Darcy vs Suzie

I gave myself the weekend to sleep on it, during which I didn’t load a Seattle Times web page once. I thought I might, with a little distance, eventually fisk the paper’s execrable editorial endorsement of Susan Hutchison, but I can’t really bring myself to read it again, let alone read it closely. And honestly… why bother?

For the core of my critique of the Times as both an opinion leader, and as a news organization doesn’t require line-by-line mockery to explicate: quite simply, they are a bunch of fucking hypocrites, a thesis that is perhaps best illustrated by contrasting their treatment of Susan Hutchison with that of Darcy Burner.

As we all know, the Times’ editors dismissed Darcy as an inexperienced lightweight, out of touch with the mainstream values of her district, who should have been advised to work her way up to a congressional challenge… a particularly galling critique considering the quality of her opponent. But perhaps the most misogynistic and mean-spirited attack was the accusation that she “lacked authenticity,” a theme picked up by their news department to devastating effect in an eleventh hour front page smear piece accusing Darcy of lying about her Harvard degree.

Compare that to the Times’ treatment of Suzie, a woman who has never held political office, never ran a business, and never even managed a staff, running for what amounts to the governorship of a small state. What political and administrative qualifications does Suzie bring to office? None. Yet in Suzie’s evolution-denying, abortion-opposing, union-busting hands, inexperience suddenly becomes a positive, enabling her to bring a “fresh” perspective to the problems facing King County government. Yay!

I mean… what the fuck?

And I haven’t even gotten to the issue of authenticity yet.

For let’s be honest, Susan Hutchison has run perhaps one of the least authentic political campaigns since George Wallace ran for governor of Alabama in 1982 on a civil rights platform. On more than one occasion I’ve had local journalists defend her, saying that she’s not as right-wing as I make her out to be, but that’s not the point: Hutchison is not nearly as moderate or as nonpartisan as she makes herself out to be, which makes her entire campaign a lie to which the Times has been complicit.

Furthermore, in recent weeks, Hutchison has repeatedly lied about incontrovertible facts. She claims she never gave money to the BIAW, when in fact she did. She claims her unreported campaign headquarters is merely the residence of her campaign manager, when it isn’t. And she claims the PDC has already dismissed 79 of the 82 allegations in the PDC complaint filed against her, which the PDC firmly denies.

And, of course, Hutchison laughably denies that she is a partisan Republican

Yet where is the front page article taking Suzie to task for her lies?

There is no editorial attacking Suzie’s lack of experience or her extremist values, nor front page article attacking her relentless lack of truthfulness, because unlike with Darcy, the Times wants Suzie to win. And, because as an institution, they are a bunch of fucking hypocrites.

Now I know there are those who will come back at me in the comment thread, accusing me of being just as ideological as the Times, and at least as hypocritical, but let me remind you that I’m just some foul-mouthed, partisan blogger who post photos of dog turds to his front page, and accuses a sitting state senator of fucking pigs, while they are our state’s paper of record.  I’m not supposed to be better than the Times. They’re supposed to be better than me.

But they’re not.

And as can clearly be seen in their hypocritical treatment of Darcy vs. Suzie, the Times’ alleged credibility is just as fictitious as Hutchison’s alleged nonpartisanship.


  1. 1

    Emily spews:

    I agree with you on just about everything you say here, Goldy, but wouldn’t it be nice if the two women were Burner and Hutchison instead of Darcy and Suzie?

  2. 2


    Emily @1,

    I suppose, but since we affectionately referred to Darcy as “Darcy” throughout her campaign, and since the far right wingers at the David Boze Show affectionately refer to Suzie as “Suzie”, I just thought I’d try to stay consistent.

  3. 3

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    “Hutchison has repeatedly lied about incontrovertible facts.”

    What this points out — and it’s a very important point — is that Suzie is one of those amateurish neophyte politicians who thinks the path to success is telling voters whatever they want to hear, which means you can’t depend on anything she says on the campaign trail and you have absolutely no idea what she’ll actually do in office if elected.

  4. 4

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    1, 2 — As long as politicians try to make chummy with voters by putting themselves on a first-name basis with the public, I don’t see why you or anyone else would have a problem with calling them by the names they choose to call themselves.

  5. 5

    Nobel Committee spews:

    I agree – you and the Times editorial page are equally biased and hypocritical. Likewise, the NYT and WSJ editorial pages are also biased and hypocritical.

    Is that really a shock?

  6. 7

    Bob in SeaTac spews:

    Amazing Goldy, you’re still in a state of denial about Darcy’s (excuse me, Ms Burner’s) lies about her Harvard degree. I hope for the last time you will drop the subject. Her degree from Harvard included nothing about economics.

  7. 8

    proud leftist spews:

    The sad irony is that experience matters more with regard to being King County Executive that it does for someone who would be one of 435 members of the House. Learning on the job is more permissible in the House than it is for KCE. The Times apparently is unaware of such a distinction.

  8. 9

    Tom Foss spews:

    My consistent criticism of Suzie Q (sorry Emily, you may have a point) is that as unqualified as I think she is, her one demonstrated characteristic is sheer and shocking dishonesty. While it may occasionally be arguable that “fresh perspectives” are a positive to an election (although I would say that may be true on councils or legislative bodies, but never in a major executive office,) dishonesty never is.

    Yes, I also have grave concerns about her demonstrated ignorance in government and how it works. But I cannot remember one time when that would be a desirable trait for an elected official, and now is not the time to start. And the only thing we really know about Suzie Q is that she is now showing the rather shocking trait of serial dishonesty.

    Every debate, her KING five interview- filled with deception and misstatetments, sometimes big, sometimes small. And whe called on it, she simply says people are throwing mud at her, and never answers the question.

    Some people kind of laughed about the July 4th boating incident when she should have been on the air on a major media weekend at KIRO instead of in Bend, Oregon, river rafting- not me. Will she show up the day that a flood hits or the budget needs to be rewritten, or a public safety outbreak threatens to overwhelm our public health? See, there comes a time when you have to grow up and not call in “well” on certain key days.

    Hers, and her developer supported campaign has been one of the most shockingly cynical and dishonest campaigns in our local history. If we elect her, we will only be getting the government we deserve. Oh, and don’t hold your breath waiting for the “Times” to raise any of these issues. For a reporter or editorial writer, it would be a firing offense.

  9. 10

    sarah68 spews:

    Goldy, I just want to compliment your writing ability and style. Not many writers can do an article using the word “explicate” and the phrase “what the fuck” in such a confident manner. Most writers nowadays (which word shows my age) even know the word “explicate” anyway.

    Although now that I look at it again, some of the punctuation is shaky and you could have not used quite so many f words.

    And as far as the article’s content, yes Hutchison’s a liar and she will no doubt be our next County Exec, with or without the Times’ endorsement. And who says the Times is supposed to be better than you? They’re just better funded. Although that may not be true either.

    Anyway, you’re a good writer. Most of the time.

  10. 11

    Ben Stein's Money spews:

    re 7: “Her degree from Harvard included nothing about economics.”

    That is a demonstrable lie.

  11. 13

    Ben Stein's Money spews:

    “What Burner did is the Harvard equivalent of doing a joint degree in computer science and economics, though it’s not technically called that and the process (which would involve taking an adequate number of economics courses and then writing a thesis that bridges both subjects) is probably somewhat different from what you might find elsewhere. That she chose not to give a tediously detailed description of the academic procedures of her undergraduate institution is just common sense.”

  12. 14

    Right Stuff spews:

    **sound of Goldy’s head exploding**

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    “Hutchison has repeatedly lied about incontrovertible facts.”

    What? She never has claimed an Econ degree **snicker**

    Darcy would have been better served to run for local office like “Suzie”

  13. 18

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    As Goldy doesn’t have the stomach to look at the fishwrapper today, I did, and what I found is a cutesy Q & A with Hutchison that goes like this.

    Q: What is your plan regarding the viaduct replacement?
    A: My plan is to get it built on time and on budget.

    Q: Do you support teaching Intelligent Design in King County Public Schools and do you believe in evolution?

    A. As the Executive Director of a $100 million foundation [… blah blah blah …] funded the effective way of learning called “Inquiry Science” [… blah blah blah …] massive new telescope [… blah blah blah …] [Roger Rabbit editorial note: she doesn’t answer the question.]

    Q: Do you believe that our cimate is changing and that the major cause is man’s activities?

    A: I think we can do a lot at the county [ … blah blah blah … ] manufacturers need to put more resources into the plug-in electric market [… blah blah blah …] in less than 20 years our cars will be as clean as light rail [ … blah blah blah … ].

    Q. Will you make a pledge not to raise taxes?

    A. [ … blah blah blah … ] My opponent has raised taxes nine times [ … blah blah blah … ]

    Q. did you vote for light rail?

    A. Yes … I like light rail …

    Q. Can you please elaborate on what you will do to reform the budget besides cutting waste and finding inefficiencies? It doesn’t seem like those two solutions, while good, will solve the problem, and I would like to know what programs you would look to cut back first.

    A. … zero-base budgeting … hiring freeze … accelerate annexations of unicorporated urban areas … more contracted services …

    Q: I am a current King County employee. Myself and several others were concerned to hear you say that Unions will have to take a finacial hit to help with this finantial crisis. I believe in alot of your views but am concerned with my future with King County. If elected do us union employees need to worry about our future?

