Over on Slog, The Stranger’s Eli Sanders addresses the question of whether Rep. Dave Reichert truly is, or is not a moderate… and he allows Reichert to provide the answer in his own vague, rambling words.
Sanders links to video on TVW of Reichert addressing the Mainstream Republicans of Washington at their annual Cascade Conference last week in Sea-Tac. Speaking before a gathering of self-proclaimed moderate Republicans, Reichert curiously attempts to explain away his own voting record, by recounting a rambling anecdote about a conservative voter who complained about his alleged moderation:
Now, I said, “You know what sir, that would be a huge mistake, and here’s why.’ (I wanted to explain to this person how things work back in Washington, D.C., and why certain votes have to be taken.)
Sometimes the leadership comes to me and says, “Dave, we want you to vote a certain way.’ Now, they know I can do that over here, that I have to do that over here. In other districts, that’s not a problem, but here I have to be able to be very flexible in where I place my votes. Because the big picture here is, keep this seat, keep the majority, keep the country moving forward with Republican ideals, especially on the budget, on protecting our troops, on protecting this country. Right? Being responsible with taxpayer dollars. All of those things. That’s the big picture. Not the vote I place on ANWAR that you may not agree with, or the vote that I place on protecting salmon.”
“Back in Washington, there are lots of games played…” Reichert informed his audience. As for the carefully crafted perception that he is moderate and independent? “That’s where I need to be in a 50-50 district.”
Uh-huh.
As one Republican elected official who was in the audience that day incredulously told me:
“Of course we understand that strategy… but you don’t come right out and say it in public!”
And on camera, no less. See what I mean when I say that even Reichert’s fellow Republicans think he’s an idiot?
My question then is, who is the bigger idiot? Reichert, who stupidly admits to the TV cameras that in an effort to help him look more independent, House leaders are telling him when he should or should not vote against them? Or our local editorialists who have been so reliably eager to congratulate Reichert every time he makes a show of breaking with the party line?
Reichert knows that his alleged “independent streak” is a stinking load of bullshit. His fellow Republicans know that this is a stinking load of bullshit. Only our local media seem to be oblivious to the stench of politics as usual.
Much of the myth of Reichert’s moderation and independence stems from a handful of strategic votes against his party’s leadership on bills whose passage or failure was pre-ordained. Indeed as Daniel Kirkdorffer studiously explains in his thorough analysis of Reichert’s voting record (an absolute must read for all serious journalists,) the overwhelming majority of Reichert’s allegedly moderate votes were entirely meaningless:
[Supporters] argue that Reichert has voted 55% of the time on the same side as the majority Democratic position. Problem is that almost half of those votes (206) were undisputed procedural votes, and hence meaningless when determining voting tendencies. Furthermore, his overall voting record has him voting 94% of the time with the majority Republican position.
So how do we really gauge a legislator’s voting record then? Well we do so by looking at the 389 votes where the parties took opposite positions, and we see where legislators stood on those votes.
As soon as we do that the first observation is that Reichert only voted 11.7% of the time on the same side as Democrats, but 88.3% of the time with his Republican colleagues.
However, the most important votes of all were generally the key votes on the passage of bills. 35 times since January 2005 the House has been at odds on these most important votes, and Reichert has only voted with the Democrats on two such occasions, which is just under 6% of the time.
Even in his stand against the despicable Terri Schiavo bill — for which he was loudly lauded by the local press — Reichert had little impact on the final 203-58 vote. Indeed, when the shit hits the fan as it did with ANWR, when he voted for drilling after voting against it, Reichert has always been a reliable vote when called upon by his party leaders. And he always will be.
That is what Reichert was laboriously trying to explain to his fellow Republicans last week. That is what his colleagues in the audience understood. And that is what our local media has an obligation to explain to voters.
“Reichert had little impact on the final 203-58 vote.”
So? Using that logic, what’s Representative for Life McDermott excuse for always being in the minority (even in his own party)?
What’s the overall point, anyway? Of course he is going to vote with the leadership most of the time. Do you expect a Representative Darcy Burner to vote against Nancy Pelosi?
The point is, do voters in the 8th District want someone who says he’s an environmentalist, or do they want one who really is?
The 8th district’s do-nothing congressman has done nothing about hugging a rabbit! Darcy Burner has already hugged a rabbit. Reichert doesn’t even have a plan to hug a rabbit.
HARRY YOU MEAN BECAUSE DARCY CLEANS THE SHIT OUT OF HER KIDS DIAPER, THAT MAKES HER AN EXPERT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.YOU IDIOT.
ROGER WHO WANTS TO HUG A RABBIT WHO HAS HAD HIS BALLS TORN OFF.HAVE SOME MORE RIPPLE.
OMG. Yo is Dave. The incoherence of the posts become clear now.
WHY WE NEED A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR
I just got my Puget Sound Energy bill for this month. They want more money from us peons — they’re asking the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC) for rate increases for both their electric and natural gas customers. They want, among other things, for their customers to pay for “depreciation tracking,” whatever the hell that is.
It’s standard practice for regulated utilities to demand rate increases that include things like capital improvements and capital depreciation. That’s just plain wrong — and a consumer ripoff.
