Profile | Angie Vogt
» Follow Me on Twitter
Author's Latest Posts |
- Demand Full Disclosure from the Seattle Times
- Afghanistan: Could it Be Obama's LBJ Moment?
- California Coolin': Leave the "Cool Cars" Behind
- I-1033: Good Stewardship Begins at Home
- Looking for More Reasons to Approve I-1033? Here's Two!
More»
The "Specter" of Reichert: The Fallout Begins
By Angie Vogt | 06/28/09 | 05:16 PM EDT | 12 Comments
Might Congressman Reichert be putting into action the same strategy as Arlen Specter?
Not too long ago we were dismayed by Arlen Specter's change of political parties for what was clearly a desperate act of political survival. Specter was barely distinguishable from a Democrat anyway, and the GOP had been tolerating his insincerity for a long time. They finally got organized enough and put up a good primary opponent against Specter, hoping to dash his chances of getting re-elected in 2010. Alas, Specter did the cowardly thing and just changed parties. I don't think anybody has noticed anything different since he left.
I'm wondering if Congressman Dave Reichert's political suicide vote supporting the Cap and Trade Bill (HR 2454; American Clean Energy and Security Acts or ACES) might be his first indication of a like minded move. Reichert nearly lost his last two races against a liberal twinkie, named Darcy Burner, in a district that has been leaning more to left in recent years. The base has been tolerating Dave's slow drift to the left since he voted to ban drilling on ANWR and for the failed immigration reform bill that nearly slipped under the radar and into law.
8th district Republicans who championed and campaigned like crazy for Dave Reichert to ward off the dim bulb, Darcy Burner, have had their last bitter pill from him with this vote. The ominous "cap and trade", which imposes a huge energy tax swindle on the American people, is cleverly disguised as an energy plan, but is nothing short of a power grab from the religious left, otherwise known as environmentalists and global warm-mongers.
Here is an excerpted letter from the President of the National Association of Rural Landowners in response to Congressman Reichert's latest defection from center-right common sense:
Dear Congressman Reichert:
You do not represent me, nor any other conservative in the 8th District of Washington State who voted for you. You are just another corrupt politician that puts his finger to the wind to test its direction, to determine which way you will vote ..... or, you were bought off by the Obama Administration. Same difference.
As far as we are concerned you are a traitor to conservatives everywhere. For you to vote in favor of the cap and trade bill with seven other Republican traitors, with all the mounting evidence against man-caused global warming, including a draft report from the Environmental Protection Agency itself, makes you either outright stupid, or more interested in re-election than you are in the truth and what is constitutionally right. But worse, like most Democrats, you have violated your solemn oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. You might as well pull an Arlen Specter or a Fred Jarret and join the Democrat Party, as you are a Republican in Name Only.
Forty Four (44) Democrats voted against this bill, but eight (8) Republicans voted for it. Without the eight Republican votes, the measure would not have passed. We will be encouraging others to deluge you and the other seven Republican traitors, that allowed the cap and trade bill to pass in the House, with thousands of e-mails, faxes and telephone calls.
Here is a list of the other Republicans who joined with you. For those receiving this message, we strongly suggest you let the following congressmen and women know just who you feel about their vote.
Mary Bono Mack (CA)
Michael Castle (DE)
Mark Kirk (IL)
Leonard Lance (NJ)
Frank LoBiondo (NJ)
John McHugh (NY)
Chris Smith (NJ)
Ron Ewart, President
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF RURAL LANDOWNERS
P. O. Box 1031, Issaquah, WA 98027
TAGS: Cap and trade, ACES, environment, RINO, Reichert
| 
|
12 Comments | Related Topics »King County (WA) | National
RECOMMENDED SITES
Comments
This is a real shame. I am familiar with Mr. Reichert and his law enforcement career in Washington State. He di d a good job for the people of King County but he has really missed the boat on this one.
- reply
|All eight of these Congressmen need to go! This is a disgrace.
- reply
|Reichert’s a Scumbag, plain and simple! He is more worried about his next term in a liberal district than his own honor and the Constitution of the United States.
I am not in his district I am in the 6th, I am stuck with Dicks however, I will be supporting whoever is running against Reichert if he runs again.
Luke Esser must stand-up and issue a letter of disapproval to Reichert. We Republicans have to stand-up and support the Conservatives Republicans and remove the libs like Reichert.
Sad, Reichert was a good (clean) cop, but he is throwing all those years of dedicated service out the window because now he has become a lying “on-the-take” politician.