    A. [ … blah blah blah … ]

    Q. Please explain your reasons for favoring the gravel pit at Maury Island

    A. … Without access to this [gravel] all of our county projects cost more, because we have to truck in sand and gravel from Canada and other counties [which] causes environmental harm. …

    Q. If elected, will you make it easier to rezone east King County farmland for commercial and residential development?

    A. … It’s time for an audit of the 10 year old GMA ….

    Q. In the debate on Thursday night, you said that you have supported both democrats and republicans. However, I cannot find any democrats that you have given money to. Since you have not donated to any democrats, please explain other ways you have supported them and tell us one democrat you have voted for.

    A. I’m like most people, I support the person — not the party [ … blah blah blah … ].

  14. 20

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    In other news, backers of R-71, the referendum supported by bigots to repeal equal rights for domestic partners, have asked SCOTUS to overturn the 9th Circuit’s decision last week to order the release of names of R-71 petition signers, and Justice Kennedy has told the state to file a response by Monday.

  15. 21

    don rocco spews:

    Now Goldie, don’t you understand. It’s been written in great literature for quite a long time:

    1. Darcy is the name of the cad in Pride & Prejudice. A real dick. Anyway, while Darcy Burner is a credible politico, the Times got confused, and were thinking about P&P instead.

    2. Suzie is Similar to the children’s poem “Sugar and Spice & everything nice.” Even though Suzie Hutchinson is dumber than a box o’ rocks, old Frankie was thinking about everything nice, got confused, and endorsed with his rather flaccid dick.

    Now, don’t make me tell you again!

  16. 22

    Puddybud Remembers hatched from a rock spews:

    Poor poor Goldy…

    As we all know, the Times’ editors dismissed Darcy as an inexperienced lightweight, out of touch with the mainstream values of her district, who should have been advised to work her way up to a congressional challenge

    She was trying to go to WA DC with no experience whatsoever. Susan is staying local, working in local politics working on local issues. Puddy should have made the comparison adding Darcy Moonbat! into SeattleJew’s comments. That’s the big difference Goldy. Too bad national legislation vs local legislation is lost on you. After seeing Dow and Ron in action people want a change.

    I’ve had local journalists defend her, saying that she’s not as right-wing as I make her out to be, but that’s not the point:

    Ahhh when we made the point Barack Hussein Obama Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm was a way out left-wing whackjob you all said we’s crazy. We’ll the jury is coming in and he’s made some whackamole appointments and some whackamole legislation. How is the Porkulus Bill working for WA State again? Who got more ferry money? More road money? How are those do nuthin Democratics doing for WA State lately? And Goldy wanted to send someone to WA DC with absolutely no experience, to be a lapdog for Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer.

  17. 23

    Mike Jones spews:


    Later in life Wallace saw the errors of his ways and knew he was wrong and made mistakes, nothing wrong with that.

  18. 24

    Tom Foss spews:

    @22- no, poor, poor you. I will ignore the Fox news based comments about our Prez, and stay “local.” Since this is the 14th biggest county in the nation and many, many times more populous and demanding to govern than the petro dollar state of half baked alaska, a couple questions-

    Query- How big is King Co? How big is the budget? What services do they provide? What are their taxing sources? How much of their tax base have they lost while demand for sevices grow? What services are mandated and which are optional?

    Answer these for us and then tell us that Suzie Q knows the answers, too.

  19. 25


    Puddy @22,

    No, you have it backwards. I’m all for the founders’ notion of citizen legislators, and that’s what Darcy would have been, but for an executive office, particularly one of the scope of King County Executive, we need people with experience actually running things.

    County executive is not like being a small town mayor. In population, budget and employees, King County is larger than 12 states. It requires much more public sector experience than a mere congressional seat.

  20. 26

    proud leftist spews:

    Experience is not always critical to a politician’s success, provided that the politician has sufficient intelligence to make up for the lack of experience. Unfortunately, Suzie’s IQ is insufficient to make up for any of her lack of experience.

  21. 27

    SeattleMike spews:

    Hutchison’s non-answers on the Times’ Q&A forum demonstrate that she is much better qualified for the reality show “Tap Dancing Around the Actual Questions” than being an elected official. She makes it appear that if asked you what her name was, she would launch into some diatribe about how her opponent has misused her good name, without ever actually TELLING you her name.

  22. 28

    correctnotright spews:

    @18: Case in point as to why Hutchinson would make a lousy county executive: seh can’t even answer direct questions and alsmost all of her asnwers are disingenuous or just plain stupid.

