By Robert Horn
October 16, 2006
I’m not sure what Darcy Burner has done to receive the sneaky one-two punch given her by your paper’s editorial board both in the debate you sponsored and your quick endorsement on Sunday of her opponent. In the debate, James Vesely showed his political stripe by continually admonishing the pro-Democratic audience, seeking at one point to give Mr. Reichert “more time,” and restating questions to Burner when he didn’t like her answer, demanding that she answer to him. When she mentioned the “L” word, Vesely verily chuckled with delight as he offered Reichert extra time to “defend himself”. Despite Vesely’s efforts to rattle Burner, it was the big strong ex-cop who came a bit unglued and bristled with anger and emotion, while the young Mom showed coolness under pressure.
Then in the endorsement, we’re expected to give Mr. Reichert kudos for parting ways with the Republican right-wing on Terry Schiavo and drilling in ANWR. Please. The endorsement carries a full paragraph on Burner’s voting record, which my research shows to be six out of eight times in the past 4 elections (including primaries.) Not perfect … but spare the civics lesson and parental chastisement! Please. And to compare Burner’s campaign tactics to Karl Rove, when we are forced to watch outright lies on TV on a daily basis by the Republicans running the McGavick and Reichert campaigns. Triple please. While Reichert is well-intended, intellectually he seems to be playing “catch-up” to understand important issues like global warming and stem-cell research. The problem in Congress today is that we have too many intellectually challenged people making decisions for the rest of us. The Eastside and the country deserve better.