Looks like the Reichert folk are starting to feel the heat from Darcy Burner, whose campaign to unseat the first term, 8th Congressional District Republican just jumped into the national spotlight with a spectacular first quarter fundraising report. Burner out-raised Reichert two-to-one during the quarter, including an impressive $90,000 in the final two days of the reporting period… and her $536,000 total is more than any Democrat has ever raised at this point in any 8th CD race. Ever.
Up until now the standard GOP response to Burner has been to merely dismiss her as a novice and a political lightweight… but no more. Local Republicans are nervous, and you can see it in the rhetorical beads of sweat dripping off the knotted brows of our good friend Stefan over at (un)Sound Politics.
Sounding like a pale imitation of, well… me… Stefan set out yesterday to strike a deadly blow against the surging Burner campaign, but the only damage he managed to inflict was to his own, already battered and bruised credibility.
Stefan makes three charges against Burner, that 1) she has inflated her resume by claiming to be a “former Microsoft executive;” 2) that she’s neither a regular voter nor involved in her community, and 3) that there are “funny inconsistensies” [sic] in her “stories” about leaving Microsoft.
Gee. Going after inflated resumes and sparse voting records. I wonder where Stefan got that idea? What… he couldn’t find any mother beating or horse associations in her background?
From the way Stefan thematically borrowed from some of my better known scoops, one might think I was as much his target as Burner. And ordinarily I’d be flattered by such mimicry… that is, if Stefan hadn’t done such a crappy job of it. I take great pride in my muckraking — in both its accuracy and its impact — and as the local blogosphere’s most effective practitioner of the art, I’ve got a bit of advice: good muckraking requires more than just a good rake, Stefan. You also need to find a little, um… you know… muck.
Indeed, Stefan’s fanciful essay was so thin on fact and so thick on conjecture, it’s really not even worth refuting. But he and I have a special sort of personal bond, and I wouldn’t want to hurt his feelings by withholding my critique… so let’s take his fantasies in numerical order. Stefan writes:
Burner is inflating her resume. Burner’s campaign and supporters in the media call her a “former Microsoft executive”. This is an enormous exaggeration. She was not any kind of “executive”, a term customarily applied only to the most senior company officials…
Oh please.
Burner uses the word “executive” in the little “e” generic sense to describe her role at Microsoft to the general public. What did she do there? She managed a multimillion dollar budget. She managed managers and oversaw an entire team of employees. She worked with businesses from all over the world to help them benefit from Microsoft’s technology. So was she an “executive”…?
The only smell around here is the resume of darcy.
What exactly has she done for the community? Sitting on a board with a bunch of rich people debating the state of their navels isn’t community service. Did they raise money for a cause? Did they hold educational forums? Did they support someone in need? What does Hoppers do, besides give those on it something for their resume?
Don’t have to ask about the law school board – she never actually stuck around long enough to serve.
Where are the dates? Times? Places?
Who is advising this woman? Most lame campaign chairman I have ever seen.
We have to be realistic about Darcy Burner’s chances in that it is really tough to knock off a sitting member of Congress. It is sad to see, but what the founders of our country imagined to be the People’s House has a record of re-electing incumbents at something like 95%.
With that said, Darcy is the real deal and is going to make WA-8 one of the top races in the nation. If Democrats are going to win back the House and put the brakes on the runaway Republican corruption, we need to win races like this.
The fundraising is great and if Darcy can sharpen up her campaign, we could be looking at a historic takeover come November.
Well, I can cuss out a white cop,
Slap him upside the face,
Then have my people stand by me
When I blame it all on race
Cause I’m a woman (a black one),
W-O-M-A-N.
Well, I can rip off this old House and ain’t no one gonna beef;
Rag my staff, dis Pelosi, play the queen, and never get no grief.
I got a caucus says there’s nothin’ I can’t do.
