In defense of the accusation that Darcy Burner said she has a degree in economics she doesn't hold, the Burner campaign put out a video that says an old professor likes her but never says she actually has that degree in economics in question:
Moreover, this professor seems a bit of an odd choice to defend oneself on the issue of academic credentials.
He has said Harvard is run "like a daycare for college students" (while voicing support for grade inflation). He also said:
Undergraduate education should not be too advanced or too specialized, nor should it include courses that would be helpful in the world of business .. students are better of being broadly educated generalists...
Tell me again why I'm supposed to think Darcy Burner has a degree in economics? Heck, I feel less positive about her degree from Harvard, period, based on hearing from this professor.
UPDATE: Busted.
Burner taped a public access candidate statement for KING 5 prior to the Seattle Times story coming out last week. One of the campaign's defenses at the time was that the explanation of a degree in computer science with a special field in economics ""doesn't exactly flow off the tongue.'"
Well, why couldn't she come up with a more accurate way to say that as part of a long, prepared statement like this?
She could have been more clear. But she wasn't. Now she has been caught inflating her resume, which is already questionable for someone running for Congress anyway.
Just ugly.
Posted by Eric Earling at October 26, 2008 10:01 PM | Email ThisDarcy Burner is a liar.
Posted by: Seabecker on October 26, 2008 10:26 PMAs recent Harvard graduates, we have a shocking revelation we would like to share with your readers: Democratic congressional candidate Darcy Burner may have received a degree from Harvard in 1996, but she was neither a computer-science major nor an economics minor, and she was certainly not both ["Darcy Burner's claims of a Harvard econ degree an exaggeration," News, Oct. 22].
The terminology our university uses can be tricky. Graduates of Harvard College (which is part of Harvard University, but actually predates it), receive artium baccalaureus (A.B.) degrees, also known as Bachelor of Arts in English, and instead of majors, we have concentrations. We call teaching assistants "teaching fellows." And despite last year's addition of secondary fields, there was and is still nothing called a minor at Harvard.
As her profile on The Seattle Times' Web site correctly states, Burner's education is, "Harvard University, B.A. in computer science with a special field of economics, 1996." And as she explains on her own Web site, at Harvard, Burner "earned a degree in computer science and economics." There is no contradiction here, no exaggeration, and certainly no lying.
At Harvard, we have joint concentrations, which are like double majors. As of this year, we also have primary and secondary fields, which is like a major and a minor. And to make matters even more confusing, when Burner was at Harvard, the computer-science department required students to choose an area of specialization. Burner chose economics. As a result, Burner completed five upper-level economics courses, in addition to significant course work in computer science and mathematics. Burner's course of study was almost certainly more intensive than that of the majority of economics concentrators at Harvard.
Voters in Washington's 8th Congressional District have more important issues to worry about than the terms in use at Harvard. We hope that The Seattle Times recommits itself to investigating issues that really matter as the election draws near.
-- Jean Yang, Cambridge, Mass., and Seth Flaxman, Switzerland
Posted by: Sam on October 26, 2008 10:26 PMJust because she wasn't clear enough for you does not mean she wasn't clear. Please learn the difference.
Your faith in the MSM -- here represented by The Seattle Times -- is touching. We liberals know enough to go beyond "the filter", and right back to the source, the Harvard Dean who wrote her graduation requirements. He agrees she has the qualifications she claims.
Now, which Congressional candidate allowed others to claim he had a B.A., a degree he has never earned?
Posted by: tensor on October 26, 2008 10:53 PMShe's cratering on this issue. The fact that she feels the need to dig up old professors, etc. is the "wait, let me explain" moment. Voters see though this kind of charade.
Posted by: Jeff B. on October 26, 2008 11:23 PMI have a degree in Economics. I took 43 quarterly credits of upper level economics classes.
It appears that Harvard is on semesters. I don't know if Darcy took 5 year long econ classes, or just 5 semester-long classes. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt that these five classes were upper level, and not the entry level type.
Best case - she took 5 classes, 5 credits each, semester classes. That means she took 25 semester credits, which would translate to 37 quarterly credits, less than what I took.
Worst case - she took 5 classes, 3 credits each, semester classes. That means 15 semester credits, which would translate to 22.5 quarterly credits, or half of what I took. That would be a "minor" or whatever they want to call it. It isn't a "degree".
I stand ready to be corrected. But I want real analysis, not half baked attacks.
Posted by: janet s on October 26, 2008 11:43 PMWhy do you libs waste your time posting here? You admit this is a partisan crowd, and it is. Go have a happy lib fest over at HA. Nobody here will be swayed by your biased views, just as nobody is ever swayed at HA by a non-lib poster. Unless you are being paid by the Burner campaign, your wasting your life idolizing a woman with no experience, no accomplishments and 9 days from now - still no job.
Posted by: ameslaker on October 26, 2008 11:52 PMYou want context. Read the rest of the threads about Darcy on this blog. This issue is by far not the worst thing Darcy Burner has claimed, only the latest. Or go to HA and get your pablum.
Posted by: ameslaker on October 27, 2008 12:16 AMIt takes an Ivy Leager to sound this smug.
Thanks, Jean and Seth. We'll take it from here. We needn't detain you further.
Posted by: Texpatiate on October 27, 2008 06:27 AMSo to me, in regards to Burner, it means should probably took 2 to 4 additional economic courses besides the standard Macro and Micro Economics courses that most science and business students take. I am sure Statistical Analysis probably also counted as part of the Econ emphasis, although, it is also probably a standard class for Computer Science graduates. The point is a lot of classes do have cross-over between degrees. Having an emphasis, or for that matter, a minor, is not the same as one's major field of study. For Burner, her major was Computer Science, which mean the bulk of her classes were in Computer Science (Programming, Assembly, Data Structures, etc.) or Math (Analytical methods, statistics, etc.). I am sure she had Macro and Micro Economics.
None of this really matters, however, because how many years ago did she attend college? How often has she used the Econ part of her knowledge since she graduated?
Finally, she should realize that economic "experts" are not those with undergraduate Econ degrees, they at least have Masters, and most all have PHD in Economics. As far as I can tell, Darcy doesn't even have an MBA, which would be typical for any business, engineering, or science major who want to move into more general management route. At least an MBA would provide some additional background on economics, on General and Financial Accounting, and on Marketing that would provide one better understanding of how to deal with what is going on with today's markets.
No, Darcy is fighting a losing battle on this one. Give it up Darcy.
Posted by: tc on October 27, 2008 07:03 AMDarcy spent waaaaay too much time protesting this one. She should have issued one clarifying press release and moved on. Instead, she searched for minor, inaccurate bio websites (not controlled by her opponent) to make a weak case that she isn't alone. She gave the story longer legs by that weak statement from her Harvard professor
Her lie in and of itself wouldn't have been terrible had it not been for the fact that A) this wasn't her first resume inflation lie and B) the lie was one that served the obvious purpose of puffing up her qualifications durring the current economic crisis.
The Darcy has always known that her weakness in this and every campaign is her blatent lack of any relevant public service experience. Rather than spend the past two years actually serving the public on boards, volunteer efforts and the like, she simply spent her time courting her most ardent supporters and donors, the DailyKos, ActBlue, George Soros crowds.
It's amazing to me that in a Cong. district that is AT LEAST 50% democrat, the D's can't come up with a more qualified candidate.
Posted by: diamondshards on October 27, 2008 07:21 AMLOL, your a chart maker!
Well that explanes it all.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on October 27, 2008 07:47 AMAndrew Brown: you're wrong, a lot of people DO care about this. Darcy comes off as not altogether sincere, and this fact that she lied plays into that, and it's a large part of the picture.
Posted by: pudge on October 27, 2008 08:01 AM"It's amazing to me that in a Cong. district that is AT LEAST 50% democrat, the D's can't come up with a more qualified candidate."
And they have run her not once, but twice!
Go get a job, Darcy, it (victory) ain't gonna happen this time either. Or run for county council, state legislature, something that establishes (if you win and serve) a record that voters can observe and use to form opinions. Or is that the problem neo-coms have....the record thing....well, you can always hope to hide behind a biased media like the rest of the Dims do.
Posted by: Saltherring on October 27, 2008 08:23 AMThe last thing we need is her. Patty M is bad enough.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on October 27, 2008 08:24 AMTechnically, IE's tradition has its root with Fredrick Taylor and have been classified originally as the stopwatch people due to time and motion study work. I didn't want to be a stopwatch person, so I got into the emerging System Engineering side that relates to IT systems. At that time, the university didn't have a Computer Engineering or Software Engineering degree. If I went today, it would be in Software Engineering.
For the record, I also have 30 credit hours of MBA work at PLU, but no degree. Therefore, I make no claim on having an MBA degree.
Posted by: tc on October 27, 2008 08:58 AM"Now, which Congressional candidate allowed others to claim he had a B.A., a degree he has never earned"?
Obviously, just like Darcy, you think that if you repeat a lie over and over it becomes truth. Well, it don't.
But in the interest of fairness and holding all candidates to the high standards you would like Reichert to abide by, be advised that CNET posted a story this morning stating Darcy worked for Microsoft for 12 years. As we all know, it was less than 4. Walk across the room and tell Sandip to call them and have them correct this error. He was quoted often in the article, so I assume he has their number. Oh that's right, he'll probably spin it into something like her using her brother's military experience to indicate she's an expert on the war. I've got it, we meant that my husband and I worked for Microsoft for a combined 12 years. But because we talked about Microsoft even after I left, it was the same thing as still working there. Woo-Hoo, works for me.
Yes we had a few in our Fire dept on were to put equipment on rigs & medic units. Or driving speeds to a call. Thank god our Chief said enough of this BS and told the city to stop wasting our FD funds. Which they fought at first but gave in when we proved the IE's wrong!
The GOV is full of these people. Boeing too!
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on October 27, 2008 09:14 AMTruly, the double standard of the left continues to astound.
Posted by: Hinton on October 27, 2008 09:16 AMDarcy is now running in part on her "economics" degree. She doesn't have a degree in economics. Even if you try to weasel that she has the equivalent of a minor in economics... it's not the same as a degree.
If someone runs on their "expertise" based on their degree, and it turns out that at best, they are greatly inflating that degree, how do we know she has the supposed expertise she claims her degree gave her? Especially when she already has a history of inflating other parts of her resume?
You can't run based on a set of qualifications, then say whether you actually have those qualifications or not is irrelevant. That's a big deal, and as someone who is going to be voting in this race, not something I can ignore.
Posted by: Mike H on October 27, 2008 09:30 AMBut I guess it's okay to lie and cheat if you are liberal.
Posted by: Thomas B. on October 27, 2008 10:00 AMBottom line is that we are spending three times the amount on the programs generated and propagated by the liberal democrats than we are spending to terrorism. Which leads me to my point that if Darcy had an economic degree why in God's name would she be a Progressive Democrat? Seems like a contradiction to me.
There seems to be a mentality within the Democratic Party that it is acceptable to exaggerate or downright lie. Then the candidates state the lies so many times, I think they actually believe it. As a Blue Dog Democrat I feel as though I have been the Sarah Palin of the Democratic Party in Washington. I have attacked Darcy Burner and Christine Gregorie on their lies. It makes all the Democrats look bad and it turns voters away. I cannot recall how many people have told me during my campaign that they are not going to vote because all politicians are crooks and liars. Thanks Darcy and Chris for confirming their beliefs.
WHAT IS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY THINKING WHEN THE SPEW THESE LIES:
Al Gore and the internet.
Darcy Burner a Microsoft Executive and now an economics degree.
Christine Gregorie has a budget surplus. If I make $500 a week and spend $400 a week I will have a surplus of $800 by the end of the year. However, I have bills coming due in 2009 and 2010 that amount to 3.2 BILLION. Unfortunately, I will continue to make $500 per month and probably less given the current economy. THERE IS NO SURPLUS.
Hillary Clinton came under sniper fire in Bosnia. I was a delegate for Hillary and she lost my vote when she LIED.
And the best of all from Bill Clinton. I DID NOT HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH THAT WOMAN.
I am not perfect but I don't lie and will not tolerate anyone who does.
As a former military officer, that ran for US Congress as a Democrat, YOU LOST MY VOTE.
JIM VAUGHN
BLUE DOG DEMOCRAT
CHAIRMAN OF DEMOCRATS FOR DAVE REICHERT.
I'm wondering, does that equate to spending a night at a Holiday Express?
Posted by: Saltherring on October 27, 2008 10:34 AMMary Washington College
B.A., Political Science, History, 1993 � 1997
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ericearling
I just spoke with the Registrar at UMW, and was informed that Earling does indeed have a B.A. in Political Science granted in Spring 1997, but that a History major does not seem to appear on the degree. So presumably Earling had the 36 credits in Political Science required for a major, but not the 36 credits in History that were required for a major in that subject.
I wonder if Earling is willing to make his UMW transcript public, as Darcy Burner has done, so that his degree claims can be verified? Did Earling take enough History for a major, or did he merely take substantial course work short of a major, as Burner did in Economics?
I think it is even more important that Earling prove his degree claims, than it would be for Burner. Earling is the number 2 appointee for the U.S. Department of Education in the Pacific Northwest. His education is highly relevant to his appointment. Burner, on the other hand, is running for an office with no educational qualifications whatsoever, which is occupied by a fellow with a two year A.A. degree.
[Eric: I responded to this at comment # 47. Richard's assertion is in error.]
Posted by: Richard Pope on October 27, 2008 11:42 AMOn the air NOW !
Posted by: ameslaker on October 27, 2008 11:58 AMNo. 33 above, perhaps we should put you in charge of finding the "Missing Link" because the one you provided just doesn't connect.
