To the person who said something about Darcy's degree in economics is what we need in this economic crisis.....
Do some research, she did NOT get a degree in economics.
I support Reichert ONLY because he has done for my 8th district what we need. When I write my reps, he has been the ONLY one to respond out of the 5 letters I have written. Goes to show he listens to his people. Darcy is a sweet woman but I feel she needs some lower level government experience before taking on this job.
George - 15 years ago
Reichert has been hammering Burner on her Harvard degree and what her major really was. I'm thinking, wow, must be tiff among intellectuals. Then I read the voter pamphlet and found out HE NEVER GOT A BACHELOR'S DEGREE! Are you kidding? Get a life, Dave.
Uther Pendragon - 16 years ago
Reichert supported Bush's inane and dangerous attack on the Second Amendment to the Constitution and our civil liberties when he voted for the Patriot Act and Bush's expanded executive powers under the revised FISA Act. Every congress person and Senator who voted to support these legal travesties should be put out of office at the first opportunity. In voting for both of these pieces of legislation Reichert was voting to support Bush's foolish and unconstitutional doctrine of the Unitary Executive. There is simply no greater threat to our civil liberties as understood by the American Founding Fathers than Yoo's doctrine of The Unitary Executive.
'nuf said. I'll be voting for Burner. She is not nearly the threat to our civil liberties that Reichert has been in voting to rubber stamp Bush's executive power grab.
mr man - 16 years ago
Burner has an ad about Reichert's numerical placement in congress... (See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQ1p3tLKE-A ) what she FAILS to say in the ad is that this placement/seating number is directly related to how long you have been serving in Congress – this being the case, if she WERE to be elected, she would actually be rated LOWER then Reichert, not higher. One’s placement is directly affected by those already in office BEFORE you either not running for congress again, dying in office, or the incumbent being beaten, etc – this is NOT determined but what bills you Pass or do not pass – essentially ALL Jr. Congress people start at the bottom. … but burner’s ad leads one to believe that the rating has something to do with how effective you are (hence the ad’s ineffective comments) so, she is either:
a)Disingenuous about this and trying to essentially mislead people into voting for her (same as a lie in my book)
or
b)An absolute idiot, and does not know how the system works.
…either way, that ad alone should be a wakeup call for people NOT to cast a vote for her…
Max - 16 years ago
correctnotright -
I'm sorry, but the mess that we are in is not the fault of the free market. It is the fault of people taking on risky loans, people taking on loans they can't pay for, companies and people appraising at prices above market value, companies offering shady loans, businesses wanting to squeeze profits, shareholders pushing businesses to keep increasing profits, government ignoring the signs, business ignoring the signs, shareholders and consumers ignorning the signs, governement not setting good checks ... need we go on. It is a problem that we all have helped create.
However, more regulation does not mean a free increase-government pass. Bush increased government to a size that is too large and still doesn't solve our problems. The problem is NOT a partisan one. It is a citizen problem that we all need to solve. The last thing we should do is to give carte blanche to 1 person or some 500 people to solve. The solution is not a Darcy Burner proposal. It is a work together with everyone to solve. Darcy has only shown that she is anti-this and anti-that. We need someone who will at least take a stab at working with others. In this race, the only person who HAS done this and WILL do this is Reichert.
Our solutions need input and support from more than 1 person ... or 1 party.
Mike - 16 years ago
Reichert all the way. Not only am I voting FOR Reichert, there is no other alternative. Burner seems like a nice person, but is naive to our needs. She seems (more and more each day with her attack ads) to be only a puppet for the Democratic Party.
We want our independence. We want solutions for us. Reichert is the only one in the race that provides us with these things.
Kim - 16 years ago
Check out this video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&eurl
Stop drinking the kool aid!!! The only thing that liberals can do to attack Reichart is to add a W in a sad attempt to characterize him as Bush.
Steve and his goats - 16 years ago
Like a good comrade... Correctnotright obeys his masters at horsesass and makes an appearance.
Priceless
"Being a do-nothing in congress is enough reason alone to throw him out."
Unlike the good Democrats in congress that are doing everything bush wants. Keep them in. Only if Democrats held their own to the same standard.
correctnotright - 16 years ago
To Max and Michael above:
You guys really make very little sense. The whole republican mantra of less government, the free market rules all and less regulation is what got us into this banking mess. Phil Gramm wrote the bill that deregulated the banks - seems it was not such a good idea.
Republican presidents have created the largest deficits in history - Bush took a budget surplus and turned it into the largest deficit in history. At a time when we need help at home, we are spending up to 1 trillion in Iraq for an unnecessary republican war. Seems republicans are not very fiscally responsible either.
As far as experience, Reichert took 20 years to try and catch the Green river killer who was right under his nose. So yes, Reichert is experienced at failure. Burner has worked on the responsible plan for withdrawal from Iraq - a blueprint to get us out of that mess supported by ex-generals. to me, that is a heck of a lot better experience than someone who voted with Bush almost all the time (excpet on key votes after they were decided). Yup, the election is NOT about Bush - it is about continual poor judgement and the continual failure of Reichert's experience. He is rated as one of the worst legislators in congress for a reason. Being a do-nothing in congress is enough reason alone to throw him out.
correctnotright - 16 years ago
This is to Jennifer above:
Dave Riechert is not "nuanced". He has admitted that he votes the way his republican party tells him and then - after the key amendments - they "let" him vote moderate to protect him. You are just the type of uninformed voter who will be fooled by this type of voting shenanigans. To me, this makes Dave even more of a hypocrite because he will vote both ways on key votes to appear "moderate". Dave Reichert has no principles except to get elected and to follow his party - why else would he vote the way he does? He has followed Bush hook, line and sinker. If you like how bush has run Washington, if you like the Iraq war, if you like deregulation of the banks - then Dave Reichert is your man.
The left-wingnuts at horsesass.org are being encouraged to "freep" this poll.
http://www.horsesass.org/?p=8497
Ann - 16 years ago
Has anyone checked what she "didn't do" or "couldn't do" at Microsoft? She failed there and I'm not willing to let her "try" not to fail again! She's not ready. Also of interest to me is the life sketch in her latest mailing about her hardship in having a child (which she is now so willing to leave while she will be away from home a good deal of the time) and her home burning down - not easy things to deal with, but that still does not make her qualified.
Warren - 16 years ago
I was pleased to see the Times endorse Dave Reichert. Reichert has taken some very tough, principled votes that put him at odds with many in his own party because he was reprenting the interests of the majority of the 8th. Darcy Burner, on the other hand, in a Times article, talked about how her fundraising from outside the district would give her independence. Just what we need, someone who is "independent" from the people who elect them. Burner independent alright; independent of the views of the majority of the 8th. Electing Burner would be like giving Nancy Peoplsi two votes in the House regardless of teh interests of our district. Sarajane's comment about Burner being brillaint and Dave not is fatuous. It is a typical ad hominem personal attack. Harvard does not make anyone brilliant just well educated. Buner's personal history since graduating, which matters far more, does not inspire confidence in her abilities. Dave Reichert has a long history of public service and a solid track record in Congress. I am pleased that the Seattle Times has recognized this.
Debra Lamanna - 16 years ago
I support Dave. I do not hear the Democrats telling us the plan they have. They only keep saying that it is all Bush. I have news anyone who is in any office they are to take care of business. Have we all forgotten when we elect people to office it is to serve the public interests not his or hers. It is to SERVE the PEOPLE!!! Once they are in office they are to do what is best for all of us. I want to hear a PLAN just like we are asked by our employer or we get fired with out pay. I do not look at the party I look at the person and the plan.
Sarajane - 16 years ago
Your very slanted editorial endorsement neglected to say that Darcy is brilliant and Sheriff Dave is not. Darcy may have taken seven years to finish her degree (because she had to put herself through school?), but her degree is from Harvard. In economics. Which is what prepares her to offer well-informed policy solutions to the current economic meltdown. Sheriff Dave's lame approach is to call for a study--inaction vs. sorely needed action. His independence is a carefully nurtured myth. He was caught on tape telling a friendly audience "they let me take that vote." Give me a break! Give Darcy a chance.