I can make a scene outta diddly and I can make fools outta you
Cause I’m a woman (a black one)
W-O-M-A-N
Way to bring up the “dictionary” definition of executive. The SEC doesn’t give a rat’s arse what the dictionary thinks an executive is. An executive is someone who is allowed to park in an executive parking spot. Microsoft security would have had a tow truck on the way before her feet hit the ground if she had tried to park in an executive parking spot. I can see her trying to argue to a Microsoft security that a manager is really no different from an executive.
troll @1 – Typical conservative propaganda… if facts fail you, simply assert something long enough and loud enough and pretend its evidence. Hmmm… reminds me of someone’s tactics about Big Lies and all that… anyone help me out with that one?
But Stefan’s attempt at muckraking comes off as even more pathetic when we learn that Microsoft’s own website once listed Burner under “executives and senior business managers.” Ooops.
Goldy, I think that link is busted.
An executive is someone who is allowed to park in an executive parking spot.
Wow! You nailed it! All this time we thought that being an executive had something to do with your actual job function. How could we have been so foolish? It only has to do with where you can park your car.
Man, if you people get any stupider, you could get your own special parking spaces.
Nindid-unfortunately, the resume vagueness is probably indicative of a very weak candidate. She is raising money for the same reasons that the guy running against Tom Delay was raking it in. It wasn’t for him, it was against Delay. Now that Delay is out of the race, the donations are expected to dry up from the national scene.
Darcy is attracting national attention because they want to defeat reichert, not because they want to elect darcy. They don’t care and don’t know who she is. She is a useful tool.
None of these posts from goldy actually explains what she has done to warrant the national office.
Excellent post, Goldy. I giggle when I think of the douchebags at uSP getting hot under the collar about this.
They’re spinning so hard they could dry laundry.
Goldy gives this excuse for Darcy Burner not voting:
“Entirely lacking in scandal as it is, this is where Stefan really proves himself to be a lazy little hack, for if he had bothered to ask the Burner campaign for comment, he might have discovered that she missed one of these elections because she was confined to bed due to life-threatening complications during pregnancy, and doctor’s orders came too late to apply for an absentee ballot.”
Darcy Burner’s campaign biography says this about her pregnancy and child birth:
“Eager to start a family, Darcy became pregnant and took maternity leave from Microsoft. Henry Burner was born in January of 2003.”
Stefan’s research shows that Darcy Burner did not vote in the general elections in November 2001 and November 2003.
http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/005994.html
So Goldy, please tell us which one of these elections did Darcy Burner miss due to being “confined to bed due to life-threatening complications during pregnancy” for her son born in January 2003? Was it the November 2001 election, or was it the November 2003 election?
The link Gold posted was a link I posted at SP.
Strangely enough it has mysteriously disappeared from Google Cache within in the last 6 hours.
It listed her as one of the “Executive and Business Managers” that were giving presentations.
I found it on archive.org though:
http://web.archive.org/web/200.....spx?nav=rn
There are two issues here:
1. Was Stefan’s post convincing? Not at all.
2. Is Burner a terrific candidate? Maybe not, alas.
Let’s not confuse the issues.
It is so cute when the local trolls try to get all coordinated and jump on the same little pathetic talking point to push a non-existant story.
You guys should stick with preaching to the choir and trying get your own fanatics all upset that Burner described herself as an executive and what-do-you-know so did Microsoft apparently.
I found it interesting that Sharkansky did a post on Dan Savage’s hit piece against Pat Thibaudeau the other day. He made some kind of reference to the fact that Democrats go after Democrats more viciously than he does.
Well, the difference between Sharkansky and Savage is that Savage DID HIS HOMEWORK and provided some HISTORICAL FACTS to illustrate why Ed Murray is fully justified in running against Thibaudeau. If Sharkansky actually decided to throw a couple facts in with his baseless conspiracy theories and hearsay, he might actually start getting somewhere.
Will @6, Gerald @11,
Hmm. Disappears from Microsoft, then disappears from Google cache.
Good thing I saved a copy. I’ve uploaded it and changed the link.
One more point here that needs to be mentioned is that Burner may not be a perfect candidate – who is? – but how well she matches up with Reichert.
Dave comes across as an empty suit spewing talking points. But this time around he has a record to defend and a bright engaging woman to deal with with a strong business background. Reichart is going to have to improve drammatically over his last campaign to pull off this win in a down year for Republicans.
We will see what happens, but if you think the Republicans in the know are not sweating this one you are fooling yourself.
What a weak attempt Goldy,
you post is bullshit. Darcy has referred to herself as an Executive and it’s a lie.
BTW, I especially liked one of the criticisms you threw at Aaron Dixon for being behind on his child support.
When are you going to make your divorce papers public, you little fucking weasel?
Goldy says: “Hmm. Disappears from Microsoft, then disappears from Google cache.”
Do you think this is a CONSPIRACY by Microsoft to disavow and sabotage Darcy Burner’s campaign? Sure is one hell of a coincidence — that webpage sits in the Google cache for over two years (02/27/2004 to 04/06/2006). But when Gerald and Goldy posts links to the webpage, it mysteriously disappears from the Google cache within hours (or even minutes).
Yep, the REAL EXECUTIVES at Microsoft don’t want Darcy Burner elected to Congress. They like Dave Reichert, and if they can help make Burner look foolish in any way, they will do so.
Yep, there sure is a CONSPIRACY by the powers-that-be at Microsoft to derail the Burner campaign. Write about it all you want. But you will have to face reality — Microsoft is a BIG PLAYER in the 8th congressional district, and if they are against Burner, her chances of winning are almost nil.
@10
Um, last time I checked, pregnancy lasts 9 months. November before a January birth that’s 3 months at best. Emergency bed rest 6 months into a high risk pregnancy is completely possible. Really, the math is just about right for missing an off season election due to pregnancy complications.
So that’s one missed due to serious threats to her health, and one missed for undisclosed reasons. Even if it was irresponsibility, missing one election does not a scandal make. Sorry.
Hey, Goldy,
Why don’t you address the points Richard Pope brought up in the 4/5/2006 Open Thread (#34 & onward)?
Have her spin doctors not formulated talking points for you yet?
Should the media be asking her, “if elected, will you quit [because it’s just too darn hard!]?”
David Goldstein: All dish and no take.
You can tell by the length of this post that Goldstein is in full back peddle mode. Thanks for the idea of investigating resumes. But it looks like it has come back to bite you. Goldstein, if you don’t know that the term Executive refers to top level VPs, etc. then you’ve never worked in the private sector. Burner was at best a director or senior manager. But that’s really beside the point, because the point is that she has not been completely open and truthful about her intentions and her past. In todays world, a candidate for the the US House has to be a lot more squeaky clean and/ or well connected and experienced. Burner is neither.
You are getting some of your own medicine and believe me, we are going to make sure Burner goes down.
AA @ 20
Darcy Burner’s son was born in January 2003. However, Burner VOTED in November 2002 (2 months before her child was born).
A child being born in January 2003 CANNOT EXPLAIN missing an election in November 2001 (14 months before delivery the child –the normal human gestation period is only 9 months). Nor can it explain missing an election in November 2001 (10 months after the child is born).
You said: “So that’s one missed due to serious threats to her health, and one missed for undisclosed reasons. Even if it was irresponsibility, missing one election does not a scandal make. Sorry.”
MISSING TWO ELECTIONS is not nearly as big of a scandal as FIBBING about the reason for missing one of these.
Whoops should have said: “Nor can it explain missing an election in November 2003 (10 months after the child is born).”
Richard Pope @ 19
Actually it has probably been off Microsoft.com for some time now. Microsoft isn’t the issue, its Google cache.
The question is: does Google not want Burner to be elected? It is strange that they took it off just now after being cached for so long.
It would be great if they did take it down on purpose, I love conspiracies. But after a little thought, it seems likely they have some sort of mechanism where they record visitors to cache sites in order to discover dead links. Since many people started going to the cache they found the dead link and took it off.
Remember how Bush claimed (on national tv) to know NOTHING about the Plame Case, and complained about the leak of the National Intelligence documents? Remember how Bush feigned outrage, saying something like “we are going to get to the bottom of this!”
Well, it turned out Bush was probably lying. What a surprise.
I’m sure Sharkansky – the muckraker – will be all over it.
Papers: Cheney Aide Says Bush OK’d Leak
Vice President Dick Cheney’s former top aide told prosecutors President Bush authorized the leak of sensitive intelligence information about Iraq, according to court papers filed by prosecutors in the CIA leak case.
