Bill Richardson speaks (and yes, he almost endorsed Hillary Clinton)
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson -- who, if James Carville has his way, will be a long time shedding the moniker "Judas" because he decided to back Barack Obama in the Democratic presidential race -- has dished back in an exclusive Los Angeles Times interview.
Speaking over a breakfast of eggs and green chiles earlier this week at the governor's mansion in Santa Fe, Richardson revealed he came thisclose to endorsing Hillary Clinton before hesitating. (In its reaction, the Clinton camp -- not only Carville, but Bill Clinton as well -- has signaled it thought the deal was sealed.)
But Richardson, in his interview with Times reporter Mark Z. Barabak, said he stopped short because he grew upset over the nasty tone of the presidential campaign and increasingly heavy-handed pressure from the Clinton camp.
He concedes that before endorsing Obama, he wrestled with the question of loyalty to the ex-president, who named him U.N. ambassador and then put him in his Cabinet. But, Richardson said, he finally concluded that he had done his part and had settled his debt.
"I was loyal," Richardson said. "But I don't think that loyalty is transferable to his wife. You don't transfer loyalty to a dynasty."
And no, Richardson added, there has been no talk with Obama about the second spot on the presidential ticket, or of any other job in a prospective Obama administration.
"I never say never in politics, but I'm not pining for it," he said.
The full story can be read here.
-- Don Frederick



I'm a New Mexico transplant to CA, and while I'm not particularly enamored of Richardson, the idea that the Clintons "made" Richardson is preposterous. He was a successful and influential congressman long before they came on the national scene, and he made Bill Clinton look very good on several occasions. I'd been leaning toward Hillary ever since Edwards dropped out and I'd always been a fan of Carville in the past, but the attitude of entitlement they've adopted has really turned me off. I may be trying an Obama button on for size pretty soon.
Posted by: KC | April 11, 2008 at 02:25 PM
I think Richardsen sold his self to the devil a long time a
go. He, while running for President jumped on every bandwagon imaginable in hopes of being relevant in the
primaries. I truly believe that he was promised some form
of job under Obama. Even though illegal, things have a way of happening in politics.
I used to have a lot of respect for the man, but that all went out the window with all his political aspirations.
Posted by: John Cunningham | April 11, 2008 at 02:26 PM
The campaign tactics that pushed Richardson in Obama's direction are just a symptom of the poverty of vision that is fast become our political past.
Those same campaign tactics were the spoiler for me of the promise in yes, a woman president to nurture all the world's children and inspire everybody's daughters. But, ouch, something worse than Machiavellian began to unfold.
Worse, because it has those ethics but lacks competence and effectiveness.
Chilling. Then to have the former president tantrum about it and Carville feel entitled to judge it. The astonishing thing is that these people almost run or ran the world.
Chilling.
Posted by: Gaias Child | April 11, 2008 at 02:28 PM
In the same breath the Clintons speak about the voters in the remaining 10 contests and superdelegates deciding the race. Hillary has said that pledged delegates can switch. Hillary supporters are becoming bamboozled by Clintons campaign of double standards. Will her own supporters stay loyal?
Posted by: Matt | April 11, 2008 at 02:28 PM
vote4thebest:
Ironic given the screen name you are advocating loyalty to the clintons vs. what is in the best interest of people.
where can a voter go to curry favors?
Posted by: vik | April 11, 2008 at 02:30 PM
There's only one way Richardson is going to lose his new knickname "Judas" and that is to represent the will of the voters of New Mexico who resoundingly voted for HILLARY CLINTON for president and switch his superdelegate vote and/or endorsement BACK to her.
Nevermind the rest of his disloyal antics (trying to claim that he should only be loyal to one half of the Clinton team and not the other). He would be nowhere without the promotions and jobs he received because of the Clintons. And this was the thanks they got!
Besides, there is no chance in hell that Obama is going to give RIchardson the VP slot. He won't need him! It's not hispanics who are going to leave the party and vote for McCain if the inexperienced Obama gets the nom. It's going to be white, middle class, union working men and women who don't "get" Obama's false promises of "hope and change." They want real bread and butter issues they can put on the table. Not fantasies and lies and hype.
That's why Hillary Clinton is the only hope the democratic party has, as the only candidate with a true populist middle class message.
Posted by: CJ | April 11, 2008 at 02:42 PM
The campus buzz is that obama is destined to win the nomination and that pelosi already knows that obama wants the governor of kansas Kathleen Gilligan Sebelius to be his running mate. The kansas governor is a two term, white, female. Does this negate the hillary voter backlash?
