nation’s history

Richardson instinctive with Iowa-flavored humor
by: Douglas Burns

RED OAK -- ...rural Iowans love humor. Go into any coffee shop, local eatery, bar or grain elevator. Have lunch with the Rotary or Kiwanis clubs. Customers joke with waitresses. Truck drivers joke with clerks. Old men in feed hats spend hours over 30-cent cups of coffee giving each other the business over something or another. In our more urban areas, and the growing spirit-crushing suburbs, there are a lot Hillary Clintons. She's rushing to the White House. They're rushing to Bed, Bath & Beyond. But in my part of the state, western Iowa, the place where the caucuses will be decided, naturally folksy humor goes a long way.

Of the top four Democratic candidates in the race, Bill Richardson, the New Mexico governor, is most natural with a Sunday lemonade-brand of spontaneous humor. It’s instinctive for him, and it’s one of the reasons he’s climbing in the polls. He’s disarming. The jokes get people to see past the suit and tie and title and platoon of earnest young staffers. “We hit 10 percent,” Richardson said Saturday in Red Oak. “That’s pretty good for having been at the margin of error.” Richardson noted that New Mexico now has eight movies being made in the state. “One of the conditions is that I have to star in all of them,” he joked, with a wink to the fact that's he's a few pounds ahead of leading man fighting weight.

Near the end of his visit to Red Oak, Richardson tapped the shoulder of a woman sitting next to him while making a point about education. The woman clearly hadn’t been paying full attention to his remarks and was a little startled. “Did I wake you up?” said Richardson with a wide smile. He tapped his watch and said, “I’ll finish soon.”
In Denison a few weeks ago Richardson said he signed a smoking ban in New Mexico but exempted cigar bars. He shrugged and told the audience, “Hey, I’m a cigar smoker.” Richardson talks about how he will work on Iraq the first day he’s in office, energy independence the next, and health-care and education on the third day. “The fourth day,” he says, pausing. “I’ll take off.” That line works on so many levels.

The new advertisements in which Richardson sits down for a job interview for the presidency with a rude, sandwich-chomping “employer,” are more humorous than much of the material late-night comics produce. Another reason humor works well for Richardson: There’s little danger the use of it will make him seem an unserious person. Richardson has arguably the best resume of any candidate for the presidency in the nation’s history: Governor, congressman, United Nations ambassador and Secretary of Energy. As Richardson hits the small towns of Iowa, pays his due the old-fashioned way, he’ll make many Iowans comfortable with him. He comes across as a person who genuinely likes people. The same cannot be said of all candidates.
http://www.iowaindependent.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=178

Yep, Buchanan was probably the most "qualified" ever, and one of the bottom five presidents. Not THE bottom, of course.

led to what by most objective standards was the worst thing that ever happened to this country. Bush has not rivaled the Civil War yet. Now to be fair to Buchanan, Franklin Pierce is more responsible than he is. Bush has some serious competition down there. I try not to let my politics get in the way of historical analysis.

That's why Bush II is at the bottom. My bottom four, in order:

Harding
Nixon
Andrew Johnson
W.

Their actions/inactions are inexcusable and led to the deaths of 600,000 Americans in the Civil War because of their pro-slavery leanings. Granted, Buchanan was personally opposed to slavery, but he did a great deal of harm. He personally leaned on the Supreme Court through his connections to "decide" the slavery issue through Dred Scott. They were horrid and I ignore the fact that they were supposedly Democrats when rating them. The same goes for Andrew Johnson. Now Nixon belongs in the bottom five and Bush belongs in the same league. He has done damage to the Constitution, the presidency itself, and the nation. Buchanan and Pierce didn't necessarily damage the Constitution though they brought on the most serious test of the Constitution ever, they damaged the prestige of the presidency, and they did the worst harm to the nation of any president(s).

Some people forget how horrible the Civil War was because that seems like ancient history. It did damage that was never really fully healed. Thus, I rate the bottom five presidents something like this:

-Nixon
-Bush
-Andrew Johnson(racist, scandalous, and authoritarian)
-Buchanan and Pierce tied for worst

Harding doesn't belong there. He didn't do any real serious harm to the nation which is the most important category in my judgement except putting the country on the track for the Great Depression, but subsequent presidents could have undone that and they chose not to. He brought tremendous scandal to the office, but did so without harming the Constitution. Harding is the popular choice oftentimes for worst president ever, but he just isn't in the same league as the rest of them.

I would put Buchanan fifth from bottom. He walked away from actually doing anything to prevent Civil War, which was a good thing, because he left it for Lincoln. As far as Pierce, he was certainly one of the worst, but he was such a tragic figure as a human being that I have trouble piling on. His only child being crushed to death on the train taking him to Washington, in front of him and his wife, is one of the most painful moments in presidential family history. I will reconsider Harding; perhaps you are right (and what a wife to put with!). I am glad you recognize how awful Johnson was. I had dinner about a year ago with the historian Manning Marable (delightful guy) and asked him where he would rank Bush. He puts him near the bottom, but puts AJ last, and proceeded to give an extraordinary analysis of his tenure. I rank Hayes very low, too. Grant at least tried to protect blacks in the South during reconstruction; Hayes let them fend for themselves, and it was awful.

My top three are very boring: Lincoln, FDR, Washington. Predictable.

the role of government. That is the only time I can define as a political revolution in this country's history. Government has never been the same since and he really built modern America. He made mistakes, especially on court packing. However, I maintain he provided consistently the best leadership of any president ever. His management of World War II and saving the world from fascist tyranny was virtually flawless. Did he possibly overlook the threat of Communism? Yes, but at the time what was the choice? Were we going to fight Stalin right after helping them defeat Hitler? No. No sane president would have. He also saved the economy from complete disaster with the New Deal and remade this country on the domestic front. Did he completely vanquish the Depression? No, but he certainly recovered output to a great extent. In some measures we even exceeded pre-Depression levels.

The difference between the top three and everybody else is that they saved and defined this nation. Bush is last because he has done everything in his power to reverse all that FDR did for this country. And sadly, Bush isn't through yet - his most recent assault is now on Medicaid.

All make mistakes, Lincoln certainly included, but I just can't put anybody ahead of him. And that's no criticism of FDR, that's for sure.

Not sure where, but he'd be a good person to be part of the Obama team. Maybe return as Secretary of Energy...

Not a chance.

A resume is simply a list of things one has done. Richardson is very accomplished, but I will tell you he did not inspire when he was in Iowa. And I think part of his problem was his deference to Clinton. It is like he couldn't separate from his role in her husband's administration. He still has perhaps some mental image of Bill as "boss."

:kick:

:kick: