The Seattle Times breaks the news:
In recent weeks, congressional candidate Darcy Burner has touted her Harvard degree in economics when talking about the nation's financial crisis and her opposition to the bailout package passed by Congress.At two debates this month, she brought up her academic background in her opening statement.
"I loved economics so much that I got a degree in it from Harvard," she said at an Oct. 10 debate at KCTS-TV. "Now everywhere I go in this district, the only thing people want to talk to me about is the economy."
But Burner doesn't have an economics degree from Harvard.
She does have a bachelor's degree in computer science, the university said. And her academic transcripts show she took five economics courses, enough to earn an emphasis in economics within her computer science degree.
Not smart. Complete unforced error. Bemoaning Bush economic policies at length and actually coming up with her own economic agenda (besides tax increases and trade protectionism) would have served her purposes just as well as unnecessarily inflating her own academic credentials.
UPDATE: Per commenter "Mr. Cyncial" I checked the Burner website. As of this typing, her biography says:
She didn't give up and she didn't just muddle through. Instead, she buckled down and studied twice as hard at school, while working two or three jobs at time, to get accepted and then put herself through Harvard, where she earned a degree in computer science and economics.
That text contradicts today's defense from the Burner's campaign that they have been consistent about the nature of the degree. They were clearly selling it as a dual degree or dual major...and at times just fibbing outright about it as the Times caught Burner doing at a debate.
I don't believe such a strategy is at any point outlined in the DCCC's playbook on how to win a Congressional race.
UPDATE II:
UPDATE III: Burner showcases her netroots persona via Twitter in reponse to today's news:
It's bad enough Republicans baldly lie. But the MSM press aids and abets. I am, at this moment, glad both institutions are failing.
Note to self: if I ever work on a campaign again, make sure any Twitter-using candidate actually understands it is in the public domain. Better yet, don't let them Twitter or make glib comments on other social networking sites.
Nightmare averted.
"Times were tough but Darcy was tougher. She didn't give up and she didn't just muddle through. Instead, she buckled down and studied twice as hard at school, while working two or three jobs at time, to get accepted and then put herself through Harvard, where she earned a degree in computer science and economics."
See:
http://www.darcyburner.com/pages/biography/
I would have thought these losers would have changed it!
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on October 22, 2008 07:06 PMDarcy, meet the f*cking post!
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on October 22, 2008 07:08 PMKind of a dimwit? You give her too much credit. She is oof the charts inept. I've talked to people at Microsoft who say she was a real train wreck. (and these are democrats) She was propped up because the Democratic party could not find anyone with experience to run for that seat. This should be the end of her campaign. I know the Reichert camp will have ads out on this very soon.
Posted by: Red County on October 22, 2008 07:12 PMBtw, got a robocall from Mrs. Marxist---aka Michelle Obama---telling me to vote for Mr. Marxist.
Posted by: Michele on October 22, 2008 07:28 PMI hope I am wrong
Posted by: LCRW on October 22, 2008 07:33 PMhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISkG7W3v3q8
Posted by: Mike on October 22, 2008 07:40 PMI'm Darcy Burner running for congress in Washington's 8th congressional district.
It's been a very interesting two years since the last time I was in here actually.
I obviously didn't set out initially to be a politician, my background is in computer science and economics.
Then later she says this:
What I have done for my entire adult life is work with really big systems full of numbers.
My degree is in computer science and economics, I was a programmer.
And then did strategy for Microsoft, really big systems full of numbers.
That's what I do for a living.
It's what she does for a living, folks. Don't discount the ability to work with "really big systems of numbers". That's gotta be worth a Harvard degree, right???
Posted by: Smoley on October 22, 2008 07:57 PMWhatever: Kudos to the Times for laying out in black and white what nobody needs a math degree to easily and immediately understand; i.e.:
Taking a handful of econ courses does NOT equal a degree in econ. No further explanation required.
SIDEBAR: Even though I am not one of his constituents; yeah; you bet:
I'm rootin' for the Sherriff.
Methow Ken
Why would anyone running for public office pad their resume, and think they will get away with it?
Not that her base cares. Or the nutroots.
Posted by: Sasquatch on October 22, 2008 08:07 PMAnd what is about all these Harvard asswipes that makes them so damn liberal and so damn stupid. I'd love to hear from one of our commenters who went to Harvard, but came out thinking for themselves instead of just parroting liberal talking points.
To a man/woman, every person I've ever known who attended Harvard is a stuck up Progressive asshat.
"Darcy was a bobblehead.. she MAY be able to say she was a programmer.. but a strategy person? NO WAY! HAHAHAHAHA!"
Reichert better pound this info hard for the next two weeks.
Posted by: Microsoft Wife on October 22, 2008 08:26 PMIt always seemed that she meant well. That said, I found her incredibly naive and extremely condescending at times. Some of us thought she might rejoin our class after her first loss. I was shocked when she decided to run again. I cannot believe the democrats were foolish enough to allow her the nomination again. If she was not able to win in 2006 when so many other republicans were swept out, it pretty much meant that she was unelectable. I will be shocked if she wins it.
The best advice I ever got was to tell the truth.
Posted by: Commentator on October 22, 2008 09:39 PMYou will now denounce her lies and puffed up self-importance (Much like that lying empty suited, anti-American racist bigot you so admire, come to think of it) and hold her up to the same ridicule you heap upon any candidate that disagrees with you.... right?
You HAVE to do SOMETHING MORE than a retarded, moronic, playground BS nyah, nyah "bet you could get through Harvard" crap.... right?
Nah. To be a leftist is to be hypocrite. It is to have a sickening double-standard installed in you that would allow you to join the chorus of those condemning Mark Foley while you remain absolutely silent concerning his uber-leftist replacement, Mahoney who would screw anything that moved and then pay them off...
... all without a peep from the leftist scum infesting us here.
Posted by: Hinton on October 22, 2008 09:47 PMIncluding yourself in that, tensor? I'm not sure what point you were trying to make.
The fact the Burner supposedly has one (two, according to her) has just lowered the value of a Harvard degree exponentially.
Posted by: Dave on October 22, 2008 10:37 PMHmmmm..interesting. Maybe she thought the "Barry Standard" applied to all Democrat candidates.
Posted by: Dave on October 22, 2008 10:43 PMMoreover, if you want to get a degree in Economics, Harvard used to be one of the top schools. But it has slipped in the field of economics. Few of the thought and research leaders in the field come out of or are teaching at Harvard.
Finally, I have to say that, with my public university training (both under-grad and grad school), I must really be a dope. This is because these Ivy League "educated" people often really seem very dumb to me. It must be that I am just not smart enough to be on the same level as their ingenious thinking?
Oh, don't get me wrong. I've known plenty of people and worked with plenty of people who graduated from Ivy League schools who are fine people. But, generally, I would not hire one. And, I don't want one working on my project team or working for a vendor I hire or providing consulting services to my business. They just never seem to deliver. And, I've passed up chances to work for one (wow! can you believe that), because in each case I found them to be rather narcissistic - not the sort of people that will share credit with a team that does most of the work.
My guess is that it has something to do with all of the politically correct mind melding that is done to them in these schools (Woman Studies for example ... never hire a woman with a degree in that, or even a minor in that, or who has taken even one woman studies class). They just loose the ability to think critically and logically to reach an objective end-point. On top of that, these people often feel entitled, and that attitude just doesn't fly when it comes to getting things done. Now, THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS, but I have run into this enough times that I feel I can state with about 95% confidence that an Ivy League educated person will usually not be a great performer in a merit based system.
They count on you being impressed with that Harvard degree. If you're not, they are completely lost. Why do you think Darcy mentioned - probably on several occasions - that she went to Harvard? It's to plant the idea in your head that she must be very smart. Then, she can say and do stupid things, she hopes, and you will still think she's smart.
Maybe she is smart. But, my guess is she is not much smarter than your average public school college graduate. Certainly Reichert should not feel that he lacks for smarts compared to Darcy.
Posted by: bananaland on October 22, 2008 10:59 PMThe Democrats aren't looking for truth, qualifications, acumen, etc. They consistently cite that Republicans should be rebuked for sex scandals because Republicans claim the moral high ground, but hold themselves to no such standard.
Darcy Burner is in the mold of Barack Obama, although with much less intelligence and charisma. She graduated from Camp Wellstone like Obama graduated from Camp Ayers. At such camps, they look for the passionate collectivist types, and that is enough of a qualification to run for office.
And they clearly don't do any vetting at these camps. Because they are running these candidates in areas trending Blue where voters are asleep at the wheel.
@34 Dopio don't give her any ideas. If the CEO is still alive and a Democrat, then he will probably lie for Darcy in her next ad.
Posted by: Jeff B. on October 22, 2008 11:05 PMI worked for a Harvard grad once. It was a total nightmare. And it was a she, who had the whole woman's studies chip on her shoulder. And she actively hired others like her from Harvard, even when the whole team recommended otherwise in the hiring process. I wouldn't have done it, except for that fact that there was a lot of money in the job. After that, I began working for myself and vowed never to work for another one of these stuck up types again.
I agree, they like to fluff up their feathers, but that doesn't do much when you have to get things done.
Posted by: Jeff B. on October 22, 2008 11:34 PM
As a self-made woman, community leader and mother, Darcy has the kind of authentic, real world experience that voters identify with. She's not a career politician, but she knows where she stands. In Congress, she will be a principled leader.
Self-made? [x]- quite literally makes up her own qualifications out of whole cloth.
Authentic? [ ]- See self-made
Real world experience that voter's can identity with? [ ]- most haven't had their house burn down and don't lie about having degrees they haven't earned.
She's not a career politican? [x] ..and she will never have the chance to be. (good thing too, cuz she reminds me of Patty Murray lite)
In Congress, she'll be a 'principled leader'? [ ]- She may want to look up those two words before putting them on her website as attributes.
Posted by: Rick D. on October 23, 2008 07:38 AMMaybe Darcy will finally go away after she's defeated this time. She's just annoying at this point.
Posted by: Palouse on October 23, 2008 08:13 AMNo. One has a degree in Computer Science and a minor in Economics. Stop splitting hairs.
Posted by: jimg on October 23, 2008 09:25 AMI don't believe that is true. Even if it was a "minor" by whatever technical definition you choose, that is not the same as a degree in economics. I have never told anyone I have a degree in economics, even though I have a minor. If I had told an employer than I had an economics degree, they would have grounds to dismiss me.
Posted by: Palouse on October 23, 2008 09:26 AMYou'd think they'd actually, and actively be in here defending the local empty suit. They seem quite conspicuous by their absence.
Posted by: Hinton on October 23, 2008 10:14 AMSo:
Lied about MS "Executive" experience. Why I don't know. That experience wouldn't be something that helps a political resume anyway.
Lied about her degree. I know all the dems supporting her are saying it's not technically a lie, but of course it is. They would destroy a republican if he/she said anything of the sort. HA would run blog entry after blog entry and KOS would be screaming lie from the mountain tops. Just look at how many posts they have about Reichert and the Green River Arrest.
But for all you people calling her dumb, get off that. She is obviously not dumb. That should be clear. Disingenuous, haughty, stuck up, elitist, ill informed, lacking experience, dishonest, immature, yes. Dumb no.
Posted by: MrRcguy on October 23, 2008 10:25 AMhttp://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=R000578
Notice anything strange there? So now a tit-for-tat allegation has been raised that Reichert is embellishing his credentials.
Seriously, are we talking about a genuine pattern of deceit here? Or is this something less-than-worthy of our attention?
I'd honestly like an answer to both my questions.
Posted by: Harumph on October 23, 2008 11:32 AM2. Reichert is not running around, shooting off his mouth about his degree. Burner is.
3. Burner doesn't have the degree she publicly claims she has. How this is even open to interpretation is mind-boggling.
4. The fact that a good portion of Burner's supporters are defending her lies says more about them and their candidate than anything Reichert may or may not have done.
Posted by: jimg on October 23, 2008 02:47 PMAt least Dave has a record. Darcy's got what - a record of lying?
And as far as demonizing opponents, ask your Messiah Barack Obama about getting opponents tossed off the ballot, or forcing open sealed divorce records. Pure as the driven snow, that one (after it's been visited by a dog sled team, that is...)
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on October 24, 2008 06:11 AM