Posted by: mike | April 11, 2008 at 02:42 PM
I was a fan of Bill Clinton, after his early presidential missteps (promising congresspeople he'd back gays in the military & then throwing them under a bus, etc.). I still think he was one of the better 20th century presidents.
However.. this year I switched my support from Hillary to Obama. In New Hampshire, I was for hillary. Super Tuesday, I was still for hillary. But the more I read...and the more I hear....this bullying and intimidation stuff has got to go. This is no way to run a country, as the last 8 years have demonstrated. Hillary is using GWB tactics and sacrifices all integrity to get her way. Obama is true to his sense of integrity. Obama has won me over and the dysfunctional inner workings of the Hillary campaign have lost me. Go Barack!
Posted by: Free-Thinking Independent American | April 11, 2008 at 02:43 PM
Ummm, I love how once again Obama supporters make it seem its natural for all superdelegates to flock to Obama, why? because he is winning, and that is the only thing that makes sense. That if a superdelegate supports Hillary its because of "favors" and not because of how they actually feel? Give me a break; Obama supporters are tearing the party apart, by making divisions and saying the most ridiculous things about how are party functions in the first place. There is no loyalty among Democrats, just a personality contest, and egos, and holier than thou pretentious attitudes. I am tired of this aspect of the party and I am tired of everyone torching Hillary Clinton while putting Obama on cloud nine. Give it a rest. There are politicians, with flaws and strengths. You have your choice, no need to knock someone down to share your view.
Posted by: sarah | April 11, 2008 at 02:51 PM
no matter what one "owes" to either candidate, those super delegates should vote for whoever they feel is the BEST candidate. and super delegates are allowed to change their mind.
how can there be any fair race if all those super delegates vote on who they owe the most to? especialy considering one of the 2 candidates had a husband in the white house, who was capable of giving a LOT more favors...
Posted by: Tim | April 11, 2008 at 03:09 PM
Bill Richardson would not be known outside of the state of New Mexico without the support and appointments he received in the Clinton Administration. While you don't expect blind support for the Clintons, Hillary is one fine person to run for the presidency. Richardson should have shown some loyalty and support for her.
Posted by: Tapper | April 11, 2008 at 03:10 PM
Bill Richardson LOST the election to be the Democratic nominee. The people spoke loud and clear that they did not want him as their representative. He should have the good grace to accept his defeat and go quietly home to the New Mexico Governor's Mansion; a place where he would not reside but for Bill Clinton.
He has clearly held his finger in the air and determined that Barack Obama will be the nominee and he is worming for some lofty appointment. If that happens, Obama would be wise to pay careful attention to his character as it pertains to matters of loyalty.
While it is totally irrelevant.......Bill Richardson was the most boring candidate I've ever witnessed.
Posted by: JanetP | April 11, 2008 at 03:26 PM
Since when did Bill Clinton become Jesus Christ?
How can you compare Bill Richardson to a man who betrayed Jesus Christ? Unless you feel Bill Clinton is Jesus?
Posted by: Phillip | April 11, 2008 at 04:27 PM
The Clinton bashing goes on....and its extremely tiresome. What is it that you morons didn't like about the 90's? The peace? The prosperity? The fact that we were on our way to being a great country after four years of Bush the first and eight of that clown Reagan? Knock it off, losers, we Clinton supporters are tired of hearing you whine!
Posted by: NYminute52 | April 11, 2008 at 04:31 PM
I'm a Californian who temporarily lives in southern New Mexico.
I do not understand why the Clintons would want Bill Richardson's support. And Santa Fe: the decades-ago home of long-dead artist Georgia O'Keefe - its a joke and has nothing on Laguna Beach for art/culture. Think tacky, kitschy "art"/pottery/figurines that could be purchased at a roadside gas station or tourist outpost next to the 10 freeway.
NM has the worst roads, taxes medical and dental care ("professional services fee") and has their DMV partitioned out to a private company. If you think the CA DMV is bad, you should come here - rude, gum-chewing, arrogant people in Santa Fe which is a "sanctuary city" for illegals.
Do not believe Santa Fe people when they say they're from California - most of them are actually from Ohio, Indiana, Minnesota, and rust-belt states who pretend to be Californians because they went to college here.
