Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Lie Detector Failure (Bill Richardson and lies)
Albuquerque Journal | Saturday, October 19, 2002 | Alan P. Zelicoff Physician and Scientist

Posted on 10/19/2002 11:12:44 AM PDT by woofie

After basking in the national spotlight — first as a peripatetic congressman meeting with rogue dictators, then U.N. ambassador and finally as a cabinet secretary — Bill Richardson hoped for a spot on the Democratic national ticket. But his "rising star" petered out, and he came to embody the Peter Principle instead.

Saddled with a disastrous security scandal not of his making, he rose to the level of his own incompetence by taking a bad problem at Department of Energy laboratories and making it even worse.

In this shameful and very sad story are lessons for New Mexicans who might still be thinking he'd make a good governor.

There is no question that Richardson's predecessor as secretary of energy, Hazel O'Leary, sowed the seeds that led to lost nuclear secrets and missing hard drives. O'Leary systematically deconstructed basic security measures at the labs by, among other things, removing guards and replacing them with turnstiles.

No longer would visitors (or even staff) be subject to search upon entering or leaving — hence the loss of an otherwise visible deterrent to spying or even careless handling of classified data and electronic media.

Predictable disaster followed in 1999, and when it did, Secretary Richardson — then running for the Democratic vice-presidential nomination and desperate to show how he could be "tough on national security" — slapped a counter-productive, sweeping polygraph program on all of the employees at Sandia, Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore labs.

Senior administrators advised against this in the strongest terms, citing the obvious adverse effects on morale at a time when the labs were competing with Silicon Valley for talented engineers and computer scientists.

Senior scientific staff prepared detailed surveys of the track record of polygraphs, pointing out that the most damaging spies in U.S. history — double agents Aldrich Ames, Karl Koecher, Larry Wu-Tai Chin and Ana Belen Montes — all passed their CIA polygraphs multiple times and that polygraphs never caught any spies.

The scientists suggested that guards be reinstated, and that security clearances be limited to those workers who really needed them. Richardson listened to none of it, and when confronted at Sandia in 1999 about his obvious disregard for the basic dignity of loyal lab employees, Richardson waved his hand dismissively in the air and with a pained expression on his face complained with an exasperated huff: "Oh, it's all just politics." This from a cabinet secretary entrusted with nuclear weapons?

Richardson twisted arms in Congress to get funds for his polygraph program and crowed on the PBS News Hour, "What we have done since I came on board is we've instituted polygraphs for anybody that has sensitive access."

That decision sentenced 15,000 people to degrading four-hour inquisitions. He reiterated precisely the same words on CBS and ABC News several days later, ruling out any doubt that he meant exactly what he said.

But this week, the National Academy of Sciences released a two-year study on the efficacy of polygraphs. The study concluded: "Its accuracy in distinguishing actual or potential security violators from innocent test takers is insufficient to justify reliance on its use in employee security screening in federal agencies" — almost exactly what lab scientists told Richardson in 1999.

So, now Richardson is running away from his self-serving decision, claiming, "I only wanted a very narrow group of people to be polygraphed" — an obvious fib even to political partisans.

But his lying doesn't stop there. Richardson also now claims that it was he who asked for the National Academy study. But it was fellow Democrat and senator Jeff Bingaman who bravely questioned the secretary's security plans at an open DOE hearing that Richardson sponsored, and organized the Senate resolution that funded the NAS study.

Richardson's blatant lying is demeaning not only to the 10,000 New Mexicans who work at Sandia and Los Alamos; he thinks the rest of the citizenry are dupes as well.

Bill Richardson has failed his test as an executive, electing instead to put his own career before those of some of New Mexico's most talented and productive workers. While it is true he freed a few hostages in foreign lands, he condemned thousands of Americans to a useless, low-tech electronic inquisition that squandered millions of dollars and damaged the reputations of lab employees and the labs themselves.

I don't know if either of his opponents would make good governors, but if honesty is important, it would be very hard to do worse than Bill Richardson.