- reply
|Way to go, Davey boy. You just alienated all the voters who elected you.
Even though I don't live in your district, I'll be blogging, donating, and working hard to ensure your defeat if and when you choose to run again. Enjoy what's left of your political career.
You're a perfect example of why I and many others no longer consider ourselves Republicans.
- reply
|And it was a political suicide vote. What's wrong with these guys? Do they really need all that much attention. BONO's got to GO. So does Reichert.This "Spector Fever" stuff's gotta go!! I'm sick of these turn coats. Why is it that we can't tell they're bad when we support them for election? What's wrong with us that we vote for these guys? I totally agree with the Jeff William's post above when he states Reichert's "a perfect example of why I and many others don't consider ourselves Republicans." While I like to consider myself a Republican, its getting harder by the day to do so.
- reply
|Hammering Reichert is great, but using Ron Ewart/NARLO ain't the way to do it. Cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo
- reply
|As I wrote in my blog, some votes are unforgiveable.
I believe this vote was taken based on Dave's donor list, which is really allowing money to vote for him.
The vote is a vote against America, even the CBO knows it will be devasting to our finacial well being.
This program, and the push for government health care, both stab Americas heart and soul- freedom, directly, while enabling giant strides into socialism .
A largely ignorant public does not seem to realize that socialism is anti-freedom.
I formely regarded Reichert as someone that was honest, but now am much less certain about this.
Anyone that has honestly researched the topic and assessed the "facts" on the debate over climate change causes can see that much of it is 'bought and paid for' science full of manipulated and politicized data and has nearly no scientific validity.
How Reichert reached his decision is unclear, but it does show me that he is definately not thinking of Americans freedom or liberty with this vote.
- reply
|There is no such thing as a Free Lunch. Decisions, such as those of Reichart, are bringing all of us Republicans to our knees with grief. A "NO" vote here (in the "Tax and Spend" category) is an unequivocal vote against everything the Republican party stands for; much of which the above post by Dave pretty much nails. The warning signs of this century's conservative Benedict Arnolds, really began with the "Spectacle of Spector." The unabashed apologetic grovelling he displayed, all but set the tone for the rest of this term. How much money Spector was able to garner for his move, remains to be seen. That's really where those donor lists will come in handy. As the Bono's and Reichert's and Spector's actions are warning us, we need to get a finger in the dike fast before our dam totally bursts making a comeback not feasible. Our party does need some good decent individuals that can stand up to the bribes, however unspoken they may be. BUT, we also need to dump some of our loser causes, like abortion (which should be an individual decision) if we even want to have seats available for us at the bargaining table. There is little time for debate, time is our enemy.
- reply
|<!--[if gte mso 9]>
Normal
0
false
false
false
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<![endif]-->
Dick Morris on Hannity the other night said that the Democrat Party (ie President Obama) had decided that the cap and trade bill would pass and that some would be allowed to vote "no". He explained that there was a ranking of who was secure in getting re-elected to those that will have a fight on their hands...the secure seats automatically voted no…then as they moved down the line where the vote would pass, what kind of favors had to be exchanged to either let them vote no, or make you vote yes (either way, they were going to pass the bill). Just a power game...so how can we expect any politician to heed their constituents?
I am not in Reicherts district, but I will help defeat him and Norm Dicks…they can go back to the private sector as far as I am concerned…
- reply
|Well said. Thanks for posting.
- reply
|This is silly. There is zero chance Reichert is changing parties. His pro-life position and the rest of his record would get him defeated instantly. So Reichert fumbled this vote. Where is he on health care and the stimulus vote? I will take a 99% guy everyday and twice on Sundays. Who wants to trade him in for a Pelosi rubber stamp?
- reply
|Reichert is a 99% guy? You might want to check the record. I was a big Reichert supporter and I think he is a good man, but this is a monumental vote to "fumble." Cap and Trade legislation would put our economy firmly squarely in the toilet and would cost jobs in the process. Reichert "fumbled" the vote for one of two reasons:
1. and I believe this is the primary reason; Dave Reichert actually thinks this legislation is a good thing.
2. or...he is thinking about 2010 and keeping his seat.
This vote shows his inability to comprehend the legislation or it shows he is more concerned with his political future than he is with his constituents. Either way, it illustrates that he is not fit to serve in the U.S. Congress.
Again, you would not have found a bigger supporter than I was prior to the election, but there is far too much at stake to give him a pass on this vote.
- reply
|Post new comment