March 18, 2009
Darcy Burner Moving On - UPDATED & BUMPED

Bumped, per update below. - E

Original post: 10:11 am, 3/17

Former Dave Reichert Chief of Staff and current NRCC staffer Mike Shields has this in a Facebook status update:

Darcy Burner got a job as ED of the cong. progressive caucus (ie the hard left wingers). can't wait to see her on campus...

That would be this Congressional Progressive Caucus, whose "about" section pretty much confirms what Republicans have been saying for years: Darcy Burner has some admirable passion, but she's clearly a hard left Democrat, not a suburban moderate.

UPDATE: typo fixed.

UPDATE II (3/18 pm): Goldy insists that what Shields says is false. Burner will supposedly take an ED post with a different organization in DC.

Fine by me. I welcome said news, which evidently can't be released right now and wasn't worth requesting a correction from this blogger, who is not hard to reach at ericearling at gmail dot com.

All I ask is that when it is finally reported, that we are reminded that the only reason Reichert won the race is because of those rotten, evil, corporatist bastards at the Seattle Times who had the temerity to point Darcy Burner wasn't being entirely honest about her degree from Harvard.


Posted by Eric Earling at March 18, 2009 03:58 PM | Email This
1. Wasn't Burner the one who ran around and stole campaign signs off peoples lawns in 2004?

Posted by: hellpig on March 17, 2009 10:03 AM
2. Looks like the Congressional Progressive Caucus has about 75 House members, or roughly 30% of the Democratic House membership. So you call these people, presumably the 30% of the Democratic House members who are the most liberal, "hard left"?

Would you feel equally comfortable calling the 30% of House Republicans (which would be about 55 people) that are the most conservative, "hard right"?

Of course, I am not saying Dave Reichert is "hard right". Reichert is probably within the 10% of House Republicans who are the most liberal, or better stated, least conservative.

Posted by: Richard Pope on March 17, 2009 10:41 AM
3. Thanks 2 Eric for including the link to the Cong. ''Progressive'' Caucus. Figuring I had better things 2 do with my time had never been to that website b4. But after going there I strongly urge (R)s, (I)s, and even those rational (D)s who might still be out there to visit; and not only read the ''About'' section as Eric recommended, but also scan their ''Official Positions'' link.

And be afraid; be VERY afraid; that this country has deterioarated to the point where by my quick county SIXTY-NINE members of the US House belong; plus Bernie Sanders as the only member in the US Senate.
Looks like Baghdad Jimmy McDermott is the only member of the WA delegation that belongs (at least officially).

Anyway: If you read the ''offical positions'' material on this website, to even just call them ''hard left wingers'' is being generous:
If anybody deserves the designation ''left of Lenin'', these people do. They have the look of putting even the most liberal European social democratic parties to shame.

Just 1 snippet from their ''official positions'':
''U.S. obligations under Article VI of the Nonproliferation Treaty, including the commitment to move toward full and complete disarmament will be reaffirmed.''

Plus their perversely titled ''immigration reform'' section is in large part a formula for inviting everybody in the world who feels like coming to the USA at any time for any reason; to come on in; we'll redistribute wealth as required to give you the cradle-2-grave benefits of full socialism.

One more time: 69 members of the US House overtly support an agenda that if carried out to any significant degree would result in the fundamental destruction of the rights, freedoms, and opportunities that we (theoretically, at least) still enjoy. This is truly scary stuff...

FOOTNOTE: Oh; yeah: WRT Darcy:
Looks like she has finally found her true political home.

Posted by: Methow Ken on March 17, 2009 10:44 AM
4. The obvious question is, who will run for the D's in 2010 now? Back to Heidi anti-guns? I would like to see Alex Alben go for it again, he lost in the primary to Dave Ross, who then lost to Reichert.

Posted by: travis t on March 17, 2009 11:03 AM
5. Methow Ken @ 3

The Non-Profileration Treaty was ratified by Republican President Richard M. Nixon has been in effect for almost 40 years now:

Article VI of the Non-Proliferation Treaty states: "Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control."

Whether you like this treaty or not, keep in mind that none of the seven presidents after Nixon have done anything to scrap or repeal this treaty. Not even Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush. So how is it "hard left" to follow a treaty that Nixon approved, and that Reagan and Bush Jr. were satisfied with?

