Here's how Democratic congressional candidate Darcy Burner describes herself on her campaign website: Along with the thoroughly debunked claim that she was an "executive at Microsoft", she also claims to be a "community leader" and "active in her community".
The strongest claim of "community leader" is what is described in various press reports as "president of the Ames Lake Community Club" and "President of the Ames Lake Neighborhood Association". I gather the latter report got the name wrong and there is only one Ames Lake organization of which she was/is president. Its official name seems to be the Ames Lake Community Club (see here, here and here. Its license as a Washington corporation expired earlier this year)
I have the following questions:
1) What issues does the Ames Lake Community Club concern itself with?This is relevant to her campaign, because as far as I can tell, her leadership of the Ames Lake Community Club is her experience which is most similar to, although hardly on the scale of, representing a district in Congress. I'm sending these questions to the Burner campaign and I'll post their response, if any, in full. Any readers who know Darcy Burner from the Ames Lake community and wish to provide details about her leadership, please email me: theshark at usefulwork dot com. Requests for confidentiality will be respected. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at June 06, 2006 11:50 AM | Email This
2) What are the exact dates of Burner's tenure as president?
3) What did she promise to accomplish at the outset of her term?
4) What has she actually accomplished?
5) How do members of the club evalute her performance as president?
She also claims experience in state politics. So far nothing on that front either. I know she is buddies with some legislators, but that hardly qualifies.
The woman is nothing but fluff, but it will probably work for her because this district wants a reliable dem vote and doesn't care who gives it.
Posted by: Janet S on June 6, 2006 12:00 PMThe key words are President and Community.
The rest is irrevelant.
Posted by: JCM on June 6, 2006 12:39 PMIt's telling that the most vocal support for Burner has not come from any adherents inside the district but rather from "206ers" in Seattle. This is not because of any particular goodwill that these Seattle bloggers have for people living in Covington or Buckley. Rather it's because Goldstein's own congressman has been relegated as an irrelevent member of the minority party in DC.
All they care about is getting their own guy back in power and chairing a congressional committee, which is a feat that Dave has already accomplished just as a freshman.
This political algebra does not add up for Eighth Congressional district voters and I think the majority of us are able to see through this rather transparent scheme.
Don't the dims have a reliable RAT voter with the "Sheriff?"
I read right here, Reichert voted 54% or more with the RATS during his first term.
Reichert stopped by Stuart Anderson's ranch and rustled up a bunch of red meat for the base in Yakima at the convention. He's feeling some heat it appears.
Posted by: voter on June 6, 2006 12:47 PMDarcy has no track record, no indication that she can do anything other than vote the party line. She will be a back bencher, because who is going to champion someone with no resume? Reporterward is right-her support is based on being "not-reichert", and comes primarily from the other side of the lake.
It is curious that she is attracting national attention. They must be desperate, because she really has nothing to offer.
Posted by: Janet S on June 6, 2006 01:01 PMWhat an elitist, smarmy snob.
Posted by: Cheryl on June 6, 2006 01:12 PMHow do you have any idea what you are getting? First big test, what will she do? Run from the room crying? Got any proof that she could handle a crisis? No? I thought not.
Posted by: Janet S on June 6, 2006 01:26 PMRidgeway is never going to be a free man as long as he lives. That is hardly "letting him off". Yes, he deserved the death penalty... but it would have been an unbeleivably long, drawn out process, and Reichert and the prosecuter didn't want to put the nearly 50 families through it. Plus, there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute him for more than eight or so of the murders. By letting him cop a plea, he confessed to all the ones in King County... including a few they hadn't linked to him... giving resolution and closure to all of those families. Would you rather him sit on death row for years with convictions for eight murders that he fought, or sit the rest of his life in prison with confession to almost fifty. Yeah, Ridgeway really got off alright.
Oh, and tracking down Pelosi and returning her expensive shoe she lost during an emergancy evacuation isn't exactly creepy.
Posted by: Mike H on June 6, 2006 01:30 PMWell if you only read HorsesAss perhaps you might think that. I look forward to casting my ballot in support of Darcy Burner as my new congresswoman. She represents my views on the issues that most concern me. No other candidate running for the position even comes close.
Posted by: Daniel K on June 6, 2006 01:36 PMOne can argue the merits of either candidates poistions, past experiences, etc. but it's far from typical for a candidate with as little experience as Darcy Burner to go straight to the US House. Not impossible, but not typical.
In fact, if anything, this seems to be the Dem strategy. They like the fact that she is below the radar. No voting record. An attractive female. Well educated, etc. All great qualities for someone who is being groomed to spout the party line, and has little say in the matter. It's sort of like American Idol. If you win, are you going to refuse the contract handed to you by top industry moguls when you have no prior experience and no other leverage? Of course not. To continue the analogy, Burner is not a talented singer songwriter. She's just someone who has enough going for her, is opposite a relatively weak Republican candidate, and is more than willing to fully regurgitate the party line of her handlers. She is really the ideal Dem candidate. It's a good strategy to use young, under the radar candidates, but it only works in very blue cities.