If consumers have to put up the capital for their businesses, then the consumers should OWN their businesses. Utility rates always include a “return on equity” (ROE) or “return on investment” (ROI) component — usually around 9% or 10% — that compensates the utility company’s owners (i.e., shareholders) for the use of their capital. It strikes me that 9 or 10 percent is a more than generous rate of return for a risk-free investment whose revenues are assured because they have a captive customer base — and government protection from competition.
So far, this tactic hasn’t worked, because the WUTC invariably denies the ridiculous and unreasonable demands by utilities that ratepayers pony up capital funding for their companies. But that’s because, since 1985, we’ve had Democratic governors appointing the majority of the Commission, and a Democratic attorney general hiring and supervising the Public Counsel who represents consumers in rate hearings.
Can you imagine what would happen if a Governor Rossi appointed the WUTC? You know damn well what would happen! Here is how Republican capitalism works: We get all the expenses and risks, and they get all the profits.
Kyle asks, “What’s the overall point, anyway?”
It’s quite simple: despite all the smoke and mirrors, despite all the games that Reichert and the GOP play to try to pad his resume, he is governed by the “R” at the end of his name in Congress, and as such his true positions on the issues that matter and define the Parties are those of that are shared by Bush, DeLay, and Co.
When people vote in November consider who Reichert is, that’s what he is, one of the GOP. He isn’t a Democrat, he isn’t an Independent, he isn’t a Libertarian – he is a Republican and votes with Republicans basically all the time.
If you feel that as such he represents the values and issues of concern of the 8th then he will win re-election. However, I don’t think that the majority of residents of the 8th can believe that to be the case based on the facts of his voting record, despite all the attempts to make it out for something it simply isn’t.
As I wrote in the blog entry Goldy refers to:
Reichert has a very real voting record and the media is getting faked out by a myth. Let the man run on his voting record and we’ll see where the chips fall.
4.
Not and expert, only someone who is really concerned about it. She’s smart enough to study the issue and make good decisions.
Unilke you, or Sheriff Davie.
I about Darcy from who she is, what she’s done and where she’s been.
I know what the current occupant does. Tha’s why he’s got to go.
Not an expert…
I know about Darcy…
I wish there was a preview.
U.S. West pulled this same shit a couple years ago — they asked WUTC for a $200,000,000-plus rate increase that would have required their customers to pay for expanding their network — but the customers would get no shares, and would not own the capital improvements they paid for … instead, the customers would pay USW more ROI because USW now has more capital invested in their network!
Fortunately, the WUTC appointed by Gary Locke and the Public Counsel appointed by Chris Gregoire saw through this bullshit, and U.S. West got only about $33 million of their rate increase — the portion that represented a reasonable adjustment for higher expenses due to inflation and other reasonable charges to customers. The rest was denied. Specifically, they did NOT get away with hitting up their customers for capital funding.
Under any reasonable theory of rate regulation utilities are supposed to raise capital in the capital markets by selling shares or borrowing, and are then entitled to rates that include a reasonable ROI. There is absolutely no justification for tacking capital costs onto customer rates — it’s a consumer ripoff, pure and simple.
But companies like USW, PSE, and other utilities keep coming back to WUTC with this same old bullshit, year after year, although this time around it appears PSE is trying to disguise it under the obscure terminology of “depreciation tracking.”
And why shouldn’t they keep trying? If the Republicans manage to steal the 2008 election for former part-time janitor and real estate huckster Dinosaur Rossi, the CEOs of this companies will be telling Rossi who to appoint to the WUTC — and you can expect your utility rates to double or triple … again.
5
I still have my balls, thank you very much. Whether you have any balls is debatable. Are you the same chickenshit who used to post here as “prr?” Remember prr? Who offered to “meet” me at Drinking Liberally, and promised “I’ll be there?” and was a no-show, just like Dubya was a no-show for his generation’s war? Yeah, it wouldn’t surprise me a bit if you’re that coward “prr” who ran like a scared weasel from a cute, furry, 10 1/2 lb. rabbit.
“Yo” is a contraction of the word “yahoo” (as in “trailer park yahoo”) and is properly spelled “Y’o.” Y’o, like Stefan Sharansky, can’t even spell his own fucking name.
Reichert is nothing but another talking dummy for the Bushies.
If he ever voted against them on anything they care about, they would take away his campaign money.
And stop inviting him to champagne tasting parties.
Hey Y’o, are you ex-prr?
klake is a nazi
I hope the BIAW isn’t paying shills like Y’o more than minimum wage to post here, because they aren’t even worth that much! They’ve never won an argument, and never will. All they’re good for is getting the stuffing knocked out of them (like a tired old speed bag that’s splitting apart at the seams) by a bunch of pansy liberals.
” … Republican ideals, especially on the budget, on protecting our troops, on protecting this country. … Being responsible with taxpayer dollars. … That’s the big picture.”
EEEYOWLHAAHAHARHAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HOOO HEE HA HAW HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
Man, those pukes know how to crack a joke!!! :D
Let’s see …
Republican ideals on the budget: Gargantuan deficits
Protecting the troops: Refusing to buy vehicle or body armor
Being responsible with taxpayer dollars: Shoveling duffel bags full of money out of pickups to “private security contractors”
Darcy Burner has already hugged a rabbit. Reichert doesn’t even have a fucking plan to hug a rabbit.