Posted by: Richard Pope on March 17, 2009 11:07 AM
6. travis@4,

Another ex-MSFT female marketroid:

Suzan DelBene

Posted by: Smoley on March 17, 2009 11:34 AM
7. thanks, smoley. I do not know whom she is, but somehow get the feeling that she's another lefty who will lose to Reichert.

Posted by: travis t on March 17, 2009 11:48 AM
8. travis t @4 -

Rodney Tom?

Posted by: ewaggin on March 17, 2009 12:48 PM
9. Last time I looked, the ED of the Progressive Caucus is Bill Goold, and there's no indication he's leaving. Perhaps Mike Shields is misinformed.

Posted by: Nobody Here But Us Chickens on March 17, 2009 01:13 PM
10. All this recent talk about Reichert switching parties is quite interesting.

Will he do it?

I am sure that lots of it will do to what the polls are saying about Obama next year. It would be pretty stupid to switch at the exact moment the momentum has turned the other way.

That is how it is with these Mainsquishers in the Republican party. You never know what they will do.

My guess, while sure he is thinking about it now and has his feelers out, it really is going to depend on the general mood out there for Democrats. If it is very high like it was in 2008 then yeah he'll switch but if it is like 1994 then of course he won't.

So, yeah, that's what these recent rumblings are. Reichert putting out feelers, building his possibilities. Now there is another way he could move that most people don't realize. Now that Sims is in DC perhaps Sims could actually get him a job in the Administration. But again, I am sure that depends on Obama's popularity.

Why Sims? Well most people forget that Reichert was appointed by Sims to be King County Sheriff when the Sheriff was an appointed position.

Posted by: DD on March 17, 2009 01:30 PM
11. The "feelers" aren't all in one direction. For the Democrats "Beating Reichert with Reichert" is certainly a delightful prospect and they have people who are close to him putting out that offer to him, such as Sims and others (names only insiders would recognize).

And for Reichert's part, yeah, he sees this as an intriguing prospect.

But yeah, this is at such an early stage. Reichert would obviously try to get the best deal he can with committee assignments and such, but yeah, a lot will have to do with eternal events which we can't even imagine yet and how they effect the political scene.

This is at such an early stage that who knows if anything in the end will come out of it. But it's political drama at it's height and I am sure there are going to be some late nights of smoked filled rooms and high powered negotiation on both sides.

I believe what we will see is a coy Reichert positioning himself for a switch, then lots of money spent by his people on studies and polls but in the end it really depends on Obama and how people are feeling about him next year as to whether this all plays out publicly in a switch or not.

Posted by: Russ on March 17, 2009 01:52 PM
12. Clearly, Burner was never a good fit for the 8th District.

Posted by: Michele on March 17, 2009 02:21 PM
13. ..and if Reichert switches I will never again vote for him.

Posted by: Michele on March 17, 2009 02:24 PM
14. A troll comes here and highjacks the thread with rumors unrelated to the topic. People here follow up as if the rumors were true.

I go, "Huh?" as I do the AFLAC impersonation of the duck leaving the barbershop and listening to Yogi.

Posted by: swatter on March 17, 2009 03:00 PM
15. That troll, formerly at #14 & #15 is the same clown that has masqueraded as "Conservative not Republican," "Steve," "Sue," et. al. The current name of choice is "Kim." Either way, it's the same soul who managed to be the only commenter I have ever banned. Those who remember Dave Mathews in the comment threads realize the body of work it takes to get banned, because the pain-in-the-ass Mathews never achieved that distinction.

Posted by: Eric Earling on March 17, 2009 03:05 PM
16. I doubt that he would switch. Why would he when he won as an R, even chased Darcy out of elective politics.

He is one of those guys who could probably fit into either party. If I were a state Dem honcho, I would worry that he would prove to be too independent. They would want someone who could be counted on to vote for the stimulus, for example.

Posted by: travis t on March 17, 2009 03:15 PM
17. The Slavery Party: proving the Peter Principle since 1824!

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on March 17, 2009 05:01 PM
18. There's as much chance of Reichert turning Dem as there is of pigs flying. His core values are Republican and his centrism is purely a reflecton of doing exactly what he was elected to do: REPRESENT HIS CONSTITUENCY. He's got the job as long as he wants it.