Michael - 16 years ago
When are Democrats finally going to realize that President Bush is NOT running for reelection? Just like Obama, what has Burner done for the 8th District? Both have done NOTHING. Both have NO leadership experience. Burner needs to crawl before she walks. She needs to run for a city council position,state legislature,mayor of a city etc. In other words she needs to do something for the people. She has no style, no substance and her campaign commercials have the same effect as watching paint dry.Democrats need to sit back and let Republicans run the country. They will be much happier.
Max - 16 years ago
I am an independent within the 8th District that has been pleased with the independence and representation of Dave Reichert. Without any previous experience, I can only listen to what Darcy Burner supports and it is only partisan politics.
We need less governement. The Government proves over and over (no matter who is in power) that they can't manage money, balance a budget, live without personal perks, and deal with real life issues. Partisan politics just makes the problems worse.
I support Dave Reichert.
Lynn - 16 years ago
All I know is when our family had difficulty recieving V.A. benefits for my Mother-in-law Dave Reichert's office was the only one who responded to our request for help. We sent letter's to Patty Murray's office, Maria Cantwell and Dave Reichert and whithin a week we were contacted by Dave's office and they had the problem resolved in short order. Thank you Dave for being there when we needed you. It has been almost two years and we still haven't heard from Patty or Maria.
Michele - 16 years ago
I'm voting for Reichert. Burner could neve get my vote, as she talks about taxes being too low (what????), and hang out in the sewers of KOS etc. That's not a good fit for the 8th District.
I had the fortunate experience of talking to a Darcy Burner phone bank volunteer. Sadly the young man could only recite the same old DNC talking points I've heard from the Democrat Party for eight long years. I honestly was hoping for something so much more, and fresh. If all Democrats have to go on is Bush this and Bush that, then they are in serious trouble as a party, and I, for one, refuse to listen to their childish blame game. Democrats voted to go to war, and voted to fund it, but refuse to own up to that.
On energy, I asked the young man to show me how to get to work [22 miles from home] other than in my car. Democrats should shut up about getting us off foriegn oil when they only have pipe dreams and NO immediate replacement. Grow up, this is my life you are talking about, not some popular ideological cause that makes you feel good. I have a mortgage and kids to feed.
It's time for this country to contemplate, in a very serious way, Term Limits. For now I'll vote for The Sheriff again as he is a safe, and steady guy over a girl still in her teen years.
Sue - 16 years ago
Thank you, Zack, for your insightful reply to the ridiculous endorsement of Dave "W" Reichert. After the PI also made that bonehead decision, I cancelled my paper. I was so hoping the Times would step up to the plate and endorse a bright, hard working woman in Darcy Burner, so I could call and request a subscription, but no go. I will be paperless for a while. I'm glad to see that 59% of the readers disagree with the editorial board and I hope they will eat crow come November 5th.
David - 16 years ago
After "people skills," Sarah Palin, character assassination, and you, jennifer, I'll choose a "bright" analyst any day.
Zack, thank you, for incising and draining the putrid editorial endorsement of Reichert.
Apparently, the Times editorial board has no shame implicitly implying that those reading its opinions are uncritical dullards.
Zack - 16 years ago
The Times endorsement of Reichert is pretty ridiculous. The Iraq war section is a great example but so is the section on the economy. "On Iraq, Burner produced a well-crafted white paper written with retired Gen. Paul Eaton that lays out a purposeful reduction of troops and materiel from the war zone. Reichert believes in the surge strategy in Iraq and anticipates the coming introduction of troops into Afghanistan. That's not a liberal position, but it is mainstream in temperament and reality." There's two glaring problems with this, the first is that it fails to mention that Darcy's already had more of an impact in congress then Reichert has with her plan, which has been endorsed and adopted by both challengers and incumbents this election cycle. The second is the blanket assertion about the surge strategies political, and real position. While many credit the surge working, there is evidence that the relationship is on of correlation not causation, because at the same time the surge was happening ground tactics also shifted, and the US began paying off tribal groups or “Enlightenment Councils.” 30,000 combat troops is a bump, but not a large one. Before the numbers were announced calls for the surge strategy typically involved 50,000-100,000 additional combat troops.