Hmmm … I wonder if that should read,
Darcy Burner has already hugged a rabbit. Reichert doesn’t even have a plan to hug a fucking rabbit.
And yes, I still have my balls, but DOCTOR MENGELE isn’t gonna do any fucking for a while, if ever.
Now we see why Janet S called her boy Sheriff Davie a “bungler.”
22
I wonder if she got kicked off the BIAW payroll for that remark? I haven’t seen her posting here lately …
BIAW-paid trolls … brought to you by your L & I taxes.
I watched the same video while cooking dinner the other night, and I have to say I was genuinely shocked at how Reichert gave the impression that there’s nothing underneath that nice full head of photogenic white hair but mush. His blather about having “put his arm around suspects” (including Gary Ridgeway) to gain their confidence and make them cooperate backfired. Using it as an analogy to political log-rolling in DC and dealing with “being from a 50-50 district” implies that he’s willing to make some phony act of nicey-nicey over anyone and tell them what he thinks they want to hear to get them to do what he wants. His canned blather towards the end about how the “recovering economy” will make everything all better after the present orgy of deficit spending on military pork was pathetic. He seemed to be overjoyed to get away from the podium, and many in the audience looked relieved to have the whole business over with as well.
Maybe the guy’s just lousy in front of large groups of people, but for heaven’s sake, that’s a major part of the job.
Daniel K @ 8: “If you feel that as such he represents the values and issues of concern of the 8th then he will win re-election. However, I don’t think that the majority of residents of the 8th can believe that to be the case based on the facts of his voting record, despite all the attempts to make it out for something it simply isn’t.”
I understand that, but then the flip side of that is how much independence will Darcy Burner show from Pelosi, Coyners, et al? Yes, the 8th is not on the side of the House Republicans but that doesn’t mean that they’ll sign on wholeheartedly to the House Democratic agenda. Being beholden almost exclusively to the party leaders and not your district is the problem; Reichert has his record, what will be Burner’s?
So, when is the story coming about Maria Cantwell and her independent voice? Oh, yeah, that’s different, because she votes however the dem leadership tells her, and that’s a good thing. They aren’t evil incarnate.
Grow up. This is how it is done. The shocked amazement is just insulting.
It is either stand together and get something done, or go off on tangents and be a permenant back bencher, like McDermott.
And, I’d rather have someone with a record of public service and leadership, who might not be as well spoken as desired, than a total unknown who lies on her resume. Darcy might be well spoken, but she only says what her handlers tell her to say. She has no brain of her own – she is the puppet of the dem leadership. And she hasn’t even been elected yet.
The challenge is still there – why should we vote for darcy, other than that she isn’t a repub? I have yet to hear a coherent explanation of why she is wonderful. Instead I get a bunch of paranoid attacks that accuse me of trying to set a trap. I would think that an invitation like this would be embraced. Must be really embarrassing to have a candidate that is just an empty suit, but will be a reliable vote. But, wait -that’s the criticism that Goldy is using against Reichert.
Reichert is a “catch and release moderate”. When the Hastert-DeLay crowd knows they have a bill in the bag (the catch), they “release” their so-called “moderates” to vote the opposite way so it plays well at home.
It’s dishonest. A “catch and release” moderate is a lockstep Republican with a fig leaf of plausible deniability.
Kyle – Valid question. I think that Darcy Burner could be like Jay Inslee. I personally think that’s a good person to be compared to. That’s a voting record that is almost the opposite of Reichert’s.
So the question is, is it one that is closer to where the district is? I believe it is. The 8th really is a Democratic district that hasn’t had good candidates at the Congressional level until now, or hasn’t had a candidate with as much Party support until now. That’s going to make a lot of difference when it comes to getting the message out about Burner.
When it comes to social issues, the strength of the Democratic Party, Burner will be head and shoulders above Reichert. If one looks to the Republican Party for fiscal issues, you’re flat out of luck with the crowd in power today from the Executive branch right through both the Senate and the House in Congress. Fiscal Conservatives have not found a champion in D.C. in the present GOP leadership, and that will either keep them from voting Republican or caused them to consider voting for the alternative. Democrats voting on social issues will not be swayed by Reichert when a true Democrat is available to them to vote for. That leave Independents who polls show aren’t too enthusiastic about what they’re witnessing today from the GOP.
So while, yes, Burner will vote predominently with Democrats on these issues, her vote is probably far more in tune with that of most of the 8th.
Janet, are you talking about the type of harmony and “standing together” we witnessed in Yakima last weekend from the GOP on the immigration plank they erected and walked right out to the end of?
BTW I’m still waiting for someone to tell me what real community service darcy has done – what has she contributed to the local community? Writing checks doesn’t count. I want to know dates of service, amounts raised, action taken.
And what did darcy do in state politics? She claims experience – what a load of BS.
I bet darcy reads this blog. Since there has never been an answer to my questions, this just confirms what I thought – nothing there. Just a pack of “overstatements.”
