Voter Feedback on Seattle Times Endorsement of Dave Reichert

I checked the Seattle Times to see if there were any letters to the editor about the the Seattle Times's endorsement of Dave Reichert. 

Interestingly enough, there wasn't a single letter in the Tuesday Oct 17th edition that supported the Seattle Times endorsement; all of the letters supported Darcy Burner, not Dave Reichert.  I liked Robert Stagman's letter below.  For other letters see the post continuation.

How do we support monumental failure of the people's interests?

Editor, The Times:

The Times' endorsement of Dave Reichert for Congress in the 8th District based on "a conscience-driven independent streak that reflects his moderate district" is a travesty reflecting your decision to ignore many of his radical and intolerant positions ["Reichert in the 8th," Times endorsement, Oct. 15].

When asked during a recent debate if he agreed with the right of a pharmacist to refuse contraceptive therapy to women based on his/her "moral beliefs," Reichert's answer was an unqualified single word: Yes.

Reichert's vote on whether a military servicewoman overseas could obtain an abortion at her nearest military hospital if she paid for it herself: No.

Reichert's vote on George Bush's energy bill giving billions of dollars in tax subsidies to oil companies at a time of obscene oil company profits (and after receiving $43,000 in campaign contributions from Big Oil): Yes.

Reichert's vote on HR 4241, which would help offset Bush's massive budget deficits by selling off up to 20 million acres of prime public lands, including national parks, to mining speculators: Yes.

Is Reichert "independent" and "moderate"? Not for this 8th District voter!

— Robert Stagman, Mercer Island

How do we support monumental failure of the people's interests?

Editor, The Times:

The Times' endorsement of Dave Reichert for Congress in the 8th District based on "a conscience-driven independent streak that reflects his moderate district" is a travesty reflecting your decision to ignore many of his radical and intolerant positions ["Reichert in the 8th," Times endorsement, Oct. 15].

When asked during a recent debate if he agreed with the right of a pharmacist to refuse contraceptive therapy to women based on his/her "moral beliefs," Reichert's answer was an unqualified single word: Yes.

Reichert's vote on whether a military servicewoman overseas could obtain an abortion at her nearest military hospital if she paid for it herself: No.

Reichert's vote on George Bush's energy bill giving billions of dollars in tax subsidies to oil companies at a time of obscene oil company profits (and after receiving $43,000 in campaign contributions from Big Oil): Yes.

Reichert's vote on HR 4241, which would help offset Bush's massive budget deficits by selling off up to 20 million acres of prime public lands, including national parks, to mining speculators: Yes.

Is Reichert "independent" and "moderate"? Not for this 8th District voter!

— Robert Stagman, Mercer Island

Beyond our limits

The voters in the 8th District are fortunate in having a choice between two attractive candidates for Congress. The Times has endorsed incumbent Dave Reichert, R-Auburn, based largely, it appears, on his independence from the Bush administration.

Unfortunately, while Reichert has demonstrated a willingness to vote against the Bush administration on a handful of issues where his vote was not decisive, the fact remains that a vote for him is a vote for Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, the rest of the Republican leadership in the House and the disastrous policies of the Bush administration.

Re-electing Reichert only makes the task of overcoming the corruption of the current congressional leadership and the incompetence of the Bush administration more difficult. As long as Reichert remains a Republican, and he has not demonstrated any "independence" on that score, he no more deserves to be re-elected than the congressional leadership he supports.

Voters in the 8th District face a far more critical choice than do voters in 90 percent of the nation. By electing Darcy Burner, they can help to change the direction of policies, from Iraq to health care. By electing Reichert, they only endorse the course set for the nation by the Republican Congress in the past six years.

— Stephen Hendricks, Sammamish

The foundation sways

To say that I was surprised by The Times' endorsement of Dave Reichert is an understatement. If this were a normal election, your reasoning would have been sound. But it's not a normal election.

Reichert has been a virtual rubber stamp for the Bush administration's foreign-policy agenda. He has gone against the administration only on relatively safe (in political terms) domestic issues, but on every other matter he blindly followed his party.

He has voted for torture, and for suspension of civil rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

He has stayed mum on the ongoing expansion of the powers of the executive branch of government — even when it violates the system of checks and balances embodied in the Constitution.

He has voted with his party more than 90 percent of the time. That's not what I'd call "a conscience-driven independent streak."

If Reichert cannot stand up to his party on fundamental moral, ethical and political issues, what can he stand up for?

— Olav Martin Kvern, Seattle

Platform crumbles

I am surprised that The Times endorses incumbent Dave Reichert over the challenger, Darcy Burner.

I attended the recent debate between Reichert and Burner. I found Reichert ill-informed and full of platitudes. He pointed to his record of service (paid service as sheriff, not volunteer service). Why should I be comforted that he tracked the Green River killer for 19 years? We've been tracking Osama bin Laden for more than five years now, and I feel less safe than ever, considering our government can't seem to find him.