What's for sure is that all of Stefan's questions are absolutely legitimate. Goldy is asking all kinds of questions about Reichert as he should. It's interesting, today's Bush Deranged Dems really believe that Repubs are not allowed to question their candidate, but they should be able to grill the Republican candidate. It's laughable.
So Darcy Burner and other Ames Lake and 8th CD residents, what's the scoop?? Is Darcy a strong presence in your district that you've known for years as a community leader? Or is she just a pretty face that's trying to win a recently hatched campaign and that you'd never heard of before January?
Voters of the 8th will ultimately make the call. I'd really like to hear from some of them and not from the troll commenters and Nutrooters like Goldy who would agressively back even a trained monkey as long as she was a card carrying progressive.
Posted by: Jeff B. on June 6, 2006 01:36 PMUnlike john, I understand the difference between scratching an itch, and digging myself another a$$hole...
Posted by: alphabet soup on June 6, 2006 01:44 PMYes, we will make the call. Do you have an 8th District vote?
As for troll commenters who would aggressively back even a trained monkey well you and Janet would know what that's like what with your experience doing it over at HA and other sites in support of The Decider and The Sheriff.
Posted by: Daniel K on June 6, 2006 01:47 PMI've got issues with Reichert. Frankly I'd like to see a much stronger candidate. But it's not my call. Name me a time when HA did not support a Nutroots Progressive candidate?
SP has been anything but kind to Republicans like Reed who won't do their jobs. Partisan, sure, but way more rational than HA.
Posted by: Jeff B. on June 6, 2006 02:01 PMShe's a citizen of this country and resident of the district. That gives her the right to run. In our basic 2 party system only she and Reichert will be on the ballot. From my discussions with her and review of her platform and viewpoints, as compared to her opponent, Reichert, she's taken the stances that have earned her my vote. Reichert meanwhile has had two years to do so and has failed to be much more than a rubberstamp for Bush policies, having voted on the key votes with his GOP handlers 94% of the time.
This isn't a race where the candidate who can do the most push ups wins, this is about the issues, and which side of them you stand on. As for her preparation for the role, I am confident that she has the necessary intellectual and persuasive qualities needed to do the job.
Meanwhile Jeff B. if you'd like to dismiss my voice as a non-rational, unbelievable voice that's your prerogative, but I think that those that are honest with themselves here, after they've had their "fun" attacking those of us here that offer alternative views on the issues than the typical self congratulatory babble, will see that regardless of whether or not you agree with my opinions, I've predominently presented rational and backed up commentary. If you want to further verify my qualifications to present rational commentary you can read my 400 hundred plus blog entries.
Now if you can find others that better fit your criteria for debate and discussion, with assurances that they're not just another wingnut in disguise, and a broad knowledge of their stance on many issues, go right ahead.
As a resident of the 8th, I feel I have a perspective on what my neighbors and community want in their legislative leadership, and while Dave Reichert appears to be a nice guy, and has served honorably as Sheriff, as a politician he's not representing my community's concerns and views and Darcy Burner will.
Posted by: Daniel K on June 6, 2006 02:29 PMJust a little summary of the lack of evidence on the Green River Murderer.
March 3, 1983 Ridgway is picked out of a line up for the first time by a prostitute.
May 4, 1983 A pimp identifies Ridgway's truck on his own and calls the police to report it.
Nov 1, 1983 A friend of one of the victims, picks Ridgway out of a photo line up.
Feb 3, 1984 A prostitute contacts the task force and reports on Ridgway.
April 12, 1984 Ridgway is interviewed again by the taskforce and admits to seeing and "dating" many of the victims.
April 18, 1984 Richert uses Psychics to try to find killer and bodies.
Nov 29, 1984 A prostitute reports that she has been violently assulted. Ridgway is identified as the attacker.
Aug 12, 1986 A prostitute identifies Ridgway as the "last date" of her friend.
Jan 1987 A boyfriend of a victim identifies Ridgway from a photo line up but can't be 1000% sure.
Nah, there was not enough evidence.
That's just a few highlights, the real story is truly eye opening. Including the fact that Ridgway was arrested for soliciting a prostitute EVEN AFTER he was identified by DNA that he was the Green River killer.
Just had another idea, GWB should use his incredible ability to pick competent excutives and select Dave Reichert as the nation's top cop after he loses to Darcy in November or nominate him now and save him the ego hit of a loss.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 02:52 PMSo, your criteria, and Burners qualifications are that she will "rubberstamp for DNC policies, having voted on the key votes with her DEM handlers 94% of the time"?