Posted by: swatter on October 27, 2008 12:02 PMYou should try running for office again. You seem to have a lot of time on your hands.
Posted by: Chris on October 27, 2008 12:26 PMSo for the record. Are you still beating your wife?
So, when Eric runs for office and say's he has something he doesn't. Then your comment may mean something, but as of now. ZIP!
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on October 27, 2008 12:37 PMIt's not good to drink in the morning. (-:
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on October 27, 2008 12:45 PMIt's been 4 hours since I alerted you, and you still are allowing CNET to misstate your tenure at Microsoft. Oh, that's right, you are busy today chickening out of being on "The Commentators" 3 minutes before you agreed to appear.
You go TufGrrrl. Apparently NOT !
Yes, I only pointed it out because electrical is another important and widely recognized engineering discipline. In fact, my degree is actually the computer engineering degree you mention. My freshman year was the first offering of this combined degree which was half electrical engineering with an emphasis on digital circuits, microprocessors, microcontrollers, etc. and half computer science math, data structures, programming, etc. The concept being that in order to really understand and build computers correctly, one needs to understand both hardware and software and their interrelation.
Posted by: Jeff B. on October 27, 2008 01:14 PMLOL............ thanks!
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on October 27, 2008 02:06 PMCall the school again. Apparently you are not as thorough as you think....
Posted by: Chris on October 27, 2008 06:19 PMThanks for the chuckle, but you're incorrect.
Try calling back and asking them to give you the second major associated with the degree. When I graduated the college had graduates with a double major - there were no minors - fill out paperwork asking which degree they would like listed first, since the college's record system for some reason has to list one of them first. I chose political science, which thus should be the first degree showing (as you discovered). The full copy of my transcript shows majors in both disciplines.
Since, however, you are so gravely concerned by all this, here are the credits I earned in history, generally by semester, with the grade earned in parentheses. Each class listed is for three credit hours and grades were administered on a straight A, B, C, D, and F scale - with no pluses or minuses.
- 3 credits for scoring a 5 on the AP European History exam in high school. These credits also fulfilled the requirement of Western Civ II for a history major at Mary Washington College.
- Fall 1994
History 299: Introduction to the Study of History (B)
- Fall 1995
History 353: History of France (A)
- Spring 1996
History 380: History of the US Since 1945 (A)
History 471EE: Lyndon B. Johnson (A)
- Fall 1996
History 121: Western Civ I (A)
History 304: Civil War (A)
History 375: Military History (A)
- Spring 1997
History 302: US Diplomatic History (A)
History 303: The American South (A)
History 377: Second World War (A)
History 485: Historical Research (A)
That adds up to 36 credits in history, thus a second major. Other info on the transcript if you remain curious:
Final GPA (four-point scale): 3.729. I graduated Magna Cum Laude, as a member of Phi Beta Kappa, with a class rank of 50/856. I was on the Dean's List and/or the President's List seven of my eight semesters at Mary Washington.
Thanks for the trip down memory lane.
Posted by: Eric Earling on October 27, 2008 06:47 PMI actually talked to the Registrar personally, because the staff member who answered insisted that I had to provide your social security number. The staff member transferred me to the Registrar, who said she could not understand why I was told about the need for the social security number.
Anyway, the Registrar told me the degree was in Political Science. I then specifically asked about History, and was told that there was not a History major on your degree. I think the Registrar probably looked at several computer screens to make sure there was not a History degree shown in the system.
However, the credits you have listed certainly should give you a History major.
Like I said, Darcy Burner gets the same results if someone calls the Registrar at Harvard to verify what they have her degree listed in. The minor in Economics (technically called a "special field" or something like that) won't appear on the computer screen at Harvard either.
Posted by: Richard Pope on October 27, 2008 11:59 PMI called the Registrar's office myself. The employee I spoke with pulled up my degree, then when I asked about a second major she said she had to push an additional button to see that, which she did, showing the history major.
Moreover, as I indicated, the written copy of my official transcript shows both majors. It is actually a part of the standard Mary Washington records for my degree, regardless of whether or not you were given a clear answer when you called.
It sounds like the Registrar herself isn't entirely familiar with the technology in her own office.
Posted by: Eric Earling on October 28, 2008 07:23 AMI am still missing your point. More thorough research has been done with Harvard than "find the extra button to push".
Her "degree" by any standard doesn't exist.
Ergo, she is a liar.
What makes this worse is that she has continued to lie. It wasn't one slip up, a simple ooopppsss!!!!
This was a campaign strategy. And that speaks volumes, don't you think?
Posted by: Chris on October 28, 2008 09:41 AM