Search Results for: Reichert

Oh man the Ale House is packed.  You’d think there was a championship football game or something.  Maybe I’ll post some observations, maybe I won’t, but if I do, I’ll probably eventually get bored or distracted.

UPDATE [6:07]:
McCain:  “I’ve not been feeling to great about a lot of things lately.”  Huh.  I’m guessing it’s his prostate.

UPDATE [6:10]:
McCain, first to use an antimetabole.

UPDATE [6:15]:
Jim Lehrer sounds downright animated.  (Or perhaps that’s just relative to John McCain.)

UPDATE [6:17]:
John McCain has a pen.  I didn’t know that.  Also, he apparently thinks that the corrupt congressman serving prison sentences are victims of the earmark system or something.

UPDATE [6:20]:
So if Republicans buy McCain’s criticism of Obama for rejecting earmarks only after he started running for president, will they buy Darcy Burner’s criticism of Dave Reichert for his new found (and temporary) anti-earmark religion?  (Oh… and Obama does indeed have prominent ears.  He reminds me a bit of that Vulcan character on Star Trek: Voyager.)

UPDATE [6:26]:
I love the fact that Jim Lehrer is letting the rules slide a bit, and allowing more of a back and forth between the candidates.  This has been one of the better political debate formats I’ve seen.

UPDATE [6:30]:
“The point is…”  How many times has McCain said “the point is” in the first half hour alone?  The point is, if you have to constantly be saying “the point is,” you’re not making your point very well.

UPDATE [6:32]:
When asked about what he plans to cut from the budget, McCain mentioned Boeing.  Needless to say, he got rather loud boos from this partisan Seattle audience.

UPDATE [6:34]:
Obama finally hit the softball on what he wants to cut:  the $10 billion a month we’re spending in Iraq.  Cheers all around.

UPDATE [6:38]:
McCain wants to make sure that we don’t put health care in the hands of the government.  You mean, like Medicare.  (“Keep government’s hands off my Medicare, dang nab it!”)

UPDATE [6:39]:
The dial test people really like the word “orgy”.  It went through the roof.  Now there’s a political platform.

UPDATE [6:43]:
By the way, he didn’t quite say it this time, but every time I hear McCain warn against putting our health care in the hands of “government bureaucrats,” I have to point out that it is already in the hands of insurance company bureaucrats.  A bureaucrat is a bureaucrat is a bureaucrat, and at least theoretically, the government bureaucrats are supposed to work for you rather than the interests of the shareholders.

UPDATE [6:44]:
McCain:  “The next president will not have to decide whether to send the troops into Iraq.”  No… the next president will have to make the decision whether to send troops into Iran.  That’s what I’m afraid of.

UPDATE [6:46]:
Dial test folks really liked Obama crediting the “extraordinary performance of our troops.”  If he can only manage to get “extraordinary orgy of our troops” into a sentence, I think he’ll have this election wrapped up.

UPDATE [6:49]:
Question:  Is McCain’s perpetual shit-eating grin the result of his various surgeries?  His torture at the hands of the Vietnamese?  Or just his personality?  Just curious.

UPDATE [6:52]:
Applause and laughter at CNN’s pan of the two debate watch parties:  the Democratic watch party was younger, multi-ethnic, and engaged… the Republican watch party was a bunch of dour, white old people.

UPDATE [6:54]:
Did McCain just say he knew Alexander the Great?

UPDATE [6:59]:
McCain wants to set the record straight on bombing Iran, and it is true, that he’s never actually bombed Iran.  And if he had tried, he probably would have been shot down.

UPDATE [7:02]:
To his credit, McCain is coming of a helluva lot more coherent than Sarah Palin, and she sets a very high bar.  In limbo.

UPDATE [7:04]:
Are those McCain’s real arms?  Behind that podium he looks like a muppet.

UPDATE [7:06]:
McCain:  “The Iranians have a rotten government, and therefore their economy is rotten.”  So… our economy is rotten, ergo….

UPDATE [7:11]:
What the hell is wrong with McCain’s eyebrows?  It’s like they’re painted on his face.  I know it’s petty, but it’s really distracting me.

UPDATE [7:15]:
In all seriousness, according to the polls, foreign policy is by far McCain’s greatest strength, and while there are no knock out punches or major gaffes, I think Obama is doing very well for himself.  If he can close the gap in this one area, McCain is in trouble.

UPDATE [7:17]:
McCain just got pissed about “my friend Henry Kissinger” and nearly lost it.  Not very presidential, and the dial test folks didn’t like it.  Obama should have gone in for the kill while McCain was on the edge of blowing up..

UPDATE [7:20]:
I look into McCain’s eyes and see three letters:  “LOL”

UPDATE [7:34]:
I don’t know if Obama is winning this debate on points, but he sure as hell isn’t losing it, and as the new kid on the block, that means Obama wins.  I don’t see how truly undecided voters watch this debate and determine that Obama doesn’t have the demeanor, temperament, knowledge and ability to lead on foreign policy issues.  In other words, I don’t see how this makes voters uncomfortable with the notion of Obama as commander in chief.  So yeah… I’m partisan… but I think this is a win for Obama.  And on top of the bad week McCain has had, I think that makes it a loss for him.

UPDATE [7:37]:
McCain:  “Jim, when I came home from prison…”  A last gambit of a desperate man.

Daily Kos just put up its third Hell to Pay poll, and I need all of you to immediately click through and VOTE FOR DARCY!

The winner of tonight’s poll will have an online fundraiser held on Saturday, and last week’s winner, Al Franken, ended up raising over $25,000.  That’s money Darcy desperately needs not only to keep pace with Dave Reichert and the NRCC, but also gobs of “independent” expenditures from the likes of the US Chamber of Commerce.

In a race that’s expected to be excruciatingly close, a couple minutes of your time right now could mean the difference between winning and losing.  So please, vote for Darcy right now!

UPDATE:
It looks like we kicked ass and Darcy won!  Thanks to all of you who cast your vote.

As expected, the Seattle Times editorial board has endorsed Barack Obama for President of the United States, paving the way for endorsements of Republicans Dino Rossi, Rob McKenna, Sam Reed, Allan Martin, Dave Reichert and Cathy McMorris Rodgers, all the while leaving their vaunted bipartisan principles intact.  At least, in their own minds.

In fact, with the possible exception of the race for Commissioner of Public Lands, I can’t imagine a single additional closely contested statewide or federal race in WA state in which the Times endorses a Democrat.

I’d be happy to be proven wrong.  But I wouldn’t bet on it.

The Seattle Times editorial board isn’t particularly impressed by Sarah Palin:

Palin’s selection was a calculated move to lure Hillary Rodham Clinton voters. Palin all but said so herself. But those who were excited about Clinton shattering the glass ceiling will move away from Palin as they learn she opposes abortion in nearly every instance, including cases of rape and incest. She supports abortion only to save the life of the mother. That’s a dramatic position for a lot of voters accustomed to decades of legalized, and safe, abortions.

Once the chatter fades about her skills hunting, fishing and field-dressing a moose, she will not bolster McCain’s standing because her more relevant credentials are weak. She was for the overpriced Bridge to Nowhere, then later opposed it. She opposes congressional earmarks in the abstract. As mayor of tiny Wasilla and later as governor, she was a fan of earmarks.

So what you are saying is that Sarah Palin is far out of step with voters on reproductive rights, and a total hypocrite when it comes to her stated opposition to earmarks.  Hmm.  Sound familiar?

In fact, the Times’ favorite “conscience driven independent,” Rep. Dave Reichert, shares Palin’s extremist opposition to safe, legal abortions, opposes requiring pharmacists to fill legal birth control prescriptions, opposes all federal funding of family planning programs, and only votes to support sex education if it is strictly “abstinence only.”  (Because that worked so well for Bristol Palin.)

Similarly, Reichert was one of our state’s most accomplished practitioners of congressional earmarking, repeatedly bragging about his booty in campaign literature, before conveniently (and hypocritically) announcing a one-year moratorium on his own use of the controversial practice now that he’s in a tight election.

The question is, will the Times ultimately hold Reichert up to the same standards by which they judge Palin?  And if they don’t, does that make them sexist?