I read her page and it sounds like it came straight from the DNC. I didn't see any specifics about how her past experience would make her a better representative in Congress.
"From my discussions with her and review of her platform and viewpoints, as compared to her opponent, Reichert, she's taken the stances that have earned her my vote" - Which stances? What viewpoints are important enough to make someone vote for her?
Posted by: SouthernRoots on June 6, 2006 02:58 PMDanielK brings out a point that really frosts me- both parties. It takes so much money to run these elections- $1 million or more- that the parties do much of the donating by hook or crook- union donations coordinated with headquarters or corporate donations, etc.. Once the person gets elected he is indebted to the party.
Now, you do not get independent thinking- only group thinking. Big problem.
Daniel, a liberal, doesn't see any good in Reichert, a Republican. However, he likes Burner with her one sentence readbites that lets Daniel know she is one of him. But, her readbites have no substance. I don't know how Daniel can like Burner based on fact but only on what he perceives she stands for. His perception and wishes are likely to be different from the real Burner.
Still, any trained monkey can be in the US House of Representatives because most of them all vote party line. I think monkeys can do that.
Someone here or there said Reichert got a chairmanship in his first term. Now, that is something.
Posted by: swatter on June 6, 2006 03:10 PMI think Dave did the right thing here.
Posted by: blah on June 6, 2006 03:20 PMI'll try to be more convincing I'm just getting started and it's a long way until November. Pass along any pointers on potential improvements. I'll be fine tuning the website now that things are starting to finally heat up, and removing most of the non-Reichert stuff, until now I basically just write when the Republicans have finally pissed me off so bad i can't help it - with the latest being the inability of the law and order party to know the difference between Illegal and legal.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 03:21 PM"As I said, Dave Reichert appears to be a nice guy. Those that know his temperment better see a different side of him."
The same can be said of Maria Cantwell - she's a witch. If you've met McGavick, you know that he's the opposite - a genuinely nice guy. Both of these personalities have been well documented, Cantwell's witchiness confirmed by her own staff.
If personality is important to you, DK, I assume you'll be voting for McGavick, right?
John McDonald,
Take your tripe elsewhere. Reichert didn't let Gary Ridgeway off - he convicted him. If it weren't for Reichert's decision, Ridgeway wouldn't even be convicted yet. He'd still be in court, and that case would be costing King County taxpayers tens of millions of dollars.
Apparently you'd like Ridgeway to be free right now, with the state spending all those millions just to convict of six or eight (maybe) murders and putting the families and the public through all that misery.
Me? I'm happy that:
1. Gary Ridgeway is convicted and in prison until he dies;
2. Forty-eight families now have closure, rather than 6 or 8, and none had to go through the horror of a trial; and
3. The state saved tens of millions of dollars in the process.
Dave Reichert deserves a high-five for that work!!
Posted by: Larry on June 6, 2006 03:24 PMGood luck with your 'I hate Dave Reichert! Darcy isn't Dave!' campaign.
I remember the 'I hate George W Bush! John Kerry isn't George Bush!' campaign from a few Novembers ago.
I remember that Kerry got trounced by 3 million votes, too.
You'll never win with hate. But feel free to try!
Posted by: Larry on June 6, 2006 03:27 PMReichert is a typical liberal. Opposed to the death penalty for mass murders but for the death penalty for people without living wills in which case they should die, government employee all his life (so he's your guy in November). The Democrats should be thrilled with him. In fact, I'm trying to think of a single thing that a Democrat wouldn't like about him other than he is a Republican and a big spender -- help me out folks.
Darcy at least has consistant values and seems more traditionally fiscally conservative.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 03:29 PMNope. Never said that.
"From my discussions with her and review of her platform and viewpoints, as compared to her opponent, Reichert, she's taken the stances that have earned her my vote" - Which stances? What viewpoints are important enough to make someone vote for her?
Her position on the Iraq war, recognizing that this was a war that was based on false pretenses, but realizing we need a real plan that brings the troops home. Reichert supports the status quo and Bush's stance that that's a problem for the next President. Given Burner's background (she grew up in a military family and her brother fought in the Iraq war) she has perspective not even Reichert has.
Her position regarding an energy solution and an "Apollo" policy that really nurtures solving our oil dependency problems through innovations in science and technology.
Her position regarding the national debt and deficit. People like John McDonald, fiscal conservatives, are apoplectic about this administration's policies and the GOP support for them. Burner would be against tax cuts for the wealthiest, and tax fairness for the working and middle class, and the poor.
Her position on ethics and accountability. She pledges to be open about all her meetings with lobbyists. Reichert is from the same party that gave us "Do Nothing" Hastings.