Posted by: MG | April 11, 2008 at 04:37 PM
"Lewis forgets about the numerous things the Clinton has done to help him and the Blacks. Both bite the hands that feed them." Posted by: vote4thebest | April 11, 2008 at 01:13 PM
That's an interesting assertion. What has Bill Clinton done to help the Black people? Ironically, it was George Bush who named the first Black Secretary of State and first Black National Security Advisor. Clinton gave us Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders and Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown. These two hardly compare.
Posted by: Randy in Dallas | April 11, 2008 at 04:46 PM
I am proud of Governor Richardson and his support of Senator Obama.
For the love of God, no more Bush > Clinton Dynasty!!!!
Posted by: PFC Marshall Jensen | April 11, 2008 at 05:03 PM
I got tired of the Clinton's sense of entitlement in 90s. This is nothing new, and still tiresome.
Still marveling at how this entitlement translated into the inevitable nominee in December who became long shot by March. HRC will draw upon her experience to be leader on Day One - yet given a head start she can't even MAINTAIN support for her candidacy. We're supposed to believe she can build bi-partisan consensus to get things done?
The goal isn't just getting the WH in 08, or even doing it again in 2012. If choice for change and progress is between the fresh blood Obama and the renegade McCain, I'm not uncomfortable with either one of them
Posted by: gb | April 11, 2008 at 05:07 PM
I hope Richardson starts talking more and giving the inside story about the Clintons seeking his endorsement and how he finally got fed up with them. Maybe he can get together with a writer and write a book that the media can serialize. That would be lots of fun. And Carville's "Judas" reference wasn't to Hillary being Jesus, but accusing Richardson of getting paid to endorse Obama, which I think says a little too much about what's going on in Carville's head to be helpful to the Clintons.
Posted by: nazcalito | April 11, 2008 at 05:11 PM
And guess what color his pants are. This was just anothe
r occasion where Judas Richardson flip flopped...the man
is a compulsive liar and brown noser with an irresistable
tendancy to bite the hand that feeds him. It's a good thing
his mask fell at this point...let the bum discredit Rezko's
protégé,and may that gracious and classy lady senator
from New York Triumph over nepotism and low morality.
Posted by: Judas thought he was sitting on the toilet! | April 11, 2008 at 05:19 PM
What a wise and sagacious judge of caracter James Carville is.Was he ever right-on when he stigmatized that
scumbag Judas Richardson. Obama fell for Richardson's
ploy hook,line and sinker and promised him the moon. This
poor excuxe for a governor was incapable of delivering
his state to Kerry and New-Mexico's voters chose Hillary
over Wright's disciple Typical self destructing Dem.
Posted by: Is Charles Manson Obama's alter ego? | April 11, 2008 at 05:35 PM
Richardson not only betrayed his commitment to Bill Clinton ... he also betrayed the voters of New Mexico who voted for Clinton!
He and NObama reallly put a new "spin" on "spin" .. forget him!!
Posted by: Jackson | April 11, 2008 at 05:40 PM
CLINTON = BETRAYAL
She betrayed Bill RichardSon after all LATINOS VOTED for her and even took an extra step calling him as Zero as not many LATINO VOTERS LEFT.
Bill Clinton BETRAYED his own marriage. Surprisingly, Usually Angry Hillary seems to worked out deals (Senator Post) after deals (President post).
Chelsey tell you "NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS". I guess Hillary must have taught Chelsey that they OWN WHITE HOUSE.
CRAZY WOMAN still pushing for Obama as her VP behind scenes without a clue that no one will vote even Obama if he is in VP position.
Posted by: kg | April 11, 2008 at 06:37 PM
bill richardson should be named the best TRAITOR OF THIS DECADE.
it is people like ted kennedy, john kerry and bill richardson who say that super delegtes should follow the wishes of voters. THEY ARE SUPPORTING OBAMA BUT HILLARY WON IN BOTH STATES. THE BEST FLIPFLOPPERS , cheaters deceivers of this decade.
bhagwan deol. los angeles
Posted by: bhagwan deol | April 11, 2008 at 06:39 PM
This is wrong on so many levels! Loyalty is tranferrable to a spouse? Richardson's loyalty is supposed to be to the American people, NOT any politician(s) in the first place! The Clintons are truly People Unclear on the Concept.
I wonder where the CLINTONS' loyalty lies - don't you? Because I don't think it's with me or any other 'ordinary' person.
Posted by: Tom J | April 11, 2008 at 06:41 PM