If the Times would like to endorse Reichert, because he fits in with the pro-business, anti-transit bias of the Times ownership, then by all means, please feel free to make that argument. Its is just disingenuous, to call Burner’s accurate accounting of the effects of deregulation assigning blame, while the stalling tactics of Reichert’s and McCain’s “hearings first, maybe some action later” strategy is forward looking.
The pass that the times editorial board is most glaring in the last paragraph: “The candidates differ when they come to big social questions. Burner is solidly pro-choice but also strongly in favor of the recent, rigorous interpretation of the right to own a gun, handed down from the Supreme Court, as is Reichert. Reichert dodges the inevitable Roe vs. Wade question, but sort of endorses sex education without being specific. Burner is getting better, Reichert is still best.”
Reichert dodges one question with a vague response, and doesn’t express views on Roe v. Wade for fear of losing votes of moderate democrats for whom choice is a key voting issue and he’s still better. Once again, if you want to make a case for conservative social issues, be my guest, but to rubber stamp the current electoral strategy of state republicans to avoid social issues at all cost, ultimately harms the state. These lawmakers will face questions on social issues, they should have to address how they will vote, or govern, if they aren’t going to express their own philosophies on social issues.
It’s ok to have disagreement in politics. It’s not ok to push differences under the rug, especially crucial differences, and pretend everything is going to be all right. I might have policy disagreements with conservatives, but I’m willing to engage in discussion on policy specific points. Dodging questions and falling back to values debates and culture clashes, just continues to cheapen American politics. America’s Papers as the last vestiges of commercial journalism in this country have a responsibility to discourage candidates and politicians from obfuscation, not to encourage as the times does with this endorsement.
jennifer - 16 years ago
I am a Dem and I am going to be voting for Dave. He is one of the few R's that actually have a nuanced position and he represents my interests in most cases. Darcy wouldn't have any seniority on the committees and she hasn't worked in years. In fact neither does her husband.
She might be bright but she lacks the people skills it takes to actually represent a district. I don't elect people who want to implement their own ideas and she doesn't seem to grasp that. I also don't like how she has lied in the past about her qualificiations. She took 7 years to graudate from college and she claims she left microsoft to go to law school but then dropped out of that as well..
Her only skill seems to be that she is a woman and once got a job for a few years at her husbands place of employment and there she supervised at most a couple of other people. She is also well just dorky.. Politics is largely based on people skills and she would make a great technical analyst at some government agency but not a representative to the US Congress.
Tim - 16 years ago
Dave has done nothing but support Bush and wasted our hard earned dollars. Get rid of him already!
To the person who said something about Darcy's degree in economics is what we need in this economic crisis.....
Do some research, she did NOT get a degree in economics.
I support Reichert ONLY because he has done for my 8th district what we need. When I write my reps, he has been the ONLY one to respond out of the 5 letters I have written. Goes to show he listens to his people. Darcy is a sweet woman but I feel she needs some lower level government experience before taking on this job.
Reichert has been hammering Burner on her Harvard degree and what her major really was. I'm thinking, wow, must be tiff among intellectuals. Then I read the voter pamphlet and found out HE NEVER GOT A BACHELOR'S DEGREE! Are you kidding? Get a life, Dave.
Reichert supported Bush's inane and dangerous attack on the Second Amendment to the Constitution and our civil liberties when he voted for the Patriot Act and Bush's expanded executive powers under the revised FISA Act. Every congress person and Senator who voted to support these legal travesties should be put out of office at the first opportunity. In voting for both of these pieces of legislation Reichert was voting to support Bush's foolish and unconstitutional doctrine of the Unitary Executive. There is simply no greater threat to our civil liberties as understood by the American Founding Fathers than Yoo's doctrine of The Unitary Executive.
'nuf said. I'll be voting for Burner. She is not nearly the threat to our civil liberties that Reichert has been in voting to rubber stamp Bush's executive power grab.
Burner has an ad about Reichert's numerical placement in congress... (See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQ1p3tLKE-A ) what she FAILS to say in the ad is that this placement/seating number is directly related to how long you have been serving in Congress – this being the case, if she WERE to be elected, she would actually be rated LOWER then Reichert, not higher. One’s placement is directly affected by those already in office BEFORE you either not running for congress again, dying in office, or the incumbent being beaten, etc – this is NOT determined but what bills you Pass or do not pass – essentially ALL Jr. Congress people start at the bottom. … but burner’s ad leads one to believe that the rating has something to do with how effective you are (hence the ad’s ineffective comments) so, she is either:
a)Disingenuous about this and trying to essentially mislead people into voting for her (same as a lie in my book)
or
b)An absolute idiot, and does not know how the system works.