Speaking of doing nothing, Dave Reichert has a plum position on a Homeland Security sub-commission, yet he has done nothing with it and ignored the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. Burner pladges to implement as many of those recommendations as possible.
Darcy Burner supports stem cell research and Reichert doesn't.
She supports a woman's right to choose. Reichert doesn't.
And so on, and so on.
The fact that fiscal conservatives find Burner's positions better than Reichert's is an indication to me that Burner's appeal is pretty wide. On the one hand she appeals to social liberals and on the other hand she appeals to fiscal conservatives. I would generally describe myself as a social liberal fiscal conservative, and I think that most of the residents of the 8th would too. Those that wouldn't will still see enough positive stances from Burner to make her more appealing than Reichert IMO.
Posted by: Daniel K on June 6, 2006 03:58 PMShe bought into Ames Lake May 7th 2002, public record. So she has been here a little over 4 years. She expressed her support of a fast track citzenship for illegals on the Dave Ross Radio Show about three weeks ago. Since she is running for National Office, we could care less about the State income tax, but since you want to know, ask her. She claims to be a big Dave Ross supporter, and he is for it.
Posted by: Smokie on June 6, 2006 03:58 PMI would argue that since most people don't get involved at all and Darcy has taken an active role on her community council that "Community Leader" is a fair assessment.
If you listen to Darcy Burner for more than a few minutes, it seems clear that she would be a capable, smart congresswoman that would strongly represent the 8th Congressional District.
Posted by: John Wyble on June 6, 2006 04:15 PMWhere did she live prior to her current residence? (Outside or in the district?)
I heard her on Dave Ross, but don't remember her saying that. Do you have the quote?
Should we assume that anyone who admires person X shares all of their stances on issues?
Posted by: timothy on June 6, 2006 04:24 PMHere's the hilarious quote of the day. It is looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. John M. just recently was alienated from the GOP and I just got back from the moon.
There are a lot of Repubs who are upset with Bush for a number of specific reasons. But that doesn't mean they voted for Kerry or that they won't make the pragmatic choice for a Republican at the Presidential level in 2008. Anytime you read a line like this, you know you've got a talking points seminar troller on hand.
Johnny now you run back and go play at HorsesAss.
Posted by: Jeff B. on June 6, 2006 04:28 PMShe'll need to work on the "written" talking points a bit as I can't judge her speaking ability yet. But I rather have someone who is on her way up and has huge potential, then a hack who takes pride in insulting his base.
As a life long social and fiscal conservative the 8th district will never elect my ideal candidate, however a good fiscal conservative would be a wonderful step up from what we have today. And someone with a pro-adoption view point and military family -- they have to have good instincts. I'm for hiring Darcy (thankfully I have a lot of extended family in the 8th, unlike myself)
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 04:29 PMThus far she is yet to express an original thought. I don't have the quote, but my best recollection is that she stated she was for "Securing the border and then ensuring that those 12 million people have a quick path to citizenship". Maybe KIRO saved the tape, ask them. As to her previous residence I believe it was somewhere in Bellevue, why? did she do Nothing for Public Service or Volunteering there either ?
Posted by: Smokie on June 6, 2006 04:36 PMJohn, how do you know that your extended family will all vote for Darcy Burner? Do you fill out their ballots? Or are they just extended family in the sense that you consider anyone who thinks like you part of the "Extended Progressive Family?"
Posted by: Jeff B. on June 6, 2006 04:39 PMThe extended family always gets together before we vote about 10 of us, normally about down ballot stuff. However, we haven't waiting for our regular time together to start talking most of us are pretty ticked off, some have snapped like me but not all. The illegal thing pushed most of us from silent protest to the "we ain't gonna take it, no we ain't gonna take it, we ain't gonna take it anymore." Gotta hit a hemp shop so I can fit in, all my suits will make me stand out in the demo crowd. God, I hate lib music, that alone will probably drive me back into the conservative camp.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 04:54 PMThe only one getting hammered here is you, while you hang out with your new best friends and their second-hand smoke.
I notice you chose not to comment on my comments:
Apparently you'd like Ridgeway to be free right now, with the state spending all those millions just to convict of six or eight (maybe) murders and putting the families and the public through all that misery.
Me? I'm happy that:
1. Gary Ridgeway is convicted and in prison until he dies;
2. Forty-eight families now have closure, rather than 6 or 8, and none had to go through the horror of a trial; and
3. The state saved tens of millions of dollars in the process.
You're welcome to your new life. There are far more moderate Democrats scrambling to our side in this state because of the arrogance and elitism of the Democratic Party and KCEC than there are people going from Right to Left. Maybe in the country it's the opposite (though I doubt it), but if you think the Lefty ranks are swelling in this state, then you must be swell, because you're one of the only lemmings.
Reichert 55%, Burner 44%, you heard it here first.
