April 12, 2006
Darcy Burner target of campaign finance complaint

The Washington State Republican Party has filed a formal complaint with the FEC alleging that the Darcy Burner campaign has committed a number of federal campaign finance violations.

This complaint paints a picture of a campaign that is unable to comply with federal election rules and regulations.
Funny, I had just discovered Darcy Burner's wishlist on Amazon.com. Among the items that she desires but hasn't received: A book about political campaigns called "No Place for Amateurs"

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at April 12, 2006 10:06 AM | Email This
1. Welcome to the show, Darcy.

Posted by: Darth Voter on April 12, 2006 10:21 AM
2. A complaint about alleged campaign finance violations filed by the Republican party?

Gee, I wonder if this could be a campaign tactic by a party desperate to slow Burner's momentum?

Posted by: wayne on April 12, 2006 11:05 AM
3. Isn't the Internet a wonderful invention?

Be sure to write to Al Gore and thank him.

Posted by: South County on April 12, 2006 11:05 AM
4. Slow Burner's momentum? I didn't notice that she had any.

Posted by: Me on April 12, 2006 11:22 AM
5. Me, keep not paying attention. When she wins in November remember your head in the sand ways.

Posted by: Lenny on April 12, 2006 11:26 AM
6. I wouldn't complain too much about violations of the campaign finance law, at least this early. That is, I won't because it is difficult enough to get people elected with the politician selling their soul to lobbyists, marketers, etc.

Posted by: swatter on April 12, 2006 11:34 AM
7. wayne & Lenny,

Why are you voting for Darcy Burner?

I'm voting for Dave Reichert because of his voting record in Congress, his decades of dutiful and humble service as Detective and Sheriff in King County, and his service in the Air Force Reserve. Oh - he also put away the worst serial killer in U.S. history, in case you hadn't heard.

Darcy Burner is going to get pummeled. Momentum? None of my coworkers even know her name, and I work in Bellevue. But I'll remember your prediction. Are the Mariners going to win the World Series this year too?

Posted by: Larry on April 12, 2006 11:42 AM
8. I think you guys should have sat on this for, say, three months or four.

This is a bit early and the Democrats may now have a primary race on their hands.

Just saying...

Posted by: A Watchdog on April 12, 2006 11:59 AM
9. Nothing to see here...move along.

Posted by: Palouse on April 12, 2006 12:01 PM
10. Hi there Larry - I haven't decided on who I'm voting for, but Reichert's voting record isn't something he can be too proud of (and having a voting record will be as detrimental to him as it might be helpful), and the district is clearly moving left which makes his chances harder. Reichert voting against the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act was deeply offensive to me, so I'm leaning toward voting against Reichert, and I think many will be.

People will hear about Burner in due time. The year is young.

Posted by: Lenny on April 12, 2006 12:06 PM
11. Wayne:
Well, who did you expect to file the complaint? The state Democrat party? Any old excuse, huh? Get a grip.

Posted by: katomar on April 12, 2006 01:10 PM
12. Oh, the dreamers! Lenny, we appreciate your optimism...blind party loyalty totally lacking objective thought or critical analysis is what makes America's two party system work. Somewhere on the otherside of the aisle, you have a counterpart hard at work to elect Katherin Harris to the Senate.

Darcy Burner's operation is quite obviously amateur hour and will make a nice pun when it crashes and burns.

She couldn't win if every single P.I. columnist bought a vacation home in the District and registered their garderners and expat beltway pals to vote...

By the way, give my best to Squiggy.

Posted by: Chris M on April 12, 2006 01:37 PM
13. Lenny,

When the best you can say about voting for Darcy is "I'm voting against Reichert", well, that says it all!

Obviously, it's either "I'm voting for Reichert" or "I'm voting against Reichert" - I've neither seen nor met nor heard anyone voting FOR Darcy!

And we all know how well "I'm voting against President Bush" worked out! Ha ha ha. You never win by voting against someone. You never win by mounting a hatred campaign (not that you were).

Posted by: Larry on April 12, 2006 01:51 PM
14. Larry - I think my comments are being mischaracterized. I'm sounding a warning, and the way things are heading Darcy Burner will win in November. This isn't a matter of my optimism, or blind loyalty, it is looking at the lay of the land and how Reichert is going to be up against it after the smoke clears and the people here start realizing that Burner is going to give him a tough time on the issues that matter to the voters in the 8th.

Unfortunately Stefan's eagerness to find dirt on Burner is only backfiring. These "issues" are not going to harm that campaign, but more people will start hearing about her without her having to spend any money to get her name out. The fund raising gap is already narrowing.

Would I like to vote for Reichert? Sure. I have my own issues with doing so. Burner offers a compelling alternative to me, and clearly to others. You may not know anyone that would vote for Burner, and I don't know the type of company you keep, but I know a lot of people who would, or probably would based on what I know about them, and Reichert has weakened himself by his voting record and his unfortunate association with a GOP that is frankly self-destructing it is frightening.