…either way, that ad alone should be a wakeup call for people NOT to cast a vote for her…
correctnotright -
I'm sorry, but the mess that we are in is not the fault of the free market. It is the fault of people taking on risky loans, people taking on loans they can't pay for, companies and people appraising at prices above market value, companies offering shady loans, businesses wanting to squeeze profits, shareholders pushing businesses to keep increasing profits, government ignoring the signs, business ignoring the signs, shareholders and consumers ignorning the signs, governement not setting good checks ... need we go on. It is a problem that we all have helped create.
However, more regulation does not mean a free increase-government pass. Bush increased government to a size that is too large and still doesn't solve our problems. The problem is NOT a partisan one. It is a citizen problem that we all need to solve. The last thing we should do is to give carte blanche to 1 person or some 500 people to solve. The solution is not a Darcy Burner proposal. It is a work together with everyone to solve. Darcy has only shown that she is anti-this and anti-that. We need someone who will at least take a stab at working with others. In this race, the only person who HAS done this and WILL do this is Reichert.
Our solutions need input and support from more than 1 person ... or 1 party.
Reichert all the way. Not only am I voting FOR Reichert, there is no other alternative. Burner seems like a nice person, but is naive to our needs. She seems (more and more each day with her attack ads) to be only a puppet for the Democratic Party.
We want our independence. We want solutions for us. Reichert is the only one in the race that provides us with these things.
Check out this video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&eurl
Who is really to blame?
Stop drinking the kool aid!!! The only thing that liberals can do to attack Reichart is to add a W in a sad attempt to characterize him as Bush.
Like a good comrade... Correctnotright obeys his masters at horsesass and makes an appearance.
Priceless
"Being a do-nothing in congress is enough reason alone to throw him out."
Unlike the good Democrats in congress that are doing everything bush wants. Keep them in. Only if Democrats held their own to the same standard.
To Max and Michael above:
You guys really make very little sense. The whole republican mantra of less government, the free market rules all and less regulation is what got us into this banking mess. Phil Gramm wrote the bill that deregulated the banks - seems it was not such a good idea.
Republican presidents have created the largest deficits in history - Bush took a budget surplus and turned it into the largest deficit in history. At a time when we need help at home, we are spending up to 1 trillion in Iraq for an unnecessary republican war. Seems republicans are not very fiscally responsible either.
As far as experience, Reichert took 20 years to try and catch the Green river killer who was right under his nose. So yes, Reichert is experienced at failure. Burner has worked on the responsible plan for withdrawal from Iraq - a blueprint to get us out of that mess supported by ex-generals. to me, that is a heck of a lot better experience than someone who voted with Bush almost all the time (excpet on key votes after they were decided). Yup, the election is NOT about Bush - it is about continual poor judgement and the continual failure of Reichert's experience. He is rated as one of the worst legislators in congress for a reason. Being a do-nothing in congress is enough reason alone to throw him out.
This is to Jennifer above:
Dave Riechert is not "nuanced". He has admitted that he votes the way his republican party tells him and then - after the key amendments - they "let" him vote moderate to protect him. You are just the type of uninformed voter who will be fooled by this type of voting shenanigans. To me, this makes Dave even more of a hypocrite because he will vote both ways on key votes to appear "moderate". Dave Reichert has no principles except to get elected and to follow his party - why else would he vote the way he does? He has followed Bush hook, line and sinker. If you like how bush has run Washington, if you like the Iraq war, if you like deregulation of the banks - then Dave Reichert is your man.
As if this poll means anything.
The left-wingnuts at horsesass.org are being encouraged to "freep" this poll.
http://www.horsesass.org/?p=8497
Has anyone checked what she "didn't do" or "couldn't do" at Microsoft? She failed there and I'm not willing to let her "try" not to fail again! She's not ready. Also of interest to me is the life sketch in her latest mailing about her hardship in having a child (which she is now so willing to leave while she will be away from home a good deal of the time) and her home burning down - not easy things to deal with, but that still does not make her qualified.