Sorry about ignoring your posts. Gary R was not going free on bail under any condition. And I find it amazing after Republicans have rolled up 1.074 Trillion in debt and wasted 100+ Billion on disaster prepardness they are concerned about a few million on putting to death one of the worst murderers in the History of the US. CRY ME A FRICK'IN FISCAL RIVER.
Many (no one took a poll to my knowledge) of the direct victim families were not happy about the N. Maleng and Reichert decision and expressed it to the media at the time and this is still searchable on Google. A few were okay with it on an anti-death penalty principle.
I'd like to know exactly how the 48 families got closure knowing that this sub-human slime is still breathing - or are you just saying that because you want to believe it to be true. Why not take that opinion on all death penalty cases, or does Reichert being a Republican make this a special case.
I readily admit that the conservative base is growing faster than the liberal base, due to larger families and liberal demographic killers like abortion. But don't confuse conservatives with Republicans like I so often do ... thankfully I can come to this site and be corrected on this point any time that stupid idea enters my head.
Reichert 46% Darcy 54% you heard it hear second and Dennis "Congressmen are above the law" Hastert no longer speaker. John McDonald attends Election Day Democratic Party and gets lesson on how to role a joint and begins to question his decision to support the Democratic Party.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 05:24 PMI love it - Darcy supports universal health care and fast track for illegals, and McDonald says he supports her because he is a fiscal conservative and bush's stand on illegals turned him away from the party. Huh?
Geez, if you are going to troll, at least keep it consistent. If McDonald was what he said, he would be staying home. Darcy is farther to the left of reichert, which supposedly is the opposite direction that the "life long republican" is. So why would an honest critic be in support of everything he finds detestable?
But thanks, John McDonald. You have done more than any of us to point out just why we shouldn't be voting for darcy.
Posted by: Janet S on June 6, 2006 05:34 PMSome of you folks sure are easily impressed by a candidate who apparently wants to start her political career in Washington DC instead of Carnation where she is probably better suited to serve. Holy cow, what is her rush to get to DC?
Posted by: Gary on June 6, 2006 05:53 PMWe've had a GOP Congress and a GOP White House (with the exception of the brief D Senate due to the Jeffords defection) since 2000. To say I'm disappointed in what they've done since then would be a slight understatement.
While I won't go as far as vote for a Democrat (Lord knows, not where I live), I am getting tired of holding my nose and voting the GOP. And I know I'm not alone.
Posted by: jimg on June 6, 2006 06:54 PMThanks for you kind post.
The Republican Party voted for and George Bush signed the prescription drug bill into law estimated to cost $400 Billion over 10 years. With no way to pay for it except debt. Socialism Yes or No?
Illegals, what can I say. I wonder if I can be an illegal so I can get the two income tax free years and one free felony.
Darcy has a lot of very nice qualities including being from a military family (I bet she won't be finding our soliders guilty before they are put on trial), national merit scholar, adopted, in the private sector, beer delivery brother so her victory celebration should be much better, and a mom. Look for my big check to the Darcy campaign by the end of July. :-)
No longer will I vote for a politician(s) who does not balance their books, who cannot get 20,000 people a drink of water, who can't find countries on a map or pronounce common English words, who convicts our soliders on a regular basis, who loses wars, who doesn't understand the word illegal. I resolve to be a good voter instead of having stupid loyalty to a party that after the election the local congressman mocks my values.
Maybe I should start the Republicans for Democrats PAC.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 06:58 PMI don't want single payer - however, when Republicans are not in power like under Clinton, they act like conservatives and Universal Health Care is stopped. When Bush is in power, conservatives roll over and pass the biggest government programs since LBJ to the tune of $400B in 10 years for perscriptions drugs, highway bill, etc. Go figure.
We need the Democratic Party to take some responsibilty for fighting terrorism. America has lost Maurtania, Somalia (yesterday), Sudan to Islamic Fundamentist. America has enshrined Sharia law in Afghanistan (note the legal and recent death penalty case against the Christian there) and soon Iraq. We have failed to help India and Russia in their fight against Islamic extremism. We have even been kicked out of Uzbekistan (home to the largest US military base in Central Asia) because we did not like their crack down on Muslim extremist. We continue to fund Palestinian terror groups with humanitarian aid, which enables them to spend their money on weapons. No assistance for those suffering and being massacured under Islamic facism in Nigeria, Indonesia, and elsewhere around the world. We are getting our tails crushed by a ragtag group of Islamic facist misfits as we prosecute our little politically correct battles.
