the dark horse: bill richardson

[sophiaserpentia]

Okay, in the last month alone, this man has:

• Legalized medical marijuana in New Mexico
• Helped broker a deal with North Korea so they will re-allow nuclear weapons inspectors
• While making that deal, he also arranged the return of the remains of several American POW/MIA soldiers from the Korean War
• Banned cockfights in New Mexico
• Announced that he would pull all US troops out of Iraq (a pledge so far avoided by all of the mainstream candidates for president)

I can't unequivocally back him until he moves a little closer on GLBT rights and makes his position on domestic spying more clear, but he's starting to look like a real candidate here. Democratic straw polls are beginning to reflect this.  He is also the only governor running on the Democratic side, which is a big deal.  He's more clearly qualified on foreign policy than anyone else running, having been US Ambassador to the UN.  And, he announced his candidacy on Jon Stewart's program, how cool is that?

Comments

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

Oh, yes, i've been following that. Can't say i personally much favor maintaining that balance if it means keeping the Imus/Savage/Coulter croud around, unless there's even worse waiting in the wings...

[seraphimsigrist.livejournal.com]

I know the other two only by reputation
but I think they are conservatives which
Imus really is not is he? more of a libertarian
democrat I should think no?
I only am more aware of him because I listen to
wfan on my car radio and the sports doesnt
begin until 10...

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

The other two are conservatives, but i lump them together because they are in many ways the same brand of scoffing bully, something one of any political persuation is capable of becoming, given the inclination and the lack of accountability that seems to plague the airwaves. Though, i am reading now that Imus' simulcast is being pulled by MSNBC, maybe there will start to be accountability at last?

[seraphimsigrist.livejournal.com]

well it is accountability to money a cynic would
say. I am happy to see him go down but not
happy for any loss of freedom...its a crazy old
world and all problematics are contaminated etc
gnight.+S

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

It depends on what you think freedom is freedom from. On one level, it's important to establish our nation as a culture where people are free from thugs and bullies. Accountability is a crucial part of that.

With regards to freedom of speech, one could argue that verbal bullies like Imus, et al., are threats to that freedom as well. If we have a national climate where disadvantaged people do not feel safe enough to speak up, because they are being bullied on all sides, then we are sacrificing their speech. We only have freedom of speech if everyone feels free to speak. An episode like this gives us an opportunity to ponder what discourse should look like.

lenny?

[seraphimsigrist.livejournal.com]

yeah. it's tough. freedom of speech does
not include freedom to shout fire in a
crowded theatre.
my thing is how is he different except in
being less funny by a world, from lenny
bruce? he is I think legitimately an
outsider and he uses street/outsider
talk within the general culture and people
find it funny that someone can talk like
that in public. and thats what he does.
Its what Lenny did.
I dunno. I guess I tend to the underdog
too psychologically if thats the word so
now he's down maybe feel it differently
from when he is preempting the morning
hour from the sports talk I like...
but thats my question, will it make another
lenny bruce less possible etc..
the etc because the question trails off in
several directions probably
I have no way to tie up loose ends just thinking
aloud with you.
+Seraphim

Lenny?

[seraphimsigrist.livejournal.com]

yeah. it's tough. freedom of speech does
not include freedom to shout fire in a
crowded theatre.
my thing is how is he different except in
being less funny by a world, from lenny
bruce? he is I think legitimately an
outsider and he uses street/outsider
talk within the general culture and people
find it funny that someone can talk like
that in public. and thats what he does.
Its what Lenny did.
I dunno. I guess I tend to the underdog
too psychologically if thats the word so
now he's down maybe feel it differently
from when he is preempting the morning
hour from the sports talk I like...
but thats my question, will it make another
lenny bruce less possible etc..
the etc because the question trails off in
several directions probably
I have no way to tie up loose ends just thinking
aloud with you.
+Seraphim

Re: Lenny?

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

I think we (as a society) will always make room for Lenny Bruce. It's a matter of finding balance between freedom of speech and freedom from meanness. It's not so much the vulgarity that people object to in shock jocks, its their meanness. There are far more vulgar acts around which appear to be in little danger of being cancelled or censored (South Park, for example).