Posted by: Lenny on April 12, 2006 02:34 PM
15. Lenny:

You said: "I'm leaning toward voting against Reichert, and I think many will be." How can that comment be mischaracterized? Especially when....

You haven't given a SINGLE FACT-BASED REASON to vote FOR Darcy Burner! "Burner offers a compelling alternative to me, and clearly to others." Oh, really? And what else??

You stated "it is looking at the lay of the land and how Reichert is going to be up against it after the smoke clears"...Wow, tell me more!

Who's going to vote for Burner? According to you, "I know a lot of people who would, or probably would based on what I know about them". Wow, people who would probably vote for her based on what you know about them when you can't tell me what you know about her!!

Yes, I'm making fun of your meaningless, pie-in-the-sky platitudes, Lenny. All I've heard about Darcy Burner is that she offers 'a compelling alternative'. To what? An experienced, well-respected incumbant? Whatever.

Darcy's platitudes will be pummelled by Reichert's experience. You heard it here first. Perhaps you'd like to have a beer and watch their first debate together? It'll be like watching a train wreck, and I'll be teasing you then, too, so maybe you should decline. If, of course, you're old enough to drink.

Posted by: Lenny on April 12, 2006 02:47 PM
16. That last comment above was by me.


Oops, I got carried away and posted your name rather than merely addressing the comment to you.

My apologies!

Posted by: Larry on April 12, 2006 02:49 PM
17. Larry - make fun of what I've said all you like. It changes nothing. For Reichert to pummel Burner in a debate he first has to show up at one. The last campaign showed him quite unwilling to expose his debatable debating prowess, so we'll see if he has the courage this time.

As for experience, Reichert obviously shows he has little at times as he blunders with working the process. A little over one year of experience is certainly nothing on par with Jennifer Dunn type experience. Don't over play it.

People will vote on the issues. Burner doesn't have to demonstrate experience so much as she has to have the position on the issues people in the district prefer. At this point on the major issues she does: stem cell research, energy independence, Iraq war, ANWR, jobs. Reichert is viewed as a rubber stamp congressman despite an occasional "independent" vote.

Meanwhile you say you don't know anyone who would vote for her. Then expand your circle a little.

Anyway, we can go on and on. You've said your bit and I'm tried to say mine. We'll just have to see how things play out.


Posted by: Lenny on April 12, 2006 03:16 PM
18. Lenny-
Darcy Burner is a bad liar and a bad driver.
All of her resumes and past representations about herself will be turned upside...
The way she has started with a BS ad she had to pull along with questionable representations about her law school experience and other resume issues...............
My guess is she will end up stepping down and guys like you will look like the KLOWNS you are.

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on April 12, 2006 03:40 PM
19. Lenny -

"A little over one year of experience is certainly nothing on par with Jennifer Dunn type experience. Don't over play it."

Ummm...there are people in this world, Lenny, who value Dave Reichert's DECADES of public service, compared with Darcy Burner's...ummm....ZERO years of experience in being a public servant.

"Meanwhile you say you don't know anyone who would vote for her. Then expand your circle a little."

Let me clarify - I don't know ANYONE who will vote for Darcy Burner who wouldn't vote for a warm body with a (D) behind their name - you included! Your syntax and the way you state your positions make it clear that you're not independend - you're a Democrat and/or a Liberal (despite what you may think).

There's nobody voting for Darcy because she's Darcy. And that's why she won't win. Period.

Posted by: Larry on April 12, 2006 04:45 PM
20. So lenny eschews any notion of party loyalty, but demonstrates that he would vote for a three day old ham sammich (as long as it was dressed with a "D").

So lenny, does your mama write your vote cribsheet out for ya?

Posted by: alphabet soup on April 12, 2006 05:49 PM
21. Lenny, I appreciate your level headed comments. It's always nice to hear another view point, but when people like ivan post the most charitable thing that I can say is that he's unhinged.

But I must disagree with your assessment of Darcy's chance against Rep Reichert. Yes, the district is trending left. But if the seat is truly in play why couldn't the Dems come up with someone more qualified that Darcy? Where are the Dems from the state House or Senate? Isn't there at least one Dem in the 8th district from the WA Senate that's not up for re-election? One could run against Reichert and if didn't win would still have a job in Olympia.

In 2004 Dave Ross had great name recognition, his own talk show, and received less than 47% of the vote. Darcy inflates her resume, has possibly violated campaign finance laws, and is so green (inexperienced) that it's like watching a train wreck.

Look at what happened in CA-50. Duke Cunningham is a felon in jail. For all that's going wrong for the Rs, one would think that the D's candidate would have a great chance to win; the district is much like our 8th, trending more liberal. But the D's candidate is in a runoff. She may still win, but it's not the slam dunk many thought it would be.

Darcy Burner is toast! She'll be lucky to break 45% of the vote.

Posted by: Obi-Wan on April 12, 2006 08:04 PM
Post a comment

Email Address:



Remember info?