I hate taxes. However, I also hate 1.074 Trillion in addition debt. 30 to 40% of the the price of oil has nothing to do with supply and demand it is the fact that the value of the dollar dropped dramatically. Please notice: the price of gold, real estate, oil, copper, platinum and a ton of other commodities. Note, how the interest rates and inflation are creeping up. The only reason we haven't seen Jimmy Carter type inflation is because our trade deficit is funding our budget deficit. In other words, Saudi Arabia and China keep loaning us money for very little interest, this is why Pres. Bush was photographed holding hands with and kissing King Saud in Texas of all places. If it weren't for the country of the 9/11 hi-jackers Pres. Bush would be good economic imitiation of Pres. Carter. Where is Reagan when you need him? I need to take a piligrimage to his library and cleanse my political soul.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 07:42 PMWho the hell cares about Darcy Burner or Dave Reichert for that matter.
While you are drinking your Kook-Aid there are real bad stuff going on out there that Bush and Republican Congress isn\'t doing anything about or if they are doing something about it they are part of the problem.
What is Dave Reichert Doing about this?
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20060606-1521-probe.html
http://tinyurl.com/fl3z5
After hearing about this, I might just vote for Burner to send Bush a message that he can\'t treat our troops this way!!
My wife finally read what I've been writing and agrees except for voting for (if we were in the 8th) or writing the big check to Darcy, I thought you'd enjoy that.
Still need to work on her. There's still some time between now and November.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 07:56 PMWho the hell cares about Darcy Burner or Dave Reichert for that matter.
While you are drinking your Kook-Aid there are real bad stuff going on out there that Bush and Republican Congress isn\'t doing anything about or if they are doing something about it they are part of the problem.
What is Dave Reichert Doing about this?
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20060606-1521-probe.html
http://tinyurl.com/fl3z5
After hearing about this, I might just vote for Burner to send Bush a message that he can\'t treat our troops this way!!
http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/006298.html
The reason that the Wonderful Darcy and "can't find a mass murder" Reichert race is important is because this is one of the key races (according to the experts) in determining who controls the house. I personally think Dennis "support the crooks" Hastert's seat is the key race as Republicans should worry about in the coming political bloodbath in November.
However, a more important issue as you state is why is George Bush and the ENTIRE Republican Congress letting our guys twist in the wind and go to jail after sending them into harms way. The Republican should be routed for this allow and put up for treason.
NOTE today is D-Day. 25,000 German civilians killed by US Bombers over Dresden. 200,000 Japanese civilians killed by US nuclear bombs. Did these pilots go to jail? How times have changed where a guy does 90 days hard labor for a dog barking in an ear. Good Lord have mercy on our country. I ask you, who hold the pardon pen in this country and why is it still full of ink. Clinton pardonned people like Marc Rich, why can't our guys in uniform get a couple ... hmmmmm
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 08:08 PMAnd a message needs to be sent.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3692969a12,00.html
http://tinyurl.com/mt7lf
Posted by: Conservative, Not a Republican on June 6, 2006 08:16 PMhttp://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyID=2006-06-07T000816Z_01_N06407624_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-HAMANDIYA-USA.xml&archived=False
Shorter Link to same web page
http://tinyurl.com/ly4kg
Posted by: Conservative, Not Republican on June 6, 2006 08:21 PMI was the president of our condo association for a year (or two. I forget exactly -- tells you how burdensome it was). I'd been on the board as a representative for a few years and the current president had served the maximum number of consecutive sessions as president and no one else wanted to be president, so I volunteered to step in until she could take it back. (She was a good President) -- but the way this association works, we have so LITTLE involvement basically everyone who volunteers ends up "Voted" onto the board by popular acclaim (So that the people voting don't have to do it!) and I volunteered to be President because no one else wanted it. THe only things that being President involved was a signature, once, and running the yearly meeting. Technically I was in charge of the every other month meetings, but in practice that meant turning the meeting over to our management company guy every time.
Posted by: SSchreffler on June 6, 2006 08:33 PMI promise you that I will politically club (baby seal style) these Republican troop haters as best I can from now until election day.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 08:35 PMA nice press release from Reichert on supporting the Haditha troops might be a good starter in mollify my merry band of conservatives.
Quite an interesting and convenient spin, you've got there I'm-not-a-liberal-John...
In World War II there were 407,300 US military deaths and A TOTAL OF 24 MILLION, 456 THOUSAND,100 combined military deathS. If the leaders of Germany and Japan were so very concerned about their citizens, perhaps they shouldn't have incited A WAR.
You 'blame America first, blame America always' liberals are a disgusting lot.
You completely missed my point and we are in strong agreement. Please re-read what I wrote. American Heros totally and systematically destroyed both Germany and Japan killing hundreds of thousands of Civilians. This was not crime, it was one of the most amazing courageous fights for freedom that has occured in history.
Today when our soliders fight, the moment a civilian dies or the enemy is treated to a less than 5-star hotel experience they are investigated and often put on trial by our cowardly adminstration. Why aren't our soliders supported like they were in WWI in WWII in Korea? How come George Bush wants to praise them when they leave for the battlefield and then put them in jail if anything looks bad in the press?