Postman follows up on a PolitickerWA report from the Republican convention, noting Attorney General Rob McKenna’s bold prediction that Dino Rossi is dead in the water if John McCain loses Washinton state by double digits.  But I think the more interesting McKenna comments came earlier in the piece.

Speaking at a WA delegation breakfast, McKenna noted the many buttons he’d seen cheering the selection of Justices Samuel Alito and John Roberts to the Supreme Court, calling the buttons “absolutely right”.

“He made two outstanding picks,” McKenna said of the president, “and it makes an enormous difference.”

The difference he referred to was the court’s typical 5-4 split with the alternating ideology of Justice Anthony Kennedy. The attorney general predicted that Justice John Paul Stevens, at age 87, was very likely to leave the court during the next president’s tenure

“You get another Alito-Roberts type in there, that ain’t gonna happen anymore”, he said of Justice Stevens’ typically liberal vote and Justice Kennedy’s swing vote altering the Court’s opinion between liberal and conservative decisions.

“In contrast, think of who Barack Obama is likely to appoint of the Supreme Court,” McKenna proposed, and when the crowd scoffed he answered, “Enough said.”

“Enough said,” indeed.

McKenna is often depicted by our local press as a moderate, even pro-choice Republican, but his comments before friendly crowds indicate that he is anything but.  A McCain/Palin victory would install in the White House the most anti-choice administration in the post-Roe era… an administration intent on making abortion illegal, even in the event of rape or incest, and regardless of the health of the mother.  And this is exactly what McKenna is promoting when he celebrates the appointments of Roberts and Alito.

This is in fact the platform of the Washington State Republican Party, and it is the position supported by Dino Rossi, Dave Reichert, Cathy-McMorris Rodgers and Doc Hastings.   Our state Republican Party and their leaders want to outlaw abortion, under nearly any circumstance, restrict access to birth control, and teach abstinence-only sex education in our schools (which has worked out so well for Bristol Palin).  They want to return us to the era of coathangers, knitting needles and back-alley abortions… yet our local press continues to let them slide away by saying “I’m not running on that issue.”

Of course they’re not running on that issue.  They’re position is both immoral, and counter to the opinion of the majority of voters in Washington state.

The elevation of of Sarah Palin to the national ticket was a blatant and cynical appeal to the GOP’s right-wing fundamentalist base, and as such it is incumbent on the press to start asking the tough questions of all Republican candidates, up and down the ticket.

McKenna, to has credit, was absolutely honest with the WA delegation in St. Paul:  what is at stake here is the composition of the US Supreme Court for decades to come, and whether it will allow our nation’s Christianist minority to interfere with the most personal decisions a family has to make.

Now it is time for McKenna and his fellow Republicans to be just as honest with voters back at home.

President Bush says “the man we need is John McCain.”  Hell, I betcha he’d say we need Dave Reichert and Dino Rossi too.  Remember that on election day… these are the folks President Bush says we need.

There were more than a few miffed members of the press Wednesday evening after being lured to Dave Reichert’s campaign headquarters by a media advisory promising a “major announcement,” only to find delusional fringe challenger Jim Vaughn at the podium, offering his enthusiastic endorsement.

“He’s earned my respect,” Vaughn (drunk on the power that comes from capturing a whopping 3% of the vote) said of the “yes man for George Bush” he previously accused of not having passed “one piece of legislation.”

Um… a “major” announcement…?  Yeah, well, I guess so, that is, if Reichert was referring to Vaughn’s former army rank, but as far as announcements go, this one wasn’t all that.  But then I guess that’s just an indication of how incredibly close Reichert expects this race to be, that he’s now aggressively wooing the crackpot vote.

“I really did want to knock Dave out,” [Vaughn] said. But that was a strategy rather than a disagreement with Reichert’s positions, he said. He figured if he beat Reichert in the primary, he would earn conservative Democratic and Republican votes and easily beat Burner.

Yeah… sure you would, Jim.  Here, have some gum.