Before his indictment, I. Lewis Libby testified to the grand jury investigating the CIA leak that Cheney told him to pass on information and that it was Bush who authorized the disclosure, the court papers say. According to the documents, the authorization led to the July 8, 2003, conversation between Libby and New York Times reporter Judith Miller.
There was no indication in the filing that either Bush or Cheney authorized Libby to disclose Valerie Plame’s CIA identity.
But the disclosure in documents filed Wednesday means that the president and the vice president put Libby in play as a secret provider of information to reporters about prewar intelligence on Iraq.
Goldy,
“Executives and senior business managers” — THAT is what you’re hanging your hat on??!!
I would encourage everyone to look at that website. Before looking, I presumed that this was something up to Goldy’s pseudo-journalistic standards… and I was right. It is NOT a directory of MS executives or anything of the like. The term is used as puffery to describe a series of webcasts. And even if you assume that the description is accurate, you could also draw the conclusion that she is merely a “senior business manager.”
I’ll let you in on a little secret, Goldy. The webcasts are directed toward businesspeople. Businesspeople are FAR more likely to “attend” or even pay attention to such presentations if they’re made by other executives (as opposed to programmer geeks or mid-level salespeople). So… MS puffs up the description of the presenters. Nobody is saying she wasn’t qualified to present, but the ONE reference to her as an “executive or senior business manager” is puffery.
How about you let us know when you have a link to an MS staff directory that lists her under “Executives” and not “Executives or people who share the same building with executives or people who have met executives or people who can spell ‘executive’?”
Man you sick twisted fucks sure must be worried if all you got is that the Democratic candidate calls herself an executive and failed to vote in an election or two. Next thing you know you’ll uncover some expose showing she drinks Coke Zero instead of Diet Coke.
What we Dems need to do is not worry about responding to the chickenhawk drivel brigrade and start asking the hard questions about Alaska’s newest candidate for US Senate, Mike McGavick.
Goldy hasn’t yet responded to my question as to why Darcy Burner missed voting in either the November 2001 or November 2003 general elections as a result of her pregnancy, when her son was born in January 2003.
When Goldy talked to Darcy Burner on the telephone to prepare this story, the pregnancy complication excuse related by Burner sounded SO SO SO COMPELLING:
“she missed one of these elections because she was confined to bed due to life-threatening complications during pregnancy, and doctor’s orders came too late to apply for an absentee ballot”.
BUT WHOOPS — THE DATES ARE ALL WRONG!
No wonder Darcy Burner dropped out of law school after attending for only one year. She lacks an essential skill needed by every successful lawyer — she just isn’t a convincing liar.
There is a big difference from never voting and skipping an occasional election.
Obviously, a candidate for Congress cannot also be a full time law school. Equally obviously, someone who withdraws from law school also has to withdraw from law school positions.
There’s nothing here but the smoke rising from a few dozen desperately spinning wingnuts.
Goldy’s point is that they are listing her in the same category as executives. Her technical business title was not executive, you are right.
AND if you read his post, Goldy mentions the fact that her campaign (and the media) is using manager with a small e. Meaning NOT an official title.
This is not a lie. She probably actually identifies herself as a former executive of Microsoft.
executive.
Gerald @ 31
If it is no big deal, then why doesn’t she more accurately describe herself as a “senior manager” — with capitals, italics and even BOLDFACE!
Or are they admitting to campaign puffery and little white lies because voters think an “executive” would make a better candidate than a “manager?”
I realize she is in a damned-if-you-do/don’t position because if she leaves it up, she is open to charges that she’s fudging her background and if she takes it down, she’s admitting it (and perhaps drawing more attention). Guess she should have thought of that first. [My bet is that if she fixes it, she’ll blame it on an overzealous staffer and/or incompetent web designer like Streisand’s.]
Wayne @ 30
There is absolutely no reason why Darcy Burner had to miss the entire 2005-06 academic year at the University of Washington School of Law in order to run for Congress. That academic year started in September 2005 and ends in early June 2006. This leaves plenty of time to campaign for Congress.