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 10:41 PMI noticed that you ignored most of what I wrote and I do appreciate that it is difficult to hear the truth about what dirty rotten party the Republicans have become since 2004 under the leadership of Bush.
I agree that Darcy will likely not cut taxes.
The best situation is limited government and low taxes. A bad situation is big government and high taxes. But the worst is big government and low taxes.
Passing our financial problems to our children is cruel and if that is what you want by low taxes, then you are truly a selfish person, stealing from children. If we cut spending, then cut taxes, otherwise it should be a pay as you go system with a balanced budget.
Conservatives who push for low taxes with zero restraint on spending are worse than Liberals who want government spending and want others to pay for it.
It is completely immoral that Bush has put another 1.074 Trillion in debt on us and our children.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 10:53 PMYou really are noting more than the Lynden Larouche idiots that we all ignore outside the Post Office.
Posted by: Observer on June 6, 2006 10:59 PMI also grow weary of the "tax the rich" crowd. Get a grip!! At least have the sense to read a basic book on economics before spouting off. Ms. Burner is no more a "fiscal conservative" than Cantwell or Murray. If you took away everything the top 20 richest Americans have, you still wouldn't have enough to fund all the fuzzy wuzzy social programs. All things have a cost. Someone, somewhere, somehow has to pay for the goods and services. Someone has to pick up the rest of the tab for subsidized housing. Someone has to pay the doctors and nurses who have to treat anyone who comes through the door. Someone has to pay for the supplies and manpower that eventually gets the food to the food banks.
The "tax the rich" crowd is the same group of hand wringers that insisted $30 car tabs would bankrupt the state. Instead revenues increased after 695 passed. Of course our legislators couldn't resist spending the surplus (just like they are doing now). We don't need to increase taxes. We need to put a lid on spending at the local and federal level.
As for the Iraq war, keep in mind that on the 3rd anniversary the one place the newspeople didn't see demonstrations against it was in Baghdad. Most of the soldiers I have talked to mention all the good we have done over there. Many are frustrated that the mainstream media doesn't report the successes. It's easy to be an armchair general. Our men and women over there need our support, not derision. Ms. Burner has the same mind set as those who tried to chat with Adolf. You are either against the terrorists or you support them. There is no middle ground is this situation.
Posted by: Burdabee on June 6, 2006 11:06 PMI voted for a party and people I thought were a fiscal conservatives in 2004. What I got was the biggest increase in social spending since before I was born all the way back to LBJ. Bigger than Carter, bigger than Bush 1, bigger than Clinton. Wow. Wouldn't it make sense to try the other party, since the Republican party as evidence by their actual spending is factually worse on big government spending as compared to all recent history of the Democrats. If you beg to differ, please state the numbers by which I can be convinced otherwise. I'm happy to change my opinion very quickly when presented with actual facts as opposed to political statements and political lies.
I don't think Darcy matches my social conservative viewpoints, but neither does Dave Reichert. So why do I want a big spender and social liberal as a republican.
I think a real idiot is someone who keeps voting the same way and expecting a different outcome. The Republican party and D. Reichert could not careless about the conservative voter, they want to marginalize us like the Democrats have done to the Black vote. They love the votes come November, but ignore us all the rest of the time.
The whole BS on Gay Marriage is prime example of this crass political posturing. "Here conservatives have a ban gay marriage bill, get all worked up about it, vote for me, oops the bill failed, well see you again in two years." Are we going to keep jumping through their little stupid hoops, what's next flag burning. "Oh, let's do a constitutional amendment to ban flag burning (constitutional amendments take like 10+ years to get done) and there the conservative sheep go getting all whipped up." Meanwhile our dumb President loses another country to Islamic fundamentalism, another 1000 Christians get exterminated in Nigeria, another 50,000 Jews were ethnically cleansed in Iran, the Sundan, Chad or Somalia, more trials for our troops.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 11:13 PMSince you seem to know so much about Green River. How long did it take between the DNA evidence that Ridgway was the killer and before he was put in jail? How many crimes did he commit between this timeframe? Yeah, dude read the actual story. How many times was Ridgway identified as the killer or possible killer? How many girls did he kill between the time he was a prime suspect and his arrest. How do you know Reichert did not push for a deal to be cut so he could move on with his life and into political office without all the problems of a long drawn out trial. Is that too mean? No meaner than the crap you throw at good Democrats everyday here and impune every single motive no matter how minor. You can't pull the beam out of your own eye first. The poor families need closure and I don't think is accomplished with this slime bag breathing. I don't buy that for one charitable second, that is horse crap. I persume you won't answer as the stooge Republicans on this board have no answers.
