Edwards called Richardson a liar last night for saying all troops could be withdrawn from Iraq

[bigtree]

After Bill Richardson said in the debate that he'd pull all the troops out of Iraq if elected (he mentioned 3 months or so as a time frame) Edwards called him a liar, saying in response, that Richardson and others advocating an immediate, complete withdrawal from Iraq should be "Telling the truth to the American people even when it's tough."

Is Edwards "telling the truth" when he says that the best we can do is to "change the mission" in Iraq? Although Edwards said he differs with Clinton and *Obama in that he would "immediately drawn down 40000 to 50000 troops," he joined them in refusing to commit to Russert's question about whether they would remove all of the U.S. combat forces deployed in Iraq by 2013, the end of the next president’s term.

'What I heard tonight was, even at the end of their terms the war will not end,'' Bill Richardson responded.

Why is so hard for Edwards to commit to ending military involvement in Iraq in his first term? Ending the occupation and removing our forces by then would seem to me to be a no-brainer for anyone opposed to the occupation. Why is he leaving more room for more militarism in Iraq?



Governor Bill Richardson Stands Alone on Ending the War in Iraq at NBC/DNC Debate in New Hampshire

Richardson still the only major candidate committed to withdrawing all American troops from Iraq, with no residual forces left behind

HANOVER, NH -- September 26, 2007 -- On the same day he released a new television ad in New Hampshire, emphasizing that he is the only major candidate committed to withdrawing all American troops from Iraq, Governor Bill Richardson participated in the NBC/DNC Presidential Debate at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire, moderated by Tim Russert.

Governor Richardson was the only candidate of the top four to make an unequivocal commitment to get all of our troops out of Iraq, proving that he is the only candidate who will get all of our troops out of Iraq and actually end this war. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards all reaffirmed that they would leave tens of thousands of troops in Iraq indefinitely.

"I have a fundamental difference with Senator Obama, John Edwards, and Senator Clinton," Governor Richardson said. "Their position is changing the mission. My position is to end this war. Six billion dollars on cancer research equals two weeks of spending on the war. As long as we do not end the war, we cannot invest in critical needs like cancer. The American people want to end the war. You cannot start the reconciliation of Iraq, a political settlement, and possibly this issue of a separation, which I think is a possible solution, until we get all our troops out. Unlike Senator Clinton, I do not believe the Congress has done enough. We have been able to move 240,000 of our troops in three months in and out of Iraq through Kuwait. It would take persuading Turkey. I would leave behind some of the light equipment. Leaving any troop behind will prevent us from moving forward toward stability in the region. I would talk to Iran. I would make sure the entire issue is tied to stability in the Israeli-Palestinian issue. You have to deal with the entire issue."

Richardson's strong debate performance comes just after the release of an ad and a four-minute video on Iraq. These important pieces make it clear that Governor Richardson is the only major candidate committed to getting all our troops out of Iraq -- with no residual forces -- and actually ending this war. In the ad and video, prominent online activists endorse the Richardson Plan for the war in Iraq.

To see Governor Richardson's new ad "Long Enough," click here: https://mail.icemail.com/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/m/8yej2trODXC/lmdmHc

To see Governor Richardson's new video "The Choice on Iraq," click here.
https://mail.icemail.com/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/m/8yej2trODXC/ihepV0

[Donnachaidh]

1. The spin this morning is just amazing!

Exactly WHEN was the word "Liar" spoken by Edwards?

Perhaps DU needs an animated Tazmanian Devil icon, for all the spinning that happens post-debate?

[bigtree]

4. I'm fucking tired of all the slick lawyer talk from Edwards (and some of his supporters)

Speaking directly after Richardson's explanation of his Iraq exit plan, Edwards clearly said Richardson wasn't telling the truth.

If you want to cover for him by claiming that that's somehow short of calling Richardson *a liar (and others who support a complete, immediate withdrawal) you go ahead. I can understand plain English.

It's amazing how these politicians try and hide behind their weasel words. What's even more amazing is how supporters always expect us to buy into their slick political rhetoric.

[Donnachaidh]

10. oops -- hit a nerve?