Instead, Burner started running for Congress as early as July 2005, well over a year before the election. Apparently, she has made this a full-time pursuit. Basically, during almost the entire time Dave Reichert has been representing us in Congress, Burner has been running for Congress.
When Reichert ran for Congress in 2004, he was able to do his elected job as King County Sheriff full-time, while spending most of his off-duty time running for Congress. Presently, Reichert is working for us full-time in Congress in Washington DC, while spending his vacation time back in the district trying to get re-elected.
Evidently, Burner thought that law school was too much to handle. It was too much for Burner to go to law school for another year through June 2006 and campaign part-time for Congress. If she manages to get elected in November 2006, she will be spending almost all of her time working on her November 2008 re-election campaign, and precious little in actually representing us in Congress.
Great work, Goldy. So she can explain exactly one of the missed elections, what about all the other elections she didn’t care enough about to vote in? Before she decided to run for Congress she had voted in fewer than half the elections she was eligible to vote in (at least since she registered in King County in 1998). Doesn’t sound like someone who was all that interested in community affairs until she decided she was ready to be in Congress.
The repubs (led by Stefan) are doing two things:
1) Showing how blogs,etc. can create fear, uncertainty and doubt even when none exists. This is simply the same thing right wing radio has done for years. Rush, who laughs himself to the bank, is the king of all in this strategy.
2) He reduces his own credibility (outside the ones who drink at his kool-aid trough with their mental capability turned off). Any reasonable thinking right-centrist would see his ridiculous fear, uncertainty and doubt ploy. The extremes, like Stefan himself, will follow him just as the 32% of Americans still support Bush.
And, by the way, if Stefan had any credibility, he’d call for all candidates and elected officials who ‘lied’ to be removed from their races and their offices.
As he well knows, *all* candidates and elected officials do it…especially some of his favorites.
But that would take a sense of morality, fairness and reason that is clearly outside the muckraking Stefan strategy.
The current cipher holding the seat in the 8th is a perfect candidate for prosecuting my next round of show trials. Other than that, he is useless.
So, what you are saying…is everything he said was true.
Interesting way to bitch someone out. Basically say, “Yah, that’s all true, but I don’t care, therefore it’s stupid.”
Trust me, nobody in Reichert’s campaign is sweating bullets. Burner A. Won’t raise as much money as Dave Ross, B. Isn’t nearly as good of a candidate, C. Has people like you shilling for her.
All of which are good for Reichert.
DARCY BURNER — RELEASE YOUR GRADES FROM LAW SCHOOL AT UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON!
I think I know why Darcy Burner dropped out of law school at the University of Washington after only one year in such a sudden and dramatic fashion.
Final exams for Spring Quarter 2005 ended on June 10, 2005. It takes a few weeks generally for the professors to grade final exams. In law school, 100% of the grade in most courses is based on the final exam. A student would have no idea of their grade in a given course until they received their final exam grade.
Before receiving her final exam grades for the 2004-05 academic year, Darcy Burner was all hot-to-trot to continue with the rest of her three year program at UW Law School, which would have graduated her in June 2007. Burner had been elected in May 2005 for the 2005-06 term to the Student Bar Association Executive Board and as UW law student representative to the Washington State Bar Association. Burner was also going to spend one quarter during the 2005-06 academic year working as an extern for Senator Maria Cantwell. And she was also on the executive board of PALS — Parents Attending Law School.
But when Burner received her grades in the mail (well, you probably log into a secure website for these nowadays, or the professor e-mails them to you once the course exams are graded) sometime in late June or early July 2005, all these plans changed. Instead of continuing for the remaining two years of law school, she did a 180 degree turn, immediately dropped out of law school and announced her campaign for Congress.
WHY WAS THIS? WERE HER LAW SCHOOL GRADES THAT BAD?
Darcy,
In case you are reading this, and want to dispel rumors about dropping out of UW Law School due to extremely poor grades.
Here is a link to the webpage where current and FORMER University of Washington students can request copies of their transcripts:
http://www.washington.edu/stud.....ripts.html
The cost is $4.00 for an official certified copy. I will be happy to reimburse this cost for you, if you will have them send me an official transcript copy of your first year grades at UW law school.