Posted by: diamondshards on March 17, 2009 07:51 PM
19. 17--
here, here (lifting tankard); a measure of rum for ya; dead on again; caught the essence of the issue on the up-roll;

Posted by: jimmie howya-doin on March 17, 2009 09:30 PM
20. Thanks, Jimmie! I'm in Ningbo right now, so I'll have a double-shot of Chinese white wine (110 proof stuff) in your honor!

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on March 17, 2009 11:04 PM
21. I was a paid full time staffer on Burner's campaign in 06,( which is a LOT more than ALL of the people here commenting and pretending like they have any sort of inside clue as to what's going on) and i have to say- Reichert won't switch to dem, and YES, he will have the job as long as he wants it ... sadly... but hey, at least i realize it haha!

Posted by: michaeluw on March 18, 2009 06:41 AM
22. Just like a Democrat. 5=3 in the D world. :)

Posted by: swatter on March 18, 2009 06:59 AM
23. michaeluw@21 - "YES, he will have the job as long as he wants it ... sadly..."

Nothing sad about it. We in WA-08 are lucky to have one of the few authentic pols left on the hill to represent us. Unlike that dilletante you worked for in '06, Reichert has real life experience and common sense, something in short supply among the professional pols and narcisists currently running the show. Do you even LIVE in WA-08? Most of Ditzy's staff didn't.

Posted by: diamondshards on March 18, 2009 08:33 AM
24. The Reichert campaign is holding a fund-raising luncheon later this month. The publicity for the luncheon notes that he is "our star in the west" - i.e., the only Republican member of congress on the west coast, from the Canadian border down way to to Southern California. The host committee includes Slade Gorton, John Spellman, Rob McKenna, Sam Reed, Doug Sutherland, state GOP legislative leaders Mike Hewitt and Richard DeBolt, all four GOP members of the King County Council, GOP state chair Luke Esser, King County GOP chair Lori Sotelo, and Pierce County GOP chair Bob Lawrence.

By the way, if you want to join my table, drop me an email at

Posted by: Steve Beren on March 18, 2009 11:29 AM
25. Hmmm, looks like Eric may have gotten his info wrong about the organization Darcy Burner is actually joining (copying it from the former Reichert aide).

Eric, you are usually one of the more accurate bloggers on this site - I think you should correct your info. Goldy says he asked Burner wher she was going to be the executive director and it is a new organization located in Washinton DC - not in the Washington State and NOT the Progressive caucus.

Embarassing to report this wrong without verifying the information first.


Posted by: correctnotright on March 18, 2009 02:53 PM
26. Oh yeah, Reichert and his "real world" experience: He has never worked in private industry.

He was an incompetent detective and failed to catch the Green River killer right under his nose - just because Ridgeway did not fit his pet theory. He was lazy and never did the investigative work that could have proved Ridgeways guilt.

Some leader! He is an incompetent fool.

Posted by: correctnotright on March 18, 2009 03:15 PM
27. Earlling and co.: check your facts about Darcy Burner.

And do it before you criticize the P-I for errors.

Facebook is as reliable as my ass.

Posted by: Oscar on March 18, 2009 03:43 PM
28. And apparently that incompetent fool slobber knocked your Gal Pal twice and took 6 millions dollars out of your campaign coffers while doing it. I see why you want her back in DC now.

Or maybe KC DNR would not let her rebuild her house on the lake and she figured subsidized housing in DC and public schools there will be good for Henry.

Posted by: Huh? on March 18, 2009 03:45 PM
29. Did wittle Dawcy make up some organization so she could claim she was an"executive" next time around?

Posted by: Wittl Dawcy on March 18, 2009 03:53 PM
30. AlwaysWrong,

Apparently you don't have to work in private industry to be in DC - look no further than our President!


Posted by: Shanghai Dan on March 18, 2009 04:03 PM
31. #26,

"Oh yeah, Reichert and his "real world" experience: He has never worked in private industry."

I'd love to have you say that to my former drill intructor, GySgt. Holtry, USMC. That he doesn't have any "real world" experience because his paycheck comes from the gov't.

Methinks you'd pee your pants from his response.