I'm part of the pay the bills crowd. Including inflation if that is what it takes, just balance the budget. Stealing from kids is the most immoral political position.
Some of you Republicans are still preaching limited government, low taxes, support the troops ... all good stuff, HOW ABOUT PRACTICING WHAT YOU PREACH, and stop ripping me for not following the party path when the majority of politicians we have elected don't! Good Lord.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 6, 2006 11:35 PMYour Larouche comment made me smile. However, I think Lynden Larouche actually has higher poll numbers than George Bush now for the '08 run. :-) is he out of prison yet?
Democrats Gov signs tough anti-abortion bill. It seems like the Democrats want to put the South into play.
Jeb Bush disses K. Harris. So much for the Bush's being loyal, I suppose when you get so arrogant you only expect loyalty you don't have to give it. Jeb Bush is doing his best to see that the R's lose a senate seat in FL. With friends like these ...
And the Democrats in the San Diego congressional seat are running 8% ahead of 2004, even though they will likely lose. Tough to say if this will be a trend due to the fraud case, but if Democrats poll even 4% above 2004, it will be a big Republican wipe out in November. Darcy will win running away if she polled 8% above where Ross was, even 4%.
The handwriting is on the wall ...
Posted by: John McDonald on June 7, 2006 12:32 AMYou have been off topic for some time now......
Have a great day !!
Posted by: chris on June 7, 2006 06:33 AMTherefore: TROLL.
I agree with Gary that I only bothered to look at the comments just to see how this "Darby" person could be qualified to be in Congress. There must be something to her or someone backing her. Otherwise, it must be a safe seat for the Republican that no one else bothered to run. I would suspect instead that she was active in some left-wing group that realized she would "look" like a good candidate.
I'm definately not going to bother to read these comments, so don't expect me to respond to any attacks. I'll just look to see if "The Shark" has any updates on her in the main page.
Fiscal conservatism does not mean the same to Dems or Reps. Republicans tend to view it as spending less, on what is needed. However, of late, they also try to "out-Dem the Dems" and show that they can be as generous with public money as the Dems. It doesn't help when any reduction in the rate of increase is always called a "cut in services" by Dems and the MSM.
Dems tend to beleive they deserve ALL of the money that comes in (and more), but that their conservatism is in how they choose to spend all of it. You never hear them advance the idea of tax cuts, but they do want to spend less on defense ("get out of Iraq and just look at all the money WE have to spend on other issues, like health care, etc.").
It's all our fault too. We vote them in. We demand that government do things that we really should do ourselves.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until a majority of voters discover that they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. Alexander Tytler
Posted by: SouthernRoots on June 7, 2006 07:05 AMWhatta tool not~quite~the~liberal~john! All I have to say is....thank you for showing your true (yellow) stripe. I'm glad you've abandoned the Republican party (I doubt, despite your feeble protestations, that you were ever really a member to begin with).
Posted by: alphabet soup on June 7, 2006 08:13 AMSend Bush a Message!
Vote Against Reichert!!!!
Or don't you care about our troops?
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20060606-1521-probe.html
Posted by: Conservative American, Not a Republican Robot! on June 7, 2006 08:27 AMOne thing that confuses me is why you guys are not more upset about the state of the party. Maybe you guys are the quartet on the Republican Titanic playing "Nearer my God to Thee" headed into a November iceberg. Anyways, God Bless you guys and I wish you luck, I really am a conservative. Signing out for at least a few weeks, unless GWB proposes Universal Health Care tomorrow.
Posted by: John McDonald on June 7, 2006 08:34 AMYou make no sense.
As for the actual topic of this post, everyone who reads this blog regularly knows that Burner is not qualified to be a MOC. I have problems with some of Reichert's votes, but there is no way I would support an unqualified liberal rubber stamp candidate.
Posted by: Palouse on June 7, 2006 08:49 AMReichert has had lofty political ambitions for years, long before Ridgeway was caught. And the decision to lock up Ridgeway for life was not made in a vacuum. To suggest this was a "deal" for political expediency is utter nonsense. Even if the case had gone to trial, Reichert would only have had to be present when his testimony was needed, something that could have easily been accomodated in his congressional schedule.
If you don't like Reichert, that's fine. You can vote for any candidate you want. You could even write in your own name. However, you have yet to prove Ms. Burner will be anything other than a tax and spend democrat, especially with her "tax the rich" stance. Oh, that's right. It's for the children.
Posted by: Burdabee on June 7, 2006 10:22 AMAnd so he walks off into the sunset, completely unaware that his shirt is tucked into his underpants. His head held high, he feeeeels that he showed them fellers a thing or two (and he did, albeit unintentionally!).
Thanks not~quite~the~liberal~john for showing me what incontinence looks like!
Posted by: alphabet soup on June 7, 2006 12:47 PM