And if your law school grades actually happen to have been decent, I will take back my words.
Richard,
Another one?!?!
Get it through your heads: Stupid nonfactual guesses about a candidate’s past means nothing.
Darcy got bad grades? This is getting ridiculous.
Tommy @ 36 & 37:
The EXACT same thing could be said about Goldy and the Left.
Maybe you should post when you actually have something new to add to the debate…
Gerald @ 42
Here is a quote from Darcy’s Blog at MS:
“I thought that it might be useful, if I was going to make laws, to first understand how they actually work…”
OK, Darcy, that makes sense. But bad grades would seem to indicate that she failed to understand how laws work AND how she responds to challenges and setbacks.
When the reporter from Cox Broadcasting tried to ask McKinney about the grand jury, the bodyguard told him, “I’m going to put your ass in jail. I’m a police officer,” a videotape of the incident shows.
Asked if he worked for Capitol police, the man said, “I work for Miss McKinney.”
Word that McKinney had hired a bodyguard roiled the ranks of the Capitol police who were worried that the guard was carrying a weapon. They said they are concerned about what the bodyguard might do if Capitol police challenged McKinney at a security checkpoint.
RichardPoop@41 This from a pretendLawyer who regularly confuses Criminal Matters with Civil Matters !
BOMBSHELL: LIBBY TOLD GRAND JURY BUSH AND CHENEY AUTHORIZED LEAK
“Cheney Aide Says Bush OK’d Leak on Iraq
“By PETE YOST, AP
“WASHINGTON (April 6) – Vice President Dick Cheney’s former top aide told prosecutors President Bush authorized the leak of sensitive intelligence information about Iraq, according to court papers filed by prosecutors in the CIA leak case.
” … I. Lewis Libby testified to the grand jury investigating the CIA leak that Cheney told him to pass on information and that it was Bush who authorized the disclosure, the court papers say. According to the documents, the authorization led to the July 8, 2003, conversation between Libby and New York Times reporter Judith Miller.”
For complete story, see http://articles.news.aol.com/n.....1209990007
(Notice: This story may be copyrighted. I don’t know by whom, hell, maybe your Aunt Millie. If you want to know, click on the click and look it up! I’m not your fucking research assistant! I’m a cute adorable fluffy 11 5/16 lb. bunny.)
HEY FLAKY KLAKE!!!
If Bush and Cheney can do it, why can’t Sandy Berger do it?
Is JCH traversing in some parallel universe here?
Dear President Bush:
I’m about to plan a little trip with my family and extended family, and I would like to ask you to assist me. I’m going to walk across the border from the U.S. into Mexico, and I need to make a few arrangements. I know you can help with this. I plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports, immigration quotas and laws. I’m sure they handle those things the same way you do here.
So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Vicente Fox, that I’m on my way over? Please let him know that I will be expecting the following:
1. Free medical care for my entire family.
2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might need, whether I use them or not.
3. All government forms need to be printed in English.
4. I want my kids to be taught by English-speaking teachers.
5. Schools need to include classes on American culture and history.
6. I want my kids to see the American flag flying on the top of the flag pole at their school with the Mexican flag flying lower down.
7. Please plan to feed my kids at school for both breakfast and lunch.
8. I will need a local Mexican driver’s license so I can get easy access to government services.
9. I do not plan to have any car insurance, and I won’t make any effort to learn local traffic laws.
10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo from Pres. Fox to leave me alone, please be sure that all police officers speak English.
11. I plan to fly the U.S. flag from my house top, put flag decals on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any complaints or negative comments from the locals.
12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, and don’t enforce any labor laws or tax laws.
13. Please tell all the people in the country to be extremely nice and never say a critical word about me, or about the strain I might place on the economy or I will have to sue for free money.
I know this is an easy request because you already do all these things for all the people who come to the U.S. from Mexico. I am sure that Pres. Fox won’t mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely.
Hey Roger,
Who cares if our President is compromising National Security? We have more important things to worry about, like what grade Darcy Burner got in her Consitutional Law Seminar.
