Richardson Gains National Blogger Support for Iraq Position

The Bill Richardson campaign has released a new 4+ minute online video (above) stressing that he's the only Democratic candidate for president among the top four who is advocating removing all the troops from Iraq. The video contrasts his stance with with the positions of Clinton, Obama and Edwards in no uncertain terms. The video also features appearances in support of his Iraq position by national bloggers Chris Bowers and Matt Stoller of OpenLeft and Christina Siun O'Connell of Firedoglake. A shorter version of the video will be used as Richardson's next TV ad in New Hampshire.

The campaign has also established a web page entitled where visitors can submit links to their own videos, upload photos or leave messages to tell those in power in DC to end the war now and bring all the troops home.

You can read why Chris Bowers decided to appear in the ad and video here. Excerpt:

One of my greatest frustrations as a Democratic and progressive activist has been finding prominent Democrats who will take up popular progressive positions and messaging, and make the case for those positions nationwide. In 2002 and 2003, this frustration was centered around finding Democratic leaders who would speak out against the war before it began, even though a large percentage of America was yearning for someone to take up that mantle. Thus, Howard Dean emerged. In 2005, this frustration was centered around finding Democrats who would speak out in favor of withdrawal, even though a majority of the country favored withdrawal. Thus, Ned Lamont emerged. Now, for over five months, I have tried to push for a more prominent public debate on Democratic plans for residual forces in Iraq. This time, is has been Bill Richardson who has shown leadership on this issue. Not only has he repeatedly pledged to have no residual forces in Iraq, the largest focus of his campaign to date has been trying to force a public debate on residual forces in Iraq. He has deservedly risen in Iowa and New Hampshire polls as a result.

I am thrilled to be working with Bill Richardson on this issue. While this ad is not an official endorsement of Bill Richardson's candidacy, it is an endorsement of his no residual forces plan for Iraq. It is an endorsement of his leadership on the issue. It is an endorsement of the need for a public debate on how many troops Democrats plan to leave in Iraq, what those troops will do, and how long they will stay in Iraq. Every Democrat should be aware of all candidate plans for residual forces in Iraq before they decide who to support in the primaries. Just because a candidate says he or she will end American military involvement in the war in Iraq does not mean that he or she is actually proposing to end American military involvement in the war in Iraq.

Here's Siun's post about appearing in the Richardson ad. Excerpt:

While the candidates all say they will “end the war,” the frontrunners have ducked the question of residual troops every time they are asked - and they have been asked often by Gov. Richardson in the debates and by several of us privately and in numerous posts.

... While none of us are endorsing a presidential candidate - and Firedoglake has a policy of non-endorsement - Chris, Matt and I all agreed that this question must be answered. We support Bill Richardson’s plan to leave no troops behind - and we support his effort to get the other candidates to step up and answer.

"I believe we should bring all of the troops home with no residual forces left behind," Richardson says in the video. "This is critically important. This war is a quagmire, it is endless, and the time has come to bring the troops home."

The video cites chapter eight of the U.S. Army Field Manual, as noted in the Center for American Progress report "How to Redeploy: Implementing a Responsible Drawdown of U.S. Forces from Iraq," to support that "standard military procedure calls for non-combat troops to withdraw first, so they can be protected by combat forces."

"Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards would leave tens of thousands of non-combat troops behind in Iraq," campaign manager Dave Contarino said. "An estimated 97,000 American non-combat troops are in Iraq. Leaving behind up to 97,000 American troops does not end this war. As President, Bill Richardson will withdraw non-combat troops in tandem with combat troops to get them all out of Iraq safely."

My Take
What do I think? I certainly support how Richardson is continuing to assert pressure on the three top-polling Dems in the prez race to come clean about how many and what kind of troops they'd leave behind -- and for how long. And I strongly support the position he's taking on removing all the troops now. I believe anyone making clearcut statements like these about the occupation should be applauded at a time when too many Dems are afraid to speak out clearly (and afraid to be seen with anyone in the netroots or activist community doing so). If we have any chance to be successful in convincing the DC Dems, especially the Senate, to take meaningful, courageous action NOW regarding bringing the troops home, we need to band together with anyone and everyone willing to call their bluff. With this effort, Richardson is definitely doing just that. I hope he's doing it for the right reasons and not just to differentiate himself from the pack.

HOWEVER, it still bugs me that Gov. Richardson couldn't seem to refrain from criticizing MoveOn, thus helping the Repubs pump up the fake media frenzy on the ad. I know, his criticism was mild compared with many others and at least he didn't appear on almost every major news outlet to make a point of bashing MoveOn like Hillary Clinton did, but still. If Democrats want us to have their backs, they need to  have ours, you know?