Daniel – my references are to the national scene, not state or local politics.
George W. Bush
The White House, USA
EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE:
LAW ENFORCEMENT:
I was arrested in Kennebunkport, Maine, in 1976 for driving under the influence of alcohol. I pled guilty, paid a fine, and had my driver’s license suspended for 30 days.
My Texas driving record has been “lost” and is not available.
MILITARY:
I joined the Texas Air National Guard and went AWOL.
I refused to take a drug test or answer any questions about my drug use.
By joining the Texas Air National Guard, I was able to avoid combat duty in Vietnam.
COLLEGE:
I graduated from Yale University with a low C average.
PAST WORK EXPERIENCE:
I ran for U.S. Congress and lost.
I began my career in the oil business in Midland, Texas, in 1975.
I bought an oil company, but couldn’t find any oil in Texas. The company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock.
I bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using taxpayer money.
With the help of my father and our right-wing friends in the oil industry (including Enron CEO Ken Lay), I was elected governor of Texas.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS GOVERNOR OF TEXAS:
I changed Texas pollution laws to favor power and oil companies, making Texas the most polluted state in the Union.
During my tenure, Houston replaced Los Angeles as the most smog-ridden city in America.
I cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas treasury to the tune of billions in borrowed money.
I set the record for the most executions by any governor in American history.
With the help of my brother, the governor of Florida, and my father’s appointments to the Supreme Court, I became President after losing by over 500,000 votes.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS PRESIDENT:
I am the first President in U.S. history to enter office with a criminal record.
I invaded and occupied two countries at a continuing cost of over one billion dollars per week.
I spent the U.S. surplus and effectively bankrupted the U.S. Treasury.
I shattered the record for the largest annual deficit in U.S. history.
I set an economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period.
I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month period.
I set the all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the U.S. stock market. In my first year in office, over 2 million Americans lost their jobs
I’m proud that the members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in U.S. history.
My “poorest millionaire,” Condoleeza Rice, has a Chevron oil tanker named after her. I set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips by a U.S. President.
I am the all-time U.S. and world record-holder for receiving the most corporate campaign donations.
My largest lifetime campaign contributor, and one of my best friends, Kenneth Lay, presided over the largest corporate bankruptcy fraud in U.S. History, Enron.
My political party used Enron private jets and corporate attorneys to assure my success with the U.S. Supreme Court during my election decision.
More time and money was spent investigating the Monica Lewinsky affair than has been spent investigating one of the biggest corporate rip-offs in history.
I presided over the biggest energy crisis in U.S. history and refused to intervene when corruption involving the oil industry was revealed.
I presided over the highest gasoline prices in U.S. history.
I changed the U.S. policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.
I appointed more convicted criminals to administration than any President in U.S. history.
I created the Ministry of Homeland Security, the largest bureaucracy in the history of the United States government.
I’ve broken more international treaties than any President in U.S. history.
I am the first President in U.S. history to have the United Nations remove the U.S. from the Human Rights Commission.
I withdrew the U.S. from the World Court of Law.
I refused to allow inspectors access to U.S. “prisoners of war” detainees and thereby have refused to abide by the Geneva Convention.
I am the first President in history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 U.S. election).
I set the record for fewest number of press conferences of any President since the advent of television.
I set the all-time record for most days on vacation in any one-year period.
After taking off the entire month of August, I presided over the worst security failure in U.S. history.
I garnered the most sympathy for the U.S. after the World Trade Center attacks and less than a year later made the U.S. the most hated country in the world, the largest failure of diplomacy in world history.
I have set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously protest me in public venues (15 million people), shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind.
I am the first President in U.S. history to order an unprovoked, pre-emptive attack and the military occupation of a sovereign nation. I did so against the will of the United Nations, the majority of U.S. citizens, and the world community.
I have cut health care benefits for war veterans and support a cut in duty benefits for active duty troops and their families — in war time.
In my State of the Union Address, I lied about our reasons for attacking Iraq, then blamed the lies on our British friends.
I am the first President in history to have a majority of Europeans (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and security.
I am supporting development of a nuclear “Tactical Bunker Buster,” a WMD.
I have so far failed to fulfill my pledge to bring Osama Bin Laden tojustice.
RECORDS AND REFERENCES:
All records of my tenure as governor of Texas are now in my father’s library, sealed and unavailable for public view.
All records of SEC investigations into my insider trading and my bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.
All records or minutes from meetings that I, or my Vice-President, attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review.
PLEASE CONSIDER MY EXPERIENCE AND MY PARTY WHEN VOTING IN 2006
Janet S…
You think she reads the comment threads? Are you nuts? Hell, I don’t usually read my comment threads. They’re a cesspool.
Trust me, she doesn’t have the time to wade in here.
Janet – Let’s turn your question around and ask why the particular experiences you value would disqualify a candidate – any candidate. That’s the foundation of your concern, yet there have been many great public servants in history that stepped right into prominent leadership positions without any or any significant legislative experience.