Still, every vote counts, so perhaps Reichert is onto a winning strategy that might soon be adopted by other nervous contenders, suddenly transforming the dregs of the ballot into the toast of the power elite.  Familiar names like Stan Lippman, Will Baker and David Blomstrom could find themselves courted by top-two finalists eager to win over the tens of votes each almost-also-ran commands, a loyal political base earned from years of running hopeless campaigns without ever smelling of poop.  (Well, maybe Will.)

Indeed, at this very moment I wouldn’t be surprised if Linda Averill is busy negotiating a workers paradise in exchange for her prized endorsement, while Goodspaceguy Nelson has all but secured federal earmarks to fund the colonization of orbital space.  And then there’s Mike the Mover, the Boss Tweed of perennial crackpottery, who in the context of this closely divided electorate not only has the political muscle to get you to the other Washington, but the truck as well.

Think about it… if the gubernatorial race is anywhere near as close as it was in 2004, Javier Lopez could be the deciding factor, his endorsement bringing with it the small yet highly sought after “I had sex with my high school teacher, and I’m proud of it” vote.

So kudos to Reichert for running such a groundbreaking campaign:  first his pioneering use of web videos, and now his successful outreach to Jim Vaughn, a grassroots champion who by the end of July had nearly come within $1,980,000 of the $1.98 million Darcy Burner has raised thus far.  I’m sure the press is sitting on the edge of their seats waiting for Reichert’s next “major announcement.”

Primary night festivities for me began at Drinking Liberally in Seattle. But “festive” didn’t really describe my mood. Rather I was feeling about 80 years old and in pain owning to a back injury I sustained Monday morning.

At 9:00, I shuffled back to my car and began the slow process of climbing in without the use of specific back muscles. I almost went straight home. But heading back to Redmond, I swung by the Darcy Burner party in Bellevue.

Perhaps it was my heightened sense of senescence, but I ended up in lengthy conversation with an older woman. She had something to get off of her chest and was eager to share it. I didn’t catch her name, but I’ll call her Daisy.

Daisy’s issue was the Bush prescription drug plan that, she felt, had needlessly cost her money. But, more importantly, the plan had made it impossible for some of her less healthy friends to afford the medications they needed. She mentioned cost issues (resulting in maxing out on benefits) and problems that some needed medications were simply not covered by the plan.

Daisy felt strongly enough about the issue that she had talked to Dave Reichert. She reenacted her conversation with Reichert, in which he didn’t seem to “get it.” Rather than listening to the specifics, Reichert simply asserted that she and her friends must be better off under the plan. That’s what it was supposed to do.

When she finished with her story I asked, “So that’s how you became a Darcy Burner supporter?”

Daisy responded emphatically, “No…that’s how I became: ‘Anyone. But. Reichert.'”

Fair enough!

Thirty minutes later, I noticed that Daisy had struck up a conversation with someone else:

In the middle of a busy night filled with media, hugs, handshakes, and cheers, Darcy Burner took some time to listen to Daisy’s story. I’m guessing that’s how Daisy became a Darcy Burner supporter.

On my way out the door, I ran into Darcy and asked, “Can you share a few words with HorsesAss readers about tonight?” And she graciously obliged:

[Audio:http://horsesass.org/wp-content/uploads/darcy19aug2008.mp3]

So that, dear readers, will have to serve as our podcast—let’s call it our micro-podcast—for this week.

Today is Primary Election Day, so if you haven’t already voted, vote.

Yeah, I know, it’s the middle of August, and with our new top-two primary, there aren’t really many meaningful contests on the ballot. But there are a few, and as my mother relentlessly reminds me whenever she sees me wearing my usual shmatas, appearances count.  The Republicans are downplaying expectations in the governor’s and 8th CD races, but they’re also pushing an aggressive get out the vote effort, and you can be sure they’ll claim momentum tomorrow morning if they’re even close.  So help Rossi and Reichert meet expectations by turning out for Gregoire and Burner.

Remember, both Reichert and Rossi support that clueless old guy in the video above, and they’re 100% behind his economic policies.  There are differences between the two parties, and there’s a lot at stake in this election for both Washington state and the nation.

I don’t generally do formal endorsements, but here are a few other top races I have my eye on:

Commissioner of Public Lands / Attorney General
Again, not real contests, as we’ll be getting rematches in November, but again momentum counts, especially as Democrats Peter Goldmark and John Ladenburg make their final fundraising drive post-primary.  Goldmark looks like he’s in a pretty good position to win this thing, putting the Commissioner of Public Lands office in the hands of somebody who actually cares about public lands, and Ladenburg is a dynamic public speaker who could certainly give McKenna a run for his money… if he can manage to raise enough money to get his message before voters.  Vote for Goldmark and Ladenburg.

Initiative 26: “The PVR Incumbency Protection Act”
Initiative 26 claims it would make King County Council, executive and assessor positions nonpartisan, when in fact all it will do is remove partisan labels from the ballot, thus giving voters less information with which to make their choices.  For example, if it passes (and it probably will), Councilmember Pete von Reichbauer will still be a Republican… he just won’t have to say he’s one in his literature, on his advertising and on the ballot.  That’s great for PVR, as it makes it easier to win election in a district that is steadily trending Democratic, but I don’t see how it makes the Council operate any better.  I-26 is bullshit.  Vote no.

Supreme Court:  Mary Fairhurst
Let’s get this race over with by giving Justice Mary Fairhurst the 50% plus one she needs to retain her seat.  I’ve got nothing against her opponent Michael Bond—he’s been HA’s most loyal advertiser this year, and seemed like a nice enough guy when he stopped by DL a couple weeks ago—but he’s given us no reason to toss out Fairhurst, who has proven to be one of the most even handed and legally competent justices on the bench, despite the Seattle Times’ anti-government ravings.  And… well… she’s a family friend, one of the nicest and most down to earth Supreme Court justices you’ll ever meet.  Vote for Mary Fairhurst.

King County Superior Court Position 22:  Rebeccah Graham
Hell, I’m no lawyer, so when I’ve got no idea who to vote for in judicial races, I usually ask my lawyer friends (well, the ones I respect), and that means I usually consult with Becca.  (I haven’t asked, but I’m pretty sure she’d suggest herself in this race.)  But I’m biased, so listen to the Seattle P-I:  “Graham has a diverse background, calm demeanor, passion for the law and has six years of experience as a pro tem judge. All make her an excellent candidate.”  What they said; vote for Rebeccah Graham.

UPDATE:
Dan Savage writes:

you’re going to ignore the commissioner of public urination race?!?!

I assume he means the Superintendent of Public Instruction, since I already mentioned Commissioner of Public Lands, in which case, yeah, vote for Randy Dorn, even though it’s another one of those meaningless exhibition bouts.  For eight years I’ve watched the emphasis on WASL transform my daughter’s classroom into an elementary school equivalent of a Stanley Kaplan prep course.  Anybody but Bergeson.

It’s not something the campaign likes to talk about, but when Darcy Burner first started pushing her Responsible Plan to end the war in Iraq, the folks at the DCCC weren’t exactly supportive. Sticking your neck out on a controversial issue like that is just not the sort of thing that challengers are supposed to do, so you can be damn sure that the DCCC didn’t encourage any of Darcy’s colleagues to sign on. And yet, over 50 fellow challengers did anyway.

And now we House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Stefan’s girlfriend) not only recording a video in support of Darcy, but mentioning the plan by name.

You want a guy with great hair and big biceps representing you in Congress, faithfully supporting the Bush policies on Iraq and the economy? Vote for Dave Reichert. But if you want a smart, energetic representative, willing and able to challenge the establishment in both parties, and still come out on top, your only choice is to vote for Darcy Burner.

Sure, I suppose there is a sizable chunk of voters out in Washington’s 4th Congressional District who fully understand that Rep. “Doc” Hastings isn’t really a doctor, but despite persistent claims on his resume that he attended both Central Washington University and Columbia Basin College, it turns out Hastings isn’t even a college graduate, a biographical tidbit the local news media apparently never thought relevant, but which screamed out to Jimmy at McCranium after reading news accounts of a commencement speech Hastings recently gave at CWU:

“I remember the winter,” said Hastings. “It got to 23 below in Ellensburg one day — and that alone could be reason enough to leave college. But, no in reality my grades were less than stellar and I chose to leave school after the fall quarter. I ended up in California for several years, where I met my wife, before returning to Pasco to run our family business.”

Yeah, nothing makes one prouder of the four years of hard work and thousands of dollars of student loans one just spent earning a college diploma than a commencement speech given by a US Congressman without one. But then, I guess you can forgive the folks at CWU for choosing a college dropout as their commencement speaker when Hastings has done such a masterful job of obscuring his lack of a formal education.

(Hastings opponent, George Fearing, by the way, has a BA in Business Administration from Walla Walla University and is a graduate of the University of Washington Law School. Fucking elitist.)

It is interesting to note that all six of WA’s House Democrats have earned post-graduate degrees (McDermott and Baird can even claim to be actual “doctors”) while Cathy McMorris-Rodgers is the academic superstar of the Republican delegation, earning a four-year BA from an unaccredited Christian college and an EMBA from the UW. For his part, Dave Reichert has a two-year AA degree from a small Christian college (at least it’s accredited) and… well… that’s it. (By comparison, Darcy Burner has a degree in computer science and economics from some podunk school called “Harvard” or something.)

Not to be an academic snob or anything, but well, I am, and while I’d be the last to claim that a prestigious degree or even a college education is a prerequisite for success in life, it does tell you something about the person… something Hastings went to lengths to hide in his earlier runs for Congress. So you’d think the local media might have remarked on Hastings’ remarkable lack of education… but apparently, they were just as uncurious as he was.

I’ll be filling in for Dave Ross this morning from 9AM to Noon on News/Talk 710-KIRO. I’ll post details of today’s lineup, as we put it together.

9AM:  Spokane Gambling compact… man does the press have this story wrong.

10AM:  Does Obama have a problem with women voters?  For that matter, does Gregoire and Burner?  Democratic consultant Cathy Allen shares her take on the top elections.

11AM:  Abortion.  Recent polls show Dave Reichert getting 37% of pro-choice voters, Dino Rossi 32%.  Are voters simply unaware of the candidate’s positions, or do they just not care?

One more sign of the favorable political climate facing Democrats this cycle is the sudden reversal of Republicans’ formerly unassailable fundraising advantage in districts nationwide. And we’re not just seeing the inevitable impact of Democratic incumbency here; according to an analysis released today by CQ, of the best-funded House challengers this cycle (as measured by cash on hand), nine of the ten top spots are held by Democrats.

And who should we find near the top of the list, in position number three?

3. Darcy Burner, Democrat, Washington’s 8th ($1.2 million). Burner, who was formerly employed by Microsoft, is taking on two-term Rep. Reichert ($916,000) in a suburban Seattle district in which she came within three percentage points of unseating the congressman in 2006. Burner’s challenge is one reason why Reichert is among the most vulnerable Republican incumbents; so too is the likelihood that his district will back Barack Obama over John McCain for president. CQ Politics Race Rating: No Clear Favorite.

Burner is also one of the few challengers on the list with a substantial cash on hand advantage over the incumbent… a margin that I expect to substantially widen at the end of this month’s pre-primary reporting period. And as CQ notes, this isn’t the only advantage Burner is likely to have come November:

Some of these Democratic challengers may also benefit from added assistance from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the campaign arm of House Democrats that has tens of millions of dollars more than its partisan counterpart, the National Republican Congressional Committee, to spend on television ads and other campaign communications.

The DCCC has already booked a million dollars worth of TV ads in WA-08 this fall. No word yet of an NRCC ad buy on Reichert’s behalf.

Obviously, Burner’s hard fought fundraising advantage puts her in a better position to win this November than she was heading into the 2006 election, but it also tells us a bit about the relative support of the two candidates. According to OpenSecrets.org, Burner and Reichert have raised similar amounts in-district and in-state, but the real disparity comes when looking at individual vs PAC contributions. Thus far Burner has raised 84% of her funds from individual contributors, a constituency that provides only 59% of Reichert’s funds. That’s a huge difference, and a disparity that’s likely to grow between now and November.

It’s gonna be a nail-biter, but if I were Reichert I’d be pretty damn worried.