Or is it that you CAN'T find a tape of Edwards actually calling Richardson a *liar*?

I'm not covering for anyone dear -- just pointing out your very weak, and very NASTY attempt at putting words in people's mouths. In political circles -- it's called SPIN.

[bigtree]

11. weasel words

very slippery. disgusting.

[Donnachaidh]

15. whining because I called bullshit

What's next? "I'm rubber, your glue"? :rofl:

[bigtree]

19. I don't know about you, but where I come from, saying someone is 'not being truthful'

is calling them a liar.

Weasel worded parsing of that phrase just makes the candidate look even more slippery than he intended.

[Donnachaidh]

38. that cognitive dissonance flair up alot?

YOU were the one putting words in Edwards' mouth.

YOU.

Weasel words are exactly what YOU used to start this flamebait thread. YOU.

Now go take a nap. You need one.

[Clark2008]

50. No - saying someone isn't telling the truth means the same thing

as calling them a liar where I come from, too.

[Inspired]

56. Edwards was telling us the truth...sometimes it hurts. n/t

[Moochy]

43. par for the course with the OP n/t

[lateo]

45. I agree.

I'm not supporting anyone who doesn't want to bring the troops home immediately. Reducing troop levels or changing their mission is just code for continuing the war.

[rucky]

18. i heard it with my own ears

didn't say the "L" word, but made a comment directly relating to Richardson's statement, that a leader must be truthful to the american people. It was obvious.

[bigtree]

21. thank you

It's amazing how anyone could hear Edwards respond to Richardson's Iraq plan by saying those who promise a complete withdrawal need to be 'truthful' or 'tell the truth' and not conclude he was calling Richardson a liar. Some of his supporters apparently agree with my characterization of Edward's response as they've been less slippery by directly calling the governor a 'liar'.

[Donnachaidh]

42. it's amazing how Richardson supporters are so desperate that they have to LIE

about what was said in the debate. Sad, really.

[Donnachaidh]

39. you heard the word "Liar" come out of Edwards mouth?

:rofl:

[rucky]

40. An intellectually honest person would gather the meaning.

Hey, i'm beginning to like this semantics thing!

[Donnachaidh]

41. an *intellectually honest* person wouldn't put words in other people's mouths.

Nice try. :rofl:

[rucky]

46. no need to.

it's exactly what he meant, he just thought he found a tactful way to say it. I don't think it's wrong to call somebody out when you think they're lying, but in this case, Richardson wasn't lying. Edwards just had a different plan that he's selling by cloaking it in "realism".

[Lucinda]

49. Yup. n/t

[Milo_Bloom]

53. By this logic bush never lied about Iraq.

He always used wiggle words and told us "what the intelligence report said". Thus, he never lied in your eyes, right? Because he was just repeating what a report said, that makes it technically true, right?

This is why Edwards will not be president.

[mmonk]

2. Richardson has been steadily pulling support away from Edwards.

I get the update figures from the campaign trail from the Richardson campaign. There is a corresponding rise in Richardson support with a corresponding decline in Edwards support in early states. While attacking the frontrunners, Edwards is also having to fend off Richardson.

[pberq]

3. Who defines who is a major candidate?

"Richardson still the only major candidate committed to withdrawing all American troops from Iraq"

As far as I am concerned, Dennis Kucinich is the best candidate. Therefore, for me, he is THE major candidate.

By the way, I applaud Governor Richardson's efforts in exposing Iraq war supporters Clinton, Obama, and Edwards.

[bigtree]

5. I understand. I think he uses that distinction in the polls to elevate himself

. . . but I fully realize that Kucinich has been a leader among the candidates on Iraq.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

6. I agree with you totally. eom

[Ganja Ninja]

7. Neither Hilliary, Obama or Edwards thinks all the troops ...

can be pulled out of Iraq by the end of the next president's term. Sort of makes you wonder why you should bother getting out of bed on election day.