  23. 29

    Right Stuff spews:

    “but for an executive office, particularly one of the scope of King County Executive, we need people with experience actually running things.

    County executive is not like being a small town mayor. In population, budget and employees, King County is larger than 12 states. It requires much more public sector experience than a mere congressional seat.”

    And yet you didn’t hold the same standard for POTUS Obama….? I understand why your head is exploding today…you’re unable to criticize Hutchison’s lack of experience without invalidating your support for Burner or POTUS Obama…Can’t have it both ways….

    “Pat Dyer, Harvard’s supervisor of information services in the registrar’s office, said Burner’s records don’t list the emphasis in economics. But she said a special field may not show up if she got it within the computer science department.

    Harry Lewis, a Harvard computer science professor and former dean of the school, confirmed that Burner did study economics at Harvard.

    “She doesn’t have a degree in economics,” he said. “It’s a specialty within the computer science degree that she has.”

  24. 32

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @7 “I hope for the last time you will drop the subject.”

    No, we’re not gonna drop the subject, because Republicans and their gullible lackeys (e.g., you) are perpetrating a lie and smear, and we’re not gonna let you get away with it.

  25. 33

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @14 Darcy has a Harvard degree in economics, so the snicker is on you — for being a gullible snot like the ratfucker @7.

  26. 34

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @30 “She does not have a “degree” in economics”

    Bullshit. A Harvard dean says she does. Your opinion is merely your opinion, and opinions are like assholes, everybody’s got one.

  27. 35


    Mark ,,, let me hlpe from my personal experience …

    I graduated from the College (as we call it) ..

    My “Harvard” degree is in Biology but, out of interest, I also completed the requirements for a degree in Philosophy of Religion.

    While in college, I completed the requirements for a training officer in the Coast Guard Auxiliary. That was not at Harvard, so I guess it is outside of your ken.

    OTOH, while at the College, I did also complete formal training in light and electron microscopy … that later earned ne a teaching certificat5e from the great state of California in Photography. ooops I forgot my training in physiological psych and programmed instruction under BF Skinner.

    For what it is worth, I left the College and did a couple of doctorates. One in Medicine where they seemd to accept some of my training as a qualification to skip some courses .. even though I had no “majored” in those fields. Later, based on the content of one of these, plus my “degree in microscopy, the State of California issued me a college teaching credential in Photography. Served in the USN too .. they seemed to take a number of these credentials pretty seriously. Hell they let me run a hospital lab!

    So, in a sense, I have a Harvard degree in Biology, Religion, Photography, and just a tad of phys psych.

    I can see how this sort of high level stuff is confusing to an uneducated person. Maybe we should dumb Harvard down so you can understand it?

  28. 36


    @36 Roger ..

    Darcy has the same degree everyone egts at the College. We are considered world experts in everything upon!

    I do not hink Mark is in the running for the HA Silly award unless you give him some help!

  29. 37


    Puddy ..

    Congrats! You are now in the running for the Hyopocrite award.

    SJ News … The Soros-Hutchinson Connection

    Suppose I were to tell you that Suzie is a … closet librul? The fella Suzie has been sleeping with he tells SJ this right winger stuff is all an act to get gullible right wing votes!

    You want evidence .. google her comments on Atheist Primo Richard Dawkins!

    And riddle me this, if she were really a Reprican howsit her only source of moolah since being fired at KIRO has been a far left, Hungarian Jewish Liberal … you know our local version of George Soros? Didn’t you gue3ss that Chas and George are COUSINs?

    You want more? It is TRUE Suze served on the board of the Discovery Institue. Wanna know why? They were hoping to get some moolah from the Soros’ cousing Chas Simonyi! The plan, ya see was to use Suse’s friendship with Dawkins to set up a Templeton grant for the DF based on reconciliation fo atheism and religion.

    Then wha happened? Howsit Suzie is no longer on the DI board? No raisa the money! Richie likes Suzie but NOT that much!

    So where did she go with Soros jr’s moolah? To the Seattle Sympathy. You know, that bastion of librul money bags you so love!

    And who did she get palsy with there? Gerald Schwarz!

    Nuff said?

  30. 38

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @35 “Maybe we should dumb Harvard down so you can understand it?”

    No! Never! Harvard should remain a place for highly intelligent who are motivated to learn. Harvard doesn’t need any wingnuts.

  31. 39

    Bob in SeaTac spews:

    As I remember, my diploma from UC Berkeley says AB in Physics, my diploma from the UW says MS in Electrical Engineering.

    If Ms Burner’s diploma from Harvard say “… in Computer Science and Economics” I will agree she has a degree in Economics. Show me the picture of the diploma!!!!

    Put up or shut up.