I was pleased to see the Times endorse Dave Reichert. Reichert has taken some very tough, principled votes that put him at odds with many in his own party because he was reprenting the interests of the majority of the 8th. Darcy Burner, on the other hand, in a Times article, talked about how her fundraising from outside the district would give her independence. Just what we need, someone who is "independent" from the people who elect them. Burner independent alright; independent of the views of the majority of the 8th. Electing Burner would be like giving Nancy Peoplsi two votes in the House regardless of teh interests of our district. Sarajane's comment about Burner being brillaint and Dave not is fatuous. It is a typical ad hominem personal attack. Harvard does not make anyone brilliant just well educated. Buner's personal history since graduating, which matters far more, does not inspire confidence in her abilities. Dave Reichert has a long history of public service and a solid track record in Congress. I am pleased that the Seattle Times has recognized this.
I support Dave. I do not hear the Democrats telling us the plan they have. They only keep saying that it is all Bush. I have news anyone who is in any office they are to take care of business. Have we all forgotten when we elect people to office it is to serve the public interests not his or hers. It is to SERVE the PEOPLE!!! Once they are in office they are to do what is best for all of us. I want to hear a PLAN just like we are asked by our employer or we get fired with out pay. I do not look at the party I look at the person and the plan.
Your very slanted editorial endorsement neglected to say that Darcy is brilliant and Sheriff Dave is not. Darcy may have taken seven years to finish her degree (because she had to put herself through school?), but her degree is from Harvard. In economics. Which is what prepares her to offer well-informed policy solutions to the current economic meltdown. Sheriff Dave's lame approach is to call for a study--inaction vs. sorely needed action. His independence is a carefully nurtured myth. He was caught on tape telling a friendly audience "they let me take that vote." Give me a break! Give Darcy a chance.
When are Democrats finally going to realize that President Bush is NOT running for reelection? Just like Obama, what has Burner done for the 8th District? Both have done NOTHING. Both have NO leadership experience. Burner needs to crawl before she walks. She needs to run for a city council position,state legislature,mayor of a city etc. In other words she needs to do something for the people. She has no style, no substance and her campaign commercials have the same effect as watching paint dry.Democrats need to sit back and let Republicans run the country. They will be much happier.
I am an independent within the 8th District that has been pleased with the independence and representation of Dave Reichert. Without any previous experience, I can only listen to what Darcy Burner supports and it is only partisan politics.
We need less governement. The Government proves over and over (no matter who is in power) that they can't manage money, balance a budget, live without personal perks, and deal with real life issues. Partisan politics just makes the problems worse.
I support Dave Reichert.
All I know is when our family had difficulty recieving V.A. benefits for my Mother-in-law Dave Reichert's office was the only one who responded to our request for help. We sent letter's to Patty Murray's office, Maria Cantwell and Dave Reichert and whithin a week we were contacted by Dave's office and they had the problem resolved in short order. Thank you Dave for being there when we needed you. It has been almost two years and we still haven't heard from Patty or Maria.
I'm voting for Reichert. Burner could neve get my vote, as she talks about taxes being too low (what????), and hang out in the sewers of KOS etc. That's not a good fit for the 8th District.
I had the fortunate experience of talking to a Darcy Burner phone bank volunteer. Sadly the young man could only recite the same old DNC talking points I've heard from the Democrat Party for eight long years. I honestly was hoping for something so much more, and fresh. If all Democrats have to go on is Bush this and Bush that, then they are in serious trouble as a party, and I, for one, refuse to listen to their childish blame game. Democrats voted to go to war, and voted to fund it, but refuse to own up to that.
On energy, I asked the young man to show me how to get to work [22 miles from home] other than in my car. Democrats should shut up about getting us off foriegn oil when they only have pipe dreams and NO immediate replacement. Grow up, this is my life you are talking about, not some popular ideological cause that makes you feel good. I have a mortgage and kids to feed.
It's time for this country to contemplate, in a very serious way, Term Limits. For now I'll vote for The Sheriff again as he is a safe, and steady guy over a girl still in her teen years.
