I think it's a shame that Bill Richardson has almost no chance at winning the Democratic nomination for President. I really believe that he is the best choice of all the candidates. If nothing else, he didn't try to trump his own party's debate by announcing his candidacy on Leno (Thompson).
One of the things I like about Richardson is that he is usually cogent, and is able to talk about the issues, rather than grandstanding (Clinton). I found this article, written by Governor Richardson for the Harvard International Journal, via Michael Van Der Galien's blog, the Van Der Galien Gazette.
The article discusses Governor Richardson's approach to foreign policy, suggesting that we should develop a program that will deal with the realities of the current world, or in his world that we should "craft a new foreign policy adapted to a world of complex global challenges which require thoughtful and global solutions." He refers to this concept as New Realism, and explains it rather well - better than I could summarize, though Mr. Van Der Galien does an excellent job.
Governor Richardson's approach is unique, and commendable. There has not been much from any of the major candidates anywhere regarding solid, considerable ideas, because it's safer to attack than to put yourself out there. Governor Richardson and his six major points, plus his advocacy of a Middle East-North Africa Marshall Plan are well worth considering. Check it out.
1 comment:
Anne,
Thank you for stopping by.
I've thought about what you've written, and I've come to the conclusion that Bill Richardson did right in not getting involved.
The case was brought before the judiciary in New Mexico, which, from what you've provided seems to have venue in this matter. The role of the judiciary is to hear on matters of law and settle disputes. It appears, based on what you've provided, that there was not sufficient evidence to prove to the judge (or jury, if New Mexico tries custody cases to juries - I don't know) that there was indeed child abuse, or that said abuse happened at the hands of the grandparents. Indeed, what you provided me is Madison's therapist's testimony alleging abuse. This is hardly proof enough. While I'm sure there was more laid out at trial, the judge heard the case and reached a decision, and in matters involving custody, the Court's decision rules. The losing party has the appeals process to which to turn.
It is important to see what I do not say. I do not say that Madison was not abused. I do not say that her grandparents did not abuse her. What I said was based on what little information available at this time, I would have to trust the decision reached by the Judge - a respected graduate of Hamlin University school of law and chairman of the Lea County Children's Abuse and Neglect Coordinating Council.
As I believed in the Terri Schiavo case, I believe now - that this is not a matter in which the Executive should get involved. To do so would be to supersede the authority of one of the coequal branches of government and elevate the power of the executive in a manner inconsistent with the concept of separation of powers.
My sympathies go out to you on your attempts to comment on Governor Richardson's website, but, being that it is his website, it's his control over who and what may be said on it. This is not censorship any more than comment moderation on blogs is, and I see no error there. Perhaps in a public forum, if your attempts to question the Governor resulted in your removal from the scene, or if your comments were stricken from a newspaper on his demand, then you might have a valid censorship claim, but I do not see that here.
Good luck on your endeavor, and I hope that the affected family finds justice.
Post a Comment