Has anyone else noticed that Republicans are hypocrites? They think if Sandy Berger takes a few xerox copies with him from a library for a book he’s working on, it’s some sort of big fucking federal crime, but if Bush and Cheney authorize disclosure of military-sensitive intelligence data during wartime there’s nothing wrong with it!!! Berger committed at most a misdemeanor based on a technical violation of paperwork classification laws. Explain how Bush and Cheney authorizing disclosure of military-sensitive intelligence data during wartime is not TREASON??? Goddamn Republicans think they’re the only ones who can play games with our nation’s most sensitive military secrets. Why should Republicans have a monopoly on disclosing intelligence information? Republicans want a monopoly on every fucking thing! Hell, they even want a monopoly on having monopolies.
Is JCH traversing in some parallel universe here?
Um, looking at post #50, I think that’s a yes.
Snarky Mark @44
How do you know Darcy got bad grades? Transcripts are confidential. Did you steal her transcript? How did you do that? Did you hack into UW’s computer? How many other student transcripts did you steal? Why are you hacking UW’s computer to steal transcripts?
49
“Is JCH traversing in some parallel universe here? Commentby thehim— 4/6/06@ 11:37 am”
Yes. Isn’t it obvious?
Does anybody know why Snarky Mark is hacking UW’s computers to steal student transcripts?
Snarky Mark sounds like the kind of person who would also marry his 14-year-old first cousin.
HEY SNARKY MARK!!! Got a question for ya, good buddy.
What’s your cousin’s name? Is she cute?
Is she Stefan’s wife’s twin sister? Just wondering.
“laties an gennamen, I enjoy my $125,000 a year job an expense account plus privilages I have earned through tireless work for my districk in Alanna, Georgia. I further regret the actions that led to an incident between me and a white po-lease. I have nuthing but respeck for the po-lease who protect dedicated public servants like myself, and I thank also the countless collegues of myself who have joined behind me in support. If you will excuse me now, I must get to a very important leadership meeting.”
51
“Hey Roger, Who cares if our President is compromising National Security? We have more important things to worry about, like what grade Darcy Burner got in her Consitutional Law Seminar. Commentby thehim— 4/6/06@ 11:40 am”
Constitutional law sucks! Booooor-ing!!! Why study constitutional law anyway? The government doesn’t pay any attention to what it says, so it’s purely an academic exercise.
Law students should study something useful. For Republican law students, this would include studying how to post bail for your buddies, the mechanics of grand jury proceedings, and a course in negotiating plea bargains.
60
Hey dickface, why don’t you dress up in a cop uniform, stand in front of her blocking the door, and repeat a couple of your favorite racial epithets! I’d like to see what your face looks like after getting run over by a waffle iron.
60
Alternatively, you could become Tonya Harding’s boyfriend, if you’d prefer to get a hubcap in the kisser.
DARCY BURNER SUPPORTED GENDER DISCRIMINATION BACK IN 1994:
“Well, I hate to nitpick, but it’s actually legal in pretty much everything but employment to discriminate on the basis of gender even when there *isn’t* any rational basis for it. :( Racial discrimination is Constitutionally illegal, but gender discrimination is not.”
http://groups.google.com/group.....c1c96dd111
No wonder Darcy Burner couldn’t make it in law school. Gender discrimination is both against the U.S. constitution and against the law.
Hey Goldy, this comment is one of the best jobs you’ve ever done at debunking Stefan’s haughty pretensions to be some sort of “journalist” and exposing him as the partisan shill he actually is.
I, like Richie Cunningham’s dad, have held the title “Grand Poobah”, but it was my own single proprietorship business. I have actually described myself as such on credit card applications. I hope they don’t think I was stretching the truth too much. If Stefan finds out I’m screwed.
65
Hey Richard, just a friendly reminder from your favorite legal bunny that gender discrimination is NOT against the U.S. Constitution, because you right-wing assholes BLOCKED the Equal Rights Amendment — remember?
67
Hey, there’s worst things than getting screwed, you know. Especially if you’re a cute fluffy female bunny!!! :D :D :D
Richard at 65:
As you should already know, the Constitution does not apply to discrimination of any kind by private companies, only state action. Ms. Burner was discussing discrimination by car rental companies. The Amendments to the Constitution which bar certain types of discrimination stem do not apply to car rental companies. (Federal and state law do.)