Thank you, Zack, for your insightful reply to the ridiculous endorsement of Dave "W" Reichert. After the PI also made that bonehead decision, I cancelled my paper. I was so hoping the Times would step up to the plate and endorse a bright, hard working woman in Darcy Burner, so I could call and request a subscription, but no go. I will be paperless for a while. I'm glad to see that 59% of the readers disagree with the editorial board and I hope they will eat crow come November 5th.
After "people skills," Sarah Palin, character assassination, and you, jennifer, I'll choose a "bright" analyst any day.
Zack, thank you, for incising and draining the putrid editorial endorsement of Reichert.
Apparently, the Times editorial board has no shame implicitly implying that those reading its opinions are uncritical dullards.
The Times endorsement of Reichert is pretty ridiculous. The Iraq war section is a great example but so is the section on the economy. "On Iraq, Burner produced a well-crafted white paper written with retired Gen. Paul Eaton that lays out a purposeful reduction of troops and materiel from the war zone. Reichert believes in the surge strategy in Iraq and anticipates the coming introduction of troops into Afghanistan. That's not a liberal position, but it is mainstream in temperament and reality." There's two glaring problems with this, the first is that it fails to mention that Darcy's already had more of an impact in congress then Reichert has with her plan, which has been endorsed and adopted by both challengers and incumbents this election cycle. The second is the blanket assertion about the surge strategies political, and real position. While many credit the surge working, there is evidence that the relationship is on of correlation not causation, because at the same time the surge was happening ground tactics also shifted, and the US began paying off tribal groups or “Enlightenment Councils.” 30,000 combat troops is a bump, but not a large one. Before the numbers were announced calls for the surge strategy typically involved 50,000-100,000 additional combat troops.
If the Times would like to endorse Reichert, because he fits in with the pro-business, anti-transit bias of the Times ownership, then by all means, please feel free to make that argument. Its is just disingenuous, to call Burner’s accurate accounting of the effects of deregulation assigning blame, while the stalling tactics of Reichert’s and McCain’s “hearings first, maybe some action later” strategy is forward looking.
The pass that the times editorial board is most glaring in the last paragraph: “The candidates differ when they come to big social questions. Burner is solidly pro-choice but also strongly in favor of the recent, rigorous interpretation of the right to own a gun, handed down from the Supreme Court, as is Reichert. Reichert dodges the inevitable Roe vs. Wade question, but sort of endorses sex education without being specific. Burner is getting better, Reichert is still best.”
Reichert dodges one question with a vague response, and doesn’t express views on Roe v. Wade for fear of losing votes of moderate democrats for whom choice is a key voting issue and he’s still better. Once again, if you want to make a case for conservative social issues, be my guest, but to rubber stamp the current electoral strategy of state republicans to avoid social issues at all cost, ultimately harms the state. These lawmakers will face questions on social issues, they should have to address how they will vote, or govern, if they aren’t going to express their own philosophies on social issues.
It’s ok to have disagreement in politics. It’s not ok to push differences under the rug, especially crucial differences, and pretend everything is going to be all right. I might have policy disagreements with conservatives, but I’m willing to engage in discussion on policy specific points. Dodging questions and falling back to values debates and culture clashes, just continues to cheapen American politics. America’s Papers as the last vestiges of commercial journalism in this country have a responsibility to discourage candidates and politicians from obfuscation, not to encourage as the times does with this endorsement.
I am a Dem and I am going to be voting for Dave. He is one of the few R's that actually have a nuanced position and he represents my interests in most cases. Darcy wouldn't have any seniority on the committees and she hasn't worked in years. In fact neither does her husband.
She might be bright but she lacks the people skills it takes to actually represent a district. I don't elect people who want to implement their own ideas and she doesn't seem to grasp that. I also don't like how she has lied in the past about her qualificiations. She took 7 years to graudate from college and she claims she left microsoft to go to law school but then dropped out of that as well..
Her only skill seems to be that she is a woman and once got a job for a few years at her husbands place of employment and there she supervised at most a couple of other people. She is also well just dorky.. Politics is largely based on people skills and she would make a great technical analyst at some government agency but not a representative to the US Congress.
Dave has done nothing but support Bush and wasted our hard earned dollars. Get rid of him already!