Posted by: the Sasquatch on March 18, 2009 04:42 PM
32. Dude, guys.
Reichert is not switching parties. Period.

Posted by: Don Ward on March 18, 2009 05:26 PM
33. always wrong @26 -
It's tedious hearing your same, lame anti-Reichert arguement each time his name comes up on SP. Ridgeway could have been put away years earlier if you sniveling, ACLU-supporting, felon-loving lefties didn't give criminals every advantage in the court system. Did that wretched murder's victims get any advantages? Hmmmm,????

Next time you're tempted to raise the same, tired, false arguement, try upping your med dose for the day.

Shanghai Dan @ 30 - you took the words right out of my mouth.

Posted by: diamondshards on March 18, 2009 06:26 PM
34. "26. Oh yeah, Reichert and his "real world" experience: He has never worked in private industry."
Unlike His Imperial Majesty Barack Hussein Obama I.

Oh, wait...

Posted by: D.W. Drang on March 18, 2009 06:26 PM
35. @34 DW - But Obama was a Constitutional Law professor at Hah-vad.

Posted by: Crusader on March 18, 2009 09:16 PM
36. Crusader@35, no, Obama was a professor at Chicago. He went to law school (and was president of the Law Review) at Harvard.

Posted by: Bruce on March 18, 2009 10:08 PM
37. Suzan DelBene evidently took down her Facebook page. I Googled "Suzan DelBene", got a Facebook page as hit # 7, but the Facebook page has been deactivated, and her friend ID number does not work anymore.

Suzan Delbene - Seattle, WA | Facebook
Suzan Delbene (Seattle, WA) is on Facebook. Facebook gives people the power to share and makes the world more open and connected. - Similar pages

Probably a wise precaution to remove all real social networking pages before someone runs for office?

Posted by: Richard Pope on March 18, 2009 11:19 PM
38. Silly Goldy, still backing and defending his losing horse.

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 18, 2009 11:31 PM
39. @31: I eat drill Sargents for lunch, twit.

I also eat intellectually vacant fools like you for lunch.

Just pointing out the hypocrits from the right wing who love to glorify private industry, that Riechert has no private industry expoerience.

I have nothing against working for public institutions - except that Reichert was an incompetent fool when he did work for my tax dollars.

@33: Wrong again, it was theintelectually lazt Reichert who didn't do the basic investigation on a suspect. Nothing to do with your knee-jerk liberal crap. Grow up and get a job after you graduate the third grade.

The point is that the post was wrong - and now it has been corrected.
But the underlying assumption, the Burner is some wingnut lefty is an example of where bias and incorrect facts can take you.

Posted by: correctnotright on March 19, 2009 09:11 AM
40. From the Congressional Progressive Caucus "about" page:

1. Fighting for economic justice and security for all;
2. Protecting and preserving our civil rights and civil liberties;
3. Promoting global peace and security; and
4. Environmental Protection & Energy Independence

I cannot understand how it is possible for this caucus to do both 1 and 2. Doing #1 usually means fighting for unions and "card check" and fighting against right to work laws and large employers like Walmart. Doing #2 would be preserving civil rights like my freedom of association (a.k.a. my right to work). I guess their ordering of these bullet points is significant.

Doing #4 sets up all kinds of internal conflicts in their caucus. You can't preserve the prestine desert habitat while blanketing it with solar panels. Nor can you protect potentially endangered birds of prey while generating electricity with wind generators. The two greenest electric generating technologies are nuclear and hydro, both of which are unthinkable to the environmentalists. The only way we'll ever be energy independent is if we roll out nuclear electricity generation on a scale similar to Europe.

Posted by: blindman on March 19, 2009 10:04 AM
41. correctnotright is telling the truth about eating drill Sargents for lunch. Give credit where credit is due. correctnotright ate me for lunch just last week. You can tell correctnotright has been having that lunch for a very long time.

Posted by: chucks on March 19, 2009 10:07 AM
42. Did correctnotright toss your salad drill Sargent?

Posted by: Huh? on March 19, 2009 11:42 AM
43. incorrect and wrong @39

You bore us with your no-facts posts.
Go back on your meds.

Posted by: diamondshards on March 19, 2009 07:25 PM
Post a comment

Email Address:



Remember info?