Reichert claims he "understands" the perils of interagency communications, yet his experience seems to have failed to help his committee, charged with this important arena of national security, push through urgently needed legislation in time to prevent communication disasters when Hurricane Katrina struck on his watch.

He claims not to be aligned with George Bush but brought him here to raise funds for his campaign.

I have heard no evidence that he speaks out against unfair, abusive and foolhardy administration actions and policies.

It's clear Burner speaks and act courageously, fairly and from the heart. She has earned my vote, my trust and my wholehearted support.

— Joanne Gainen, Bellevue

One side holds up other

As a fiscally conservative moderate, who voted for Republican Dino Rossi [in last year's governor's race], I agreed with almost everything in The Times' endorsement of Dave Reichert for the 8th District congressional seat. I also believe Reichert's past public-service dedication and his ability to sometimes think on his own should give Reichert another chance to serve.

However, it also shows why Western Washington voters need to vote for Darcy Burner: There is no way the voters in Eastern Washington will remove someone like Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Pasco. That means it is up to the voters in the west to do everything possible to ensure that the Republican Party is not the majority party in the House or the Senate.

These Republicans have shown they are nothing but rubber stamps for the Karl Rove/Dick Cheney/George Bush agenda (also known as the "fear agenda"), and allowing Hastings to be in charge of an ethics panel is plain scary.

That is why, unfortunately, Western Washington voters should not vote for Reichert and should vote for another very capable candidate, Darcy Burner.

— Tom Boyle, Mount Vernon

Comments

[replicaIrolexI]

replicastore
[url=http://www.varsitys.msu.edu/weekend/phpalbum/data54854/dat54/replica-rolex-watch.html]coach handbag outled[/url]
[url=http://www.varsitys.msu.edu/weekend/phpalbum/data54854/dat54/replica-gucci-handbag.html]replica rolex watch[/url]
[url=http://www.varsitys.msu.edu/weekend/phpalbum/data54854/dat54/coach-replica-handbag.html]burberry handbag replica[/url]
[url=http://www.varsitys.msu.edu/weekend/phpalbum/data54854/dat54/louis-vuitton-replica-handbag.html]replica rolex watch[/url]
[url=http://www.varsitys.msu.edu/weekend/phpalbum/data54854/dat54/burberry-handbag-replica.html]coach replica handbag[/url]
[url=http://www.varsitys.msu.edu/weekend/phpalbum/data54854/dat54/coach-handbag-outled.html]coach handbag outled[/url]
[url=http://www.varsitys.msu.edu/weekend/phpalbum/data54854/dat54/chanel-replica-handbag.html]chanel replica handbag[/url]

[hdfihfiosjkoII]

charger kendra wilkinson

[url=http://userpoint.freehyperspace2.com/userpoint/eve-lawrence-and-busty.html]butt kari sweet[/url]

[loansIII]

personalloans
[url=http://www8.vjc.edu/NewSite/discuss/msgReader$20]irwin mortgage company[/url]
[url=http://www8.vjc.edu/NewSite/discuss/msgReader$21]coach handbag outlet[/url]

[biagra]

You need it. Believe me.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra
biagra [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra]biagra[/url]

[Geni]

I think part of the reason for the lack of pro-Reichert letters is the sameness of what they're probably all saying - because every single solitary Reichert supporter I've seen, on blogs and forums all over the place, just parrots the same discredited nonsense. They try to claim Darcy has no record of achievements. Um, I'd say being a National Merit Scholar, putting herself through Harvard, and becoming independently wealthy enough to retire before 35 qualifies as achievement in MY book - I guess they define it differently. They try to claim that she's not been civically involved enough, as if Sheriff Barbrady had, before two years ago. They cite elections she missed, failing to point out that most of them were elections in the city of Redmond, in which she was not eligible to vote!

They try to claim she doesn't differ from the Democratic Party platform. Well, besides the obvious fact that the Democratic Party platform is just common sense, that's a falsehood; go take a look at the online Q&A she did with Times readers. She took a number of positions that were more centrist than the national party platform.

They claim she's running against Bush, not Reichert. Well, with the lockstep conformity the House leadership enforces these days, will someone please clarify to me what the difference is? Reichert tries to distance himself from Bush, but brings him here to fundraise among the fat cats. You can't have it both ways, Congressman Hairspray.

The bots will be out repeating those same bits of nonsense soon.

[CoolAqua]

I have to check another day to see if there are any pro-Reichert letters

[Daniel K]

A few possible explanations regarding the lack of Reichert letters:

1) The Times was trying to compensate for their one-sided endorsement.
2) The was truly an imbalance of letters supporting Burner vs. those supporting Reichert.
3) Reichert supporters felt there was little need to add to what the Times had written (since the Times pretty much wrote what the Reichert campaign has been saying).
4) They plan to run nothing but letters in support of Reichert tomorrow.