Mrs Burner is smart. She’s a quick learner. She’s attuned to the district she hopes to represent. She’s also a strong woman who knows what she wants, and will doggedly pursue it. She’s succeeded at everything she has ever undertaken. She’s personable, intellectually curious, compassionate about the issues military and working class families face because she’s from such a family herself.
If you believe that what matters is years of service, and the amount of lobbyists you can convince to give you money for favors, then go vote for someone like Tom DeLay, if that’s your prerogative, but we’ve had enough of crooks like DeLay and we need more people with the qualities Darcy Burner brings to the position.
I should have of course written above, “Let’s turn your question around and ask why a lack of the particular experiences you value would disqualify a candidate – any candidate.”
Woger Wabbit is bought and paid for with YOUR Tax Dollars.
30 years guv’mint hack attorney on a fat guv’mint pension.
Wabbit made his mark breaking apart families while a DSHS guv’mint hack attorney. What a llllllloooooooooooooooooser Mr. Wabbit is!
Wabbit was a 30-year attorney for the WORST MANAGED AGENCY IN THE HISTORY OF THE STATE!
A mind is tewible thing to waste.
Woger Wabbit hasn’t lost his mind as he never had one to begin with.
#33, you just gave puddybud an erection, and now his sons will suffer. Shame!
Janet S.:
I recall that Darcy was asked about community service at a meeting she was at several months ago, and she actually had a pretty long answer. One thing I remember is that she was a coach at the local YMCA for many years – a volunteer position working with kids. There were several other things she talked about, though I don’t remember them all.
Be careful what assumptions you make – if you harp on a straw man and you’re wrong, you look like an idiot… Like her grades is law school made you guys look.
37
So if I work for the government doing something for the public good, my wages aren’t mine but belong to the taxpayers, but if you work for a private business for the selfish purpose of making the business owner rich, your wages are YOUR money and not the customers’ money? is that how it works? Fuck you.
26
Kyle — I wouldn’t have ANY problem with Darcy signing on wholeheartedly to the Democratic agenda, which, for average American citizens, is infinitely preferable to the GOP agenda.
Tee hee
Janet thinks the campaign will be about Darcy, but it’s about Davie.
The challenge is still there – why should we vote for Sheriff Davie, other than that he is a repub? I have yet to hear a coherent explanation of why he is wonderful. No republican on this board can or will answer that question.
But hey Janet S we’re glad you love bumblers so much!
Why won’t Janet S articulate why we should vote for Sheriff Davie?
Maybe Janet S is embarassed by her bungler candidate? Maybe she’s ashamed that all those poor family members of Green River victims had to endure the unnecessary deaths caused because bumbling Sheriff Davie couldn’t catch the killer?
So Janet can only wait 18 minutes for a response before saying “I’m still waiting”, but now it has been almost 2 hours since I provided one, and she hasn’t responded.
Don’t know why I bothered – it was obviously all wingnut trolling on her part.
[Shrug] with all of the expert advisors at The Stranger giving her free advice, I’m surprised Darcy hasn’t released numbers–poll numbers that is…and I don’t mean some national poll about XYZ preference. I mean a direct runoff between the incumbent and her, if the election were held today, blah, blah, blah.
Besides Leftists at The Stranger, she also has the “nutroots” advising her. Come on people, the last thing Washington State needs is another frumpy liberal woman representing us: Reichert 55% – Burner 45%
So if I work for the government doing something for the public good, my wages aren’t mine but belong to the taxpayers, but if you work for a private business for the selfish purpose of making the business owner rich, your wages are YOUR money and not the customers’ money? is that how it works? Fuck you.
Commentby Roger Rabbit— 6/1/06@ 7:23 pm
Yeah you fucking leach.
Elephant @48,
As far as I know, there’s been no polling yet, but I believe one is coming soon.
But if you think Reichert’s at 55 percent, you don’t know nuthin about politics. I doubt he’d poll over 40 percent right now… maybe closer to 35.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000799.php
Looks like we got another republican crook cheating. All you right wingers must be proud. Your leaders are all crooks!
By the way Janet S hasn’t proven she didn’t rob a bank last week so I assume she did.
“So if I work for the government doing something for the public good”
ahem! Wabbit! You did work for the guvment! Something good! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahha
Make me laugh
You still draw a massive pension from them! Which allows you to sit on this page and spew your crap all day long! Which more than anything explains your sick stance!
Public good! ha! Public waste! Massive taxation! Blowhards!
All I see from you blowhards is massive over taxation (4th highest state taxes in this nation, still never enough), school closures, Feed the Billionare Sports stadiums, Fuck You!
Wabbitt!
You’re full of Shit!
Left @ 45:
Janet S’s job is very simple: To help build up Darcy’s negatives. In order to do that she and her allies have got to keep the focus on Darcy’s alleged shortcomings. At the end of the day it really doesn’t matter what specific complaints they come up with — more important is the constant drip, drip, drip of insinuations.
This is why Janet refuses to acknowledge any answers to her “when did you stop beating your wife” questions. She doesn’t want a real discussion. The demeaning question is merely a rhetorical tool for putting Darcy supporters on the defensive. You could submit a doctoral dissertation on Darcy and Janet would still show up the next day and demand: Why has nobody responded to my questions yet?
Janet is a hack, and should be treated as such.
54
Your insinuations about Janet’s comments tend to show your your ignorance. Factual replies to her comments would be much more appreciated.
Actually, sillyguy, I have repeatedly responded to Janet’s comments and have found that she isn’t at all interested in engaging opinions different from herself. She is clearly her as an operative for the Reichert campaign, because she does not debate in good faith.
Sorry I didn’t respond in the 20 minute time frame allowed. I was actually out volunteering for my public school.
I do not work for the reichert campaign. If you haven’t figured it out, I’m not 100% behind reichert, but will probably vote for him for the exact same reasons all of you will vote for darcy, or would if you could.
Reichert was KC sheriff for many years, and in the public eye. If there was a fatal flaw in this character, it seems like it would have come out in that time. I know there are lots of innunendos about him around here, but so far nothing has surfaced. If it did, and it was more than just a smear job, I can see a lot of repubs abstaining from voting for him.
That’s why I want to know more about darcy. If she does by chance make it into office, I would sure like to know what kind of a person she is. Yes, she is smart. But she doesn’t seem to be able to stick with anything. Character matters as much as views.
I’m glad to hear that she was in the Civil Air Patrol, and that she has volunteered at the YMCA. It still seems pretty thin as evidence that she is ready for prime time on the national scene.
It is unfortunate that she wasn’t able to run at least once for a state or local position, or assume some kind of job that required a regular presence in the public eye. Those who vault past this can be successful, but they can also flame out very quickly. I’d prefer she do her on-the-job training at something a little less critical than the US Congress.
Leave it to a DONK to try and stop an honest Republican servant like Reichert from “keep(ing) the country moving forward with Republican ideals”
The American People love Republican Ideals! Every poll shows that. Not the ones you read in the DONK papers! But the ones that are really papers!
The invisible hand will sweep away all the DONK papers people read everyday, and leave only the HONEST right thinking papers published by the Christian Rev. Sun Yung Moon!!
Leave it to a DONK to not understand that people want their representative to vote with Bush every time!
RUFUSBud – Bush is the selected President!
“I was actually out volunteering for my public school.”
Talk to the hand, Janet! If you do not come up with the $500 you earned on 99, you are gonna get a real “coming to the lord” meeting!
Give me the Benjamin’s baby, or you are never working the “public school” again!
“Character matters as much as views.”
Janet, Please tell us all why?
Many dictators were very charasmatic “characters”, but their “views” killed millions of people.
So, Janet, do you vote “character” or “view”?
Does the word DONK get to you RUFUSBUD? Ahhhh your donk aren’t ya. Hehehehhehe
SO HARRY@9 TELLS US WHAT DARCY HAS DONE AND WHERE SHE HAS BEEN GO AHEAD IVE GOT TWO SECONDS.YOU IDIOT
ROGER FIND A NEW LINE YOUR STUFF IS OLD SHIT .AND WHO WOULD WANT TO MEET A RABBIT WITH NO BALLS LOSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSER.
CHECK YOUR MAIL BOX FOR YOUR GOVMET CHECK.IF YOU CAN WALK THAT FAR.
Janet – Sorry, I’m not going to let you throw out a statement like “she doesn’t seem to be able to stick with anything”. As a frequent reader of these pages and Sound Politics I understand that this comment of yours is a concoction based on the now tired and ridiculous assertion that law courses taken at UDub between the time Mrs Burner left Microsoft and before she filed to run for Congress were somehow an indicator of “not sticking with things”.
Quite the opposite. Taking those courses, and doing quite well in them to boot, educated her about the course of action she had in mind – to serve the 8th, and to do so to the best of her abilities. As she said, if you’re going to be a law maker, good idea to understand the law. This undertaking is ongoing, and with the help of the voters, will culminate in November in her being elected as the first Democratic candidate to represent the 8th District.
I encourage you to actually attend a Burner event to meet her and talk to her if you really want to get to know who she is and what makes her tick. I’ve given you a number of positive character traits beyond her simply being smart. The natural first impression one might have might be to question if she is the right candidate and whether she can do this, but it doesn’t take long after listening to her message, listening to her replies to questions, see her sincerity of purpose, to realize that yes, she is the right candidate and that she can do this.
ROGER SPEAKING OF SPEED BAGS HOWS THE WIFE
I’m skeptical that Janet is not in some fashion linked into the talking points machine of either Reichert campaign or some allied Republican or business organization. Her spin has been too nuanced, and the aggressiveness of her attacks against Darcy don’t jive with someone who is a bystander in this race.
That said, I invite Janet to prove me wrong. Show that you knows how to have an honest debate. That starts by actually listening and responding to fellow discussants rather than endlessly repeating your taunts, a la MTR and his ridiculous chi-squared meme.
DANIEL K WHY DONT YOU SHARE YOUR BAG OF GLUE WITH LEFT TURD.
re 27: That “back bencher” is still in Congress and guess who isn’t and never will be? Salamander Jones!!!
YO, the typical renaissance Republican
I sense some nuance in your posting, Yo.
Polls show America doesn’t care for nuance!
What’s the story on the on the diseased letters that Dashle and the other politician got? I thought that the FBI was going to get to the bottom of that. Wasn’t Dashle involved in that asbestos investigation of Halliburton? The other guy was , too. Military grade Anthrax…
Democrats who barely make a peep as they’re being run over???
Gee whiz!!!!!!! What the heck is going on???!!!??
Jesus, pewma, lets have you recieve RNC Military Grade Anthrax in the mail and make a stink about it!
We have wives and children! Some of these children fetch the mail!
Let us forget the RNC Anthrax already!
We have bigger fish to Impeach.
Janet the Troll @ 31 & 58:
You seem to remember your “game” from a previous Reichert thread a day or two ago (a little more than 20 minutes), but you still haven’t told us what’s so great about Dave “I’ll extend the WA state income tax exemption” Reichert.
I’ll accept your challenge if you first do the same for the “The Sheriff.” You also referenced his experience and voting record – again back it up. Maybe you missed the posts. Go to this page: http://www.horsesass.org/my-co.....php?p=1676 and search for “freek.”
It’s interesting that you spend so much time on Darcy when the Sheriff is the incumbent. The impression you leave is that he is so bad that it’s better to talk about the challenger rather than address his complicity in the mess this admistration has left the country in, beeotch.
No disrespect is meant with the “beeotch,” it’s just there so the sentence doesn’t end in a preposition.
Freek, very well put.
re 53: Government workers on Roger’s level do not recieve Social Security> Their retirement money is taken directly out of their salaries over the course of their careers.
So…………. What was your complaint? Another thing. A person who earns a wage working for a “defense contractor” is in reality on the public dole. All those who do service work for those who get paid by defense contractors are on the public dole. American companies like GM are fdailing because they think and act like Republicans and want taxpayers to bail them out.
The big difference between Progressives and Republicans is that we do not see defense as the PRIME DIRECTIVE. Republicans have been sckered into supporting a useless, moneysucking , upper-class agenda. I think they are jealous of people who can see clearly.
Mario Cuomo once argued that the presidency had largely devolved into playing Mars, God of War. Those who fit that mold are considered strong leaders (e.g., Reagan) and those who don’t (Carter) are viewed as failures.
This image seems to fuse well with the needs of the military-industrial complex. It’s so hard for almost any elected official at the national level to say no to military pork. It’s so terribly addicting even for mainstream Democrats (particularly in swing districts).
So the problem isn’t just the Republican agenda per se, e.g., look at Norm Dicks. Hardly a peacenik commie lover.
We have a “president” ( re. R.Kennedy Jr.’s article in R. Stone ) who is searching , after all these years, for a relative of a huge business partner of his own family who supposedly is responsible for blowing up a few buildings in NY and countless BILLIONS of dollars have been spent in the effort to catch said miscreant ( without success ) but countless billions more must be spent in the “war on terror” to keep us safe?
I’m sorry. I’m just not that stupid.
Are you seeing me as disagreeing with that? I’m not seeing that. I’m just observing that the military-industrial complex has always had at least some bipartisan overtones. Of course, this is partly because of the Republicans’ historic success in charging that any Democrat who didn’t give the defense whores everything they wanted was “soft” on national security. The 1950s left a lasting scar on mainstream liberals that seems to still linger to this day, e.g., the fairly meek response of Congressional Democrats to Bush’s Iraq adventure. Look at the way that Kerry danced around the Iraq question during the 2004 election. It’s very disappointing, but it’s also at least somewhat understandable.
Thus, the schism between “progressive” and mainstream “liberal” to “moderate” Democrats. How this plays out could go a long way toward defining what happens in the 2008 presidential election.
I could die in peace if George W. Bush were in a prison cell.
Ralph Nader’s position is and was that even the mentally slowest voting dolt is ultimately educable given a “worst case scenario”. Which, obviously, is now.
I am beginning to come around to the mainstream position that these apelike creatures who are supposedly our fellow citizens are, in fact, totally and irrevocably ignorant.
So let me get this straight – Janet S wants us to believe we should vote for Sheriff Davie because he was – the Sheriff? WOW! Your standards for understanding a resume seem to dip a bit if the candidate is a rethug! Imagine that. Based on your standards Janet S. all we need to do is come back with “We’re voting for Darcy because she worked at Microsoft.”
And speaking of resumes…this donk Breen who the GOP is sacrificing in the race against Congressman for Life Jim McDermott, let’s look at his resume.
He lives on Capitol Hill. His bio says he’s “director of production operations for an Internet marketing company.”
That’s it? He’s ashamed to even tell us which Internet marketing company? No real background? Janet S I am sure this will have you up in arms given your high standards for truth in resumes….
It would be amusing (and perhaps even revealing) for a college student to do a content analysis of HA after the 2006 election cycle is over. Show how the rhetoric of trolls like Janet evolves over the course of the campaign, and how well it dovetails with the media talking points found elsewhere.
I suspect what they’d find is that Janet S shows the greatest rhetorical independence from standard Republican talking points over issues of least importance to the 2006 campaign machine. On the high-priority issues she talks the same way that Reichert votes. She knows how to play the game.
Sith Lord Cheney @ 33
That’s a post for the ages!
Actually GT if you look at the sum of the posts of the person using the name Janet S you see the trend you noticed but there are others…
1) She often mimics, word for word, whatever talking point (we’d call it lie) that Lush Flimbaugh espouses
2) She often tries multiple lines of attack and abandons those that are quickly debunked and then acts as if she never took that approach
3) She often applies a completely different standard to republicans than she does Dems
4) She occasionally tells the truth, i.e., Sheriff Davie is a bumbler
None of this is surprising to me. Just noteworthy.
85
Indicative of someone who has been posting on political boards for a long time, but nevertheless is an untrained amateur.
Here’s a compelling reason to vote Dave Reichert out of Congress: There’s another Iraq atrocity scandal involving Marines in the news this morning — the third reported in recent weeks — which obviously points to something seriously wrong with the governance of our military actions in Iraq … which will NEVER be investigated or dealt with (i.e., innocent Iraqi civilians will just go on being murdered) as long as REPUBLICANS CONTROL CONGRESS. We’ve got to get these bums out of power, or there will never be anything but more criminal conduct, lies, and coverups. Reichert may not be a bad man per se, but he is enabling these awful crimes by voting for silence, which makes him the worst kind of partisan politician. Since Republicans have completely lost their capacity for self-criticism and self-correction, the only recourse is to remove them all from power.
The only good Republican is a defeated Republican.
But Richard Poop can take comfort in knowing he is a “good” Republican — having been defeated in every race he ever ran in.
BTW, Richard, I voted for your OPPONENT in every one of those races. I mention it to rub your face in it.
Actually, not all defeated Republicans are “good” Republicans. Low Tax Looper, for example, got only 4% of the vote in his last race for public office. But even though he was soundly defeated, he’s still a bad Republican, because he MURDERED his Democratic opponent. Looper’s status as a “bad” Republican is official: he’s serving life without parole in Tennessee.
So, it’s not altogether clear whether Richard is a “good” Republican, a “bad” Republican, or something in-between. That means you’re on probation, Richard. Better behave yourself, or you’ll get a lump of coal again this Christmas.
61
Well, let’s examine this argument by Janet S that “character matters.” Of course, she’s right about that — but when you put her argument in context, it gets blown all to hell.
Some Attributes of Good Character
Honesty
Truthfulness
Compassion
Generosity
Sharing
Thrift
Hard Work
Peacefulness
Some Characteristics of Lack of Character
Deceitfulness
Dishonesty
Greed
Selfishness
Laziness
Aggression
Use of Violence
Infidelity
Now honestly, Janet, how many of these attributes of good character describe most Republicans? Not a single one! Today, the average Republican is a warmonger, torturer, invader, liar, thief, adulterer, bully, and greedy selfish CHEAP LABOR CONSERVATIVE — and is either in jail, under indictment, or under investigation! Ever since the wingnuts took over the Grand Old Party, they’ve blown to hell any notion that Republicans are morally superior to Democrats — or, for that matter, to neo-Nazis. They’re at roughly the same level as the latter, in fact, there’s probably a considerable amount of crossover between the two groups. Not to mention cross-dressing.
Hey Janet, in case you didn’t notice, I just called you a sexually confused nazi.
Here’s another reason to vote Reichert out of Congress: Darcy Burner has already hugged a rabbit, but after two years in congress Reichert still doesn’t even have a plan to hug a fucking rabbit.
Hey Richard, just to clarify something for you, I’m still a fucking rabbit. DOCTOR MENGELE didn’t succeed in cutting off my balls. On the other hand, I’m not so sure about whether he still has any gonads … you see, when he picked me up by my ears, there was a melee — you know, feet and claws flying everywhere — and frankly, I’m not sure exactly what my powerful hind feet with razor sharp claws connected with, but he gave out a pretty good yell.
Richard — in case you’re interested in the gory details, I was aiming somewhat lower than his belly button.
Richard – if you don’t believe I’m still a fucking rabbit, I suggest you take a walk in the park and count all the cute fluffy little baby bunnies you see!!! :D :D :D
Scratch one evil veterinarian who has performed countless MEDICAL EXPERIMENTS on poor innocent bunnies who were thrown in CONCENTRATION CAMPS by the parks department fascists! Maybe he’s still alive, but he won’t be reproducing anymore, at least not until they perfect human cloning.
BUSH ADMIN. BLAMES NYC FOR HOMELAND SECURITY CUTS
According to a New York Times story, the Bush administration says New York City is at fault for a 40% cut in the city’s federal funding for homeland security activities.
The Department of Homeland Security cited, among other things, that the city faxed its application instead of submitting it electronically.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06.....urity.html
and I heard Darcy on the radio.
man, what a waste she is
and that stupid KIRO guy was all buddy buddy. I thought they had to report that in-kind donations ..?
potato head @ 100: why do you call it a donation? The only problem would be if KIRO denied the Sheriff equal time. I doubt he’d request it though given his speaking abilities.
Any specifics from the interview that make you say “what a waste?”
Re: #77…
“Mario Cuomo once argued that the presidency had largely devolved into playing Mars, God of War.”
In the present case, it’s pretty hard not to make some sort of snide comment involving Uranus.