Congressman Dave Reichert, holding his grandson, thanks supporters at his victory rally this morning. He didn't talk a lot about the race, but he did recommend the book 1776
For what it's worth, Reichert's lead continues to widen with every daily report. His percentage of the votes, 51.54%, is now a smidgen higher than it was in 2004.
Meanwhile, certain Darcy Burner fan bloggers are displaying impressive introspection on their loss.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at November 18, 2006 07:52 PM | Email ThisThanks you Dave, you earned my vote!
Posted by: deadwood on November 19, 2006 01:15 AMThat alone is progress. If the attitude of "hey, it was close but we lost" had prevailed in 2000 or 2002 or 2004, the country would have been much better off and there might have been greater ability to focus on fixing some of the obvious problems instead of keeping the 'base' all frothing for the next round.
Posted by: krm on November 19, 2006 04:48 AMIf I had to trust one of the two candidates with your children, it would still be Reichert.
Seriously. Here's hoping that the former Microsoft executive tries again in 2008,2010,2012...etc.
Look at Bush's borrow & spending record.
The R's were completely in charge....following him like he was the pied piper. Money was flying, with little or no accountability.
Are those true Republican values.
Bush failed on fiscal management and the lack of a viable post-invasion Iraq. He failed.
Now, I'm a true believer that Radical Islam is beyond evil and must be dealt with head-on. Remember, the US created a lot of this mess by empowering & financing these kooks to fight the Russians in the Cold War.
But in moving ahead, we must do our best to put a fence around Radical Islam, which doesn't mean being right in the middle of all fighting. Let them kill each other.
Republican elected officials blindly supported Bush....all in the name of "Party Loyalty". Bush is not a true Conservative...or a Republican in my book.
It's time for true fiscal Conservatives grab the reigns.....quickly.
The Dems are already in turmoil. Just wait until they go thru the Committee Chair appointment process. Alcee Hastings??????????/ One of only 6 Federal Judges to ever be impeached for massive bribery and perjury.....and Hastings is going to be in charge of National Intelligence????????/
Pelosi got her ass handed to her blindly endorsing that crooked, lying kook named Murtha simply because of his radical anti-Iraq War stance.
There are 44 fiscally conservative Blue Dog Democrats running the House....not Pelosi. Everything goes thru them. Frankly, I have more confidence in them than the spineless, shallow losers posing as Republicans.
The Dems will hand the R's another golden opportunity in about 4 years. Hell, maybe 2 years the way they are going. Republicans must distance themselves from the evil within SOME of Corporate America and focus on hard-working taxpaying citizens.
America needs more diversity in its political institutions. A nasty word in its current usage, but appropriately used here.
The two party system has fostered broad alliances in both national parties that simply do not work when "Party Loyalty" becomes the issue rather than public policy or principle.
While I welcomed the reform movement of the 1990's, I do not see a viable alternative on the horizon.
I retain some hope that the religeous right will abandon the Republican Party in favor of a more focused alternative and that the centerists and fiscal conservatives can form their own political parties. Unfortunately this would require either an extremely unlikely massive shift in thinking or a visionary leader. Two things very much lacking in the American political landscape.
Posted by: deadwood on November 19, 2006 10:14 AMIt seems a bit overwhelming....
But keep in mind that Ross Perot could have won that election in 1992. Perot's main motive was to screw Bush...and with less than a month to go, Perot was leading. I believe Perot got scared of winning and began all that "crazy talk".
But it showed me that a 3rd Party is viable....even more so today than 1992.
Who would be viable 3rd Party candidates???
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on November 19, 2006 01:13 PM
With Rudy G. and John M. leading the R pack, and neither being even a close to conservative, there could be an openning for a viable third party dedicated to small government.
Even after his fall from the Speaker's chair, Gingrich has maintained his good standing as an honest conservative. He is also damnably smart and oozes charisma.
I suspect the big money will shun him as a candidate in 2008 in favor of Rudy G., and that will be his openning. Whether he can generate a big enough following or win as a 3rd party candidate with Hillary as an opponent remains to be seen. 2008 is looking pretty dim right now.
As for Perot, I think the "crazy" label was a product of his Texas twang and the Bush moles who ran his early (i.e. pre-July) campaign.
Posted by: deadwood on November 19, 2006 02:17 PMMeanwhile, that tough-guy, law-and-order image might disappear if he continues to follow orders from the likes of Rep. Boehner. (Did Rep. Reichert vote for that failure?) The latter will do everything he can to prevent full investigations into the many expensive failures by our government over the past six years, and blindly following such a course could weigh heavily on the minds of 8th district voters. None of us like seeing our tax money wasted, and we'll have a full accounting someday. I hope that returning Rep. Reichert lives up to his image, and helps us to learn exactly how badly our government has been lead.
Posted by: Paddy Mac on November 19, 2006 06:03 PMJust a heads up. This wasn't a "press conference" as nobody was there officially from the press. It was a victory party - quite a different event. And Dave's grandchildren rushing into his arms was an unscripted event.
There's no need to be cynical over everything political.
Unless you're Mr. Cynical, that is, who is licensed and bonded and has several decades of performing that duty...