[bigtree]

9. It smells

like a sham

[deacon]

8. I gave Edwards a second and even a third look. No way, I am done with him.

[charlie]

12. You sure it was Edwards who said that?

I watched it a couple of times via the YouTube links in the DU video group and didn't catch him saying it. I'm not saying he didn't, I just couldn't find where he did. Was it immediately after Richardson's response or later, when the debate turned to other topics?

I did find this at the Baltimore Sun site:

"What I heard tonight was, even at the end of their terms the war will not end," said Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, promising to bring the troops home as president.

"It's important for candidates for president to tell the American people not just what they want to hear, but what they need to hear," Obama said.

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2007/09/democrats_allow_unable_to_prom.html

I'm not sure if they haven't lifted Obama's response out of context, but it is provided as one of the quotes on the Iraq pullout matter.

[Donnachaidh]

16. Edwards did NOT call Richardson a liar

But the OP thinks because he posts it here, it was officially *said*.

Of course, the OP doesn't factor in the fact that many of us watched the debate, and actually can retain most of what we watched.

All spin, no hat.

[bigtree]

17. Obama did say something similar, so I may have found his quote instead.

but, Edwards responded right after Richardson presented his plan bu saying that candidates and others who say that they will remove all troops from Iraq need to be 'truthful'. I didn't mistake that.

Edwards didn't refuse to rule out still having a military force presence in Iraq at the end of his term to just be technically correct either. He clearly was thinking of some significant mission that our troops would still be tasked with. His promise to remove 40 to 50 thousand troops out of a force which could still at over 100,000 isn't much comfort and represents (to me) more than some token protection for diplomats as Richardson has admitted he might allow.

[charlie]

33. I'm not looking to be convinced

that there's material difference between their proposals. Even if their plans were identical, I'd give advantage to Richardson on the matter because he probably has more experience as an envoy than everyone else on the stage altogether. He's proven that he believes in the efficacy of negotiation.

I'm just trying to hear Edwards make the "truthful" remark. I've just seen the debate again, from Richardson's response all the way through to the immigration question and I didn't catch it. Now, I see a second person confirming what you've heard. Maybe I'm just punchy from being up too long, I'll watch the whole thing fresh later.

[Donnachaidh]

44. so basically, you're confused as to who said what

That explains alot.

[jsamuel]

13. Richardson is a liar. He has always said he would keep troops at the embassy.

So saying he would have "all troops" out in 2013 is a lie. Edwards wouldn't lie to the American people since he too will keep troops at the embassy.

[bigtree]

14. That's not anything like thing like the role the others envision for their 'residual force'

and it's just dishonest to equate the soldiers he admits would remain to protect diplomatic staff with the forces the others envision remaining to fight 'Iraqi al-Qaeda' and other figments of their militaristic imagination.

[mmonk]

22. You've got it wrong. There is always a marine contingent

for embassies. That is not considered a residual force. Richardson is not lying.

[jsamuel]

23. So your saying he means "All troops will be out in 2013... except the Marines."

But he didn't say that. He said ALL TROOPS will be out in 2013.

[mmonk]

24. We have marine contigents for embassies in countries

we are not involved in hostilities in. Leaving a residual force for a military presence is different.

[bigtree]

25. here are his words on this

Talking Iraq With Bill Richardson

by Chris Bowers, Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 02:55:45 PM EST
Today, I had a chance to talk for about ten minutes with Governor Bill Richardson. The entire conversation focused on Iraq. Here is what I learned:

* Apart from a contingent of marines to protect the American embassy, he does indeed mean "no residual force whatsoever." No American troops in Iraqi to serve as trainers, no American counter-terrorism units in Iraq, no American troops to protect humanitarian workers--no any of that. Also, since marines are part of every American embassy contingent, he did not consider that a residual force. He would keep American troops in the region, but not in Iraq itself.

* His rationale behind this plan is that no matter what residual American forces are doing in Iraq, they will both be targets and serve as one of the main justifications for continuing violence in the country. His solution is to convene a regional diplomatic conference, in which American withdrawal can be used as leverage, to bring in security forces from neighboring countries such as Turkey, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia.