We should forgive Ms. Burner her sketchy knowledge of complicated constitutional law, as she was neither a lawyer nor a law student in 1994. You, on the other hand, are supposed to be a lawyer. What’s your excuse?
BunnyBoy @ 54:
I’m betting that you were “encouraged” to retire so that you’d quit screwing things up (were you involved in that missed filing date fiasco??). My response was to Gerald implying her grades were irrelevant.
My comment was “… bad grades would seem to indicate …”
If, YET AGAIN, I need to say things slooowwwwwly and more explicity just for youuuuu…
The reason grades ARE relevant is IF she had bad grades, they would be an indicator that she does NOT understand the law and that she quits/wilts under pressure or challenge. She, herself, said that she went to law school to learn how things worked. The fact that she hid her law school adventure could lead one to reasonably question whether she had something to hide.
Wabbit @ 68
Gender based discrimination IS AGAINST the U.S. Constitution. Here is just one of the many U.S. Supreme Court decisions on this issue:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/.....9/190.html
In Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976), the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated an Oklahoma law that said men had to be 21 to drink, but that women could drink at only 18:
“3. Oklahoma’s gender-based differential constitutes an invidious discrimination against males 18-20 years of age in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. Appellees’ statistics (the most relevant of which [429 U.S. 190, 191] show only that .18% of females and 2% of males in the 18-20-year-old age group were arrested for driving while under the influence of liquor) do not warrant the conclusion that sex represents an accurate proxy for the regulation of drinking and driving. Pp. 199-204.”
BunnyBoy @ 66
Please allow me to correct your mistakes yet again:
“Hey Goldy, this comment is one of the best jobs you’ve ever done at debunking
Stefan’syour own haughty pretensions to be some sort of “journalist” and exposinghimGoldy as the partisan shill he actually is.”Burner was selected as an extern by Cantwell’s office in the summer of 2005, by which time grades were probably out, and would have been available to Cantwell’s office. I’m sure they had multiple applicants and I doubt Burner would have gotten the position if her grades were bad.
Speculation is a game everyone can play. For example, I speculate the reason JCH uses an alias is that his real name can be found on a sex offender list (perhaps several). I have no evidence to support my theory and it is complete speculation, but it sounds good to me. Therefore, let’s just accept it as true.
Richard:
Please note that Craig v. Boren involved state action, not a private company. It makes a difference. Complicated stuff isn’t it?
71
“I’m betting that you were “encouraged” to retire so that you’d quit screwing things up (were you involved in that missed filing date fiasco?”
All you wingers would be broke if you ever paid off your bad bets!
Item 1 – I had people lining up asking me to stay, and I postponed my retirement for a year because I was so popular with the staff.
Item 2 – Since you asked, no, I had nothing to do with the missed filing deadline. I was not involved in that lawsuit in any way, shape, or form. Not as a lawyer. Not as a supervisor. Not as a witness. Not as agency staff. Not as anything. Not even as a cute, fluffy, adorable bunny!
Wayne,
Darcy Burner said: “Racial discrimination is Constitutionally illegal, but gender discrimination is not.”
Obviously, the U.S Constitution does not prohibit private companies and individuals from discriminating on the basis of either race or gender. Only federal laws and state laws can cover this type of discrimination.
On the other hand, the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th amendment prohibits state and local governments from discriminating on the basis of either race or gender.
Stop trying to change the subject. Darcy Burner’s quote makes no sense at all, whether it is applied to the government or to private parties.
71
“IF she had bad grades, they would be an indicator that she does NOT understand the law”
What a load of crap! You know nothing about law school. Law school grades mean nothing. Any idiot can get grades. Take Richard Poop, for example. He graduated from law school and passed a bar exam, but he doesn’t even know the Equal Rights Amendment isn’t in the U.S. Constitution!
Interesting Roger….
Thanks for clarifying your status as a government hack.
You can officially drop the “I invested in my own retirement” Bullshit.
Now go cash