Mr. Obama May Have To Forget, Ol’ What’s His Name

by Chuck Ring (GadAbout-BlogAlot ©2008)

Quote Freely From the Article — Leave The Pseudonym Alone

Word from today’s New York Times informs that Governor Bill Richardson has removed himself from further consideration or confirmation for President-Elect Obama’s Secretary of Commerce position.

Richardson has stated that the ongoing investigation which involves his relationship with a financial consulting firm that contracted with New Mexico for services involving part of the governor’s GRIP program, also known as Governor Richardson’s Investment Partnership may consume too much time before and during his confirmation process. Speculation has it that the investigation centers on the possibility that a substantial amount of money may have been paid by the consulting firm in a “pay to play” scheme.

New Mexico can not afford another high-profile indictment of a government official and if Governor Richardson is not culpable, it is hoped that the investigation is finished as quickly as possible in order that he and others may get on with their lives. If the governor is guilty of wrongful action, then he would do New Mexico and our country a favor by resigning his governorship at the first opportunity. To play not guilty when one is guilty is akin to being stuck on stupid.

4 Responses “Mr. Obama May Have To Forget, Ol’ What’s His Name”

  1. Bob Steiner says:

    Let me see if I understand this. Our great state has been experiencing some “monetary”issues with elected and appointed officials. Now I do comprehend the concept of “Innocent until proven guilty”, but as naive as I am, I almost sense a pattern regarding these matters. Our last two state treasurers are serving time. Ex-Senate president Manny Aragon has been judged “guilty” and is awaiting final sentencing. Now we have a Governor being “evaluated” by a grand Jury. I just wonder if their party affiliation could have anything to do with their “attiitudes” to finanncial matters?
    I guess it is sad that the party that promoted “change” during the recent election has been so besmirched. I really don’t mind the “change” thing”so much but I wish they’d stay away from the “dollars”. If the present trend continues, we might want to consider a new tourist slogan for our state: “Visit New Mexico, Chicago on the Rio Grande!”

    See also my article of Dec 8th in our Blog, titled “Do the Right Thing, Bill!”

  2. John Weckerle says:

    I have to admit that I find the news regarding the grand jury investigation and associated developments to be disappointing, and we certainly seem to have had our share of such disappointments in recent years. However, I would stop short at suggesting that the acts of a few should be considered a reflection of the entire party. One might just as well state that all Republicans are criminals because of the acts of Ted Stevens and Scooter Libby (both of whom were convicted, as opposed to just being investigated by a grand jury), or that they are all adulterers because Newt Gingrich and John McCain cheated on their wives. That’s ridiculous; while neither party holds a franchise on honesty, most of the people I know in both parties are good and honest people and should not, as a group, be tainted by the unethical actions of a few (assuming that the current allegations turn out to be true).

    I’m also starting to hear some grumbling among close friends about the current trend toward assuming guilt the minute an allegation is made. We have a process for determining guilt under the law, and until that process is complete, the accused is considered innocent and retains the full benefits of citizenship, including holding public office. The increasing tendency on the part of the media and, to some extent, our society, shows a disturbing lack of respect for due process. We seem hell-bent on proceeding straight from the initial investigation to sentencing. I think we should allow the process to follow its proper course. After the verdict is reached, and if the verdict is guilty, then it’s time to get the rail ready.

  3. Chuck Ring says:

    John, I thought my sentiments did not go so far as yours. I did not indict (pun intended) the individual or the process. I called for fairness whichever direction the evidence falls and you can’t get more reasonable than that.

    But, I do have my own ideas about the “real” reason he pulled out and that is that he has inside information that an indictment is forthcoming and he needs the time to prepare for and “execute” his defense.

    Right now might be a good time to change the name of the GRIP deal to something less damning. “Governor Richardson’s Investment Partnership” does not bode well at this time. Perhaps something such as, “Governor Richardson’s Improvement Partnership” would be more benign.

    I’m still hoping he will get his seat if he’s innocent of wrongdoing and I certainly do not want to see another disgrace foisted on New Mexico by politicians of any stripe … especially prisoner stripes.

    .

  4. John Weckerle says:

    Actually, I was responding to Bob’s comment and probably should have mentioned that. I agree that there’s probably more to the situation than meets the microphone – and if there’s guilt, there should be an accounting.

Let us talk about
Name and Mail are required
Join the discuss

I'm not a robot (enter numbers) *