* Governor Richardson agreed when I asked him if he felt other candidates were being disingenuous when they claimed they were in favor of total withdrawal, but still wanted residual American military forces in Iraq to accomplish x, y, and z. He promised that is a distinction he would draw, and an issue he would repeatedly raise in public during the campaign . . .

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/4/13/145545/540

[jsamuel]

26. So he is lying when he says "no troops in 2013".

So he is basically redefining the definition of "troops" to mean "residual forces" which he then redefines as "anyone but the ones I am going to keep there."

[bigtree]

28. you can hang on to that if you want to make you feel better about your own prevaricating candidate

but Richardson, Gravel, and Kucinich stand apart from the others who obviously see a need to perpetuate Bush occupation with their residual forces.

Protecting an embassy isn't the same thing at all as the continued occupation the others described, and it's just not credible for those candidates or any of their supporters to compare that to their own hunger for more militarism in Iraq.

[jsamuel]

29. So tell me how protecting humanitarian workers (THE ONLY DIFFERENCE between Richardson and Edwards)

is such a bad thing.

[mmonk]

30. You are parsing words to create a deception or to back up Edwards.

Most people know the differences stated.

[jsamuel]

31. it's Richardson who is parsing "all troops"

[mmonk]

34. Here's a story about our embassy in Malta.

Read it so you know the difference.

http://malta.usembassy.gov/embassy_staff_brief_journalists_on_new_embassy_project.html

[kenny blankenship]

37. No. YOU are the one who's lying.

And it's getting very tiresome.

[Kajsa]

51. Nope,

US embassies have troops for protection.
That's a given and I think you know that.

This IS getting very tiresome and old.

[jsamuel]

52. "US embassies have troops for protection" - Exactly, that is why Bill will keep some TROOPS IN IRAQ

Just like Edwards.

[BlooInBloo]

54. Um, the embassy is not Iraq. It's US soil.

[aikoaiko]

20. Deep down inside, where my hope has retreated, I dwell on Richardson as the next come back kid

in NH, Iowa, and SC. And then becoming President.

[cooolandrew]

27. Richardson seems a very honest man to me. In New Mexico he's delivered..

[BlooInBloo]

55. I think he's a pretty-straight-shooter.

[2rth2pwr]

32. Richardson has been weasling on this for months

He finally believes his only chance is to run as an anti-war purist.

Richardson's Changing Position On Residual Troops

http://www.campaignline.com/nh/releases/?id=4185

NOW: Richardson Commercial Touts Plan to Pull "Every Single Soldier" Out of Iraq. In his most recent television commercial, Gov. Richardson says he has "the only plan that pulls every single soldier out of Iraq." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smOo1r2XPVY>

FIVE MONTHS AGO: April 2007: Leave Troops to "Protect American Institutions." Discussing his plan to withdraw troops from Iraq, Richardson said, "I would not put them in Iraq, I believe I would leave Marine forces to protect our embassy and other vital American installations."

DECEMBER 2006: Richardson Said Withdrawal Includes A Residual Force. Gov. Richardson said, "No, I'm talking about a fixed withdrawal date. I'm talking about a sizable withdrawal with perhaps a residual force-a very small residual force. But I think you have to fix the date, and you do it consulting with our military commanders, with the Iraqi government-and this is not ‘cut and run'-what I'm proposing is something that I believe will work, a fixed withdrawal date."

OCTOBER 2006: Richardson: Must Leave A Residual Force. Richardson said, "You negotiate this timetable that is also, I think, responsibly supporting and representing our security interests in the region and not just leaving without some kind of residual force or some transition force."



It's not resulting in a "surge" of support.

[mmonk]

36. I have figures Richardson has gone from small single digits

in early states to double digits. This issue of the Nation has some of this information.

[rucky]

47. meanwhile, back at the Edwards ranch...

he was talking about de-funding the war as recently as July. Now he doesn't know how long we'd be there if he were president.

[2rth2pwr]

48. I'm on the ranch, I can't see you. It's so easy to get lost here.

Just wait til next week, he will be proclaiming his IWR vote meant he was right all along.

[MazeRat7]

35. Richardson could get the job done and made a commitment, thats more than the front 3 did. -nt