TOPICS: Editorial
KEYWORDS: billrichardson; lies; richardson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 10/19/2002 11:12:44 AM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 11th Commandment; AmyB; ApacheTear; Apple_Hills; arcane; bcoffey; buckeye63; CheezyD; chookter; ...
Ping to New Mexico
2 posted on 10/19/2002 11:15:02 AM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: deport; bonesmccoy; Heartlander2
Ping
3 posted on 10/19/2002 11:16:59 AM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: woofie
Wow. Powerful stuff....and he'll probably still be elected Governor.
4 posted on 10/19/2002 11:21:23 AM PDT by FryingPan101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: woofie
Richardson is a democRAT out of the X42 administration. That's enough for me to push his "flush" button.
5 posted on 10/19/2002 11:25:39 AM PDT by nightdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: woofie
Bill Richardson, hmmm, isn't he the one who got fixed up with Monica Lewinsky by the First Creep himself?
6 posted on 10/19/2002 11:32:04 AM PDT by witnesstothefall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: witnesstothefall
Bill Richardson tried to find Monica a job as HUSH MONEY deal.
7 posted on 10/19/2002 11:34:42 AM PDT by buffyt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: buffyt
I think you scientists hate Richardson for all the wrong reasons, it was time someone shook you all up in your little ivory towers -- the problem is, he didn't go far enough at forcing you to clean up your environmental contamination you've forced the rest of us to live with (or try to, some are not doing so well) on planet earth. Sure, you have your tight little communities, with all its privileges and high salaries, but when anyone says anything regarding the mess you leave on the rest of us, you yell, "National Security"! Sometimes, while babies die in their mothers' wombs.
8 posted on 10/19/2002 11:59:35 AM PDT by TiaS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TiaS
Wow ...where did you wander in from?
9 posted on 10/19/2002 12:01:49 PM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: woofie
Where is 'lil Bill in the polls?

Remember, New Mexico fell to Gore. The pitiful transplants in the northern parts of the land of enchantment outnumber real New Mexicans.

Side note: it wouldn't surprise me if in my lifetime hunting is outlawed in NM. That's how bad the Left coast invasion has been.

10 posted on 10/19/2002 12:19:11 PM PDT by RainDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RainDog
"Uncle Bill" is supposedly ahead of John Sanchez by 12 - 15 points. I say it depends on who votes. I think Albuquerque will decide the race. The east will go for John and the North for Billy.
11 posted on 10/19/2002 12:24:52 PM PDT by MickMan51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: woofie
thanks...... someone has to keep the CLinton administration lackeys employed.... Hope he doesn't ruin the state for you....
12 posted on 10/19/2002 2:14:06 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TiaS
Uhhh.....

What?
13 posted on 10/19/2002 2:36:53 PM PDT by El Sordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TiaS
BACK TO DU!! BACK I SAY!!!

PURGE THIS DEMON FROM HELL BACK TO THE SPAWN WHENCE IT CAME!!!!

BACK!!

14 posted on 10/19/2002 2:57:55 PM PDT by Pistolshot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot; backhoe
The really weird twist in the Los Alamos scandal was the Los Alamos fire. Remember that controlled fire started by the Feds near Los Alamos? They forgot to check the weather reports. The fire got out of control and as best I can tell, a lot of evidence burned up. A tragic fire. All those murdered trees. Burned down homes as well.
15 posted on 10/19/2002 3:31:48 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: woofie
The Farmington Daily-Times had a front-page article today about the Richardson/Sanchez debate. This paper has always made no bones about who they endorse (Richardson). I noticed something today and wonder how many others noticed it too. They put a small picture of each of them in the article. The Richardson one is an obvious professional portrait of him smiling, dimples and all.....how sweet (NOT ). It looks like it's been retouched, no wrinkles, no bags or puffiness like he always seems to have. Then the one of Sanchez......no pretty poses, and he has a horrible, almost angry look on his face. Obviously a pic that someone just snapped at the wrong time.

Subliminal message maybe?????

16 posted on 10/19/2002 3:31:53 PM PDT by realwoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March; All
I well recall that fire, and speculation that it was cover for some sort of skullduggery. BTW, I have a file on the weasel here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/723210/posts
various links | 7-27-02 | The Heavy Equipment Guy

17 posted on 10/19/2002 3:38:53 PM PDT by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: backhoe
bump
18 posted on 10/19/2002 5:42:48 PM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MickMan51
There is a strong possibility that many in NM, particularly those on Indian reservations and in isolated outposts, do not even know of the many failures and lies of Bill Richardson. As I recall, one of his "first" lies was to claim that he was an "aide" to Hubert Horatio Humphrey. NM has surely changed. It voted for Nixon in 1968 -- slightly for Gore in 2000. And it fell in love with AR Bill.
19 posted on 10/19/2002 6:20:38 PM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: realwoman
The Farmington newspaper would probably go out of business if it endorsed John Sanchez (R). This newspaper serves a staunchly Democrat clientele. Many would cancel ads and subscriptions if the paper endorsed a Republican gubernatorial contender. For its own survival, the paper has to promote Richardson. People in NW NM will always be Democrat, I suspect. They are really isolated up there too.
20 posted on 10/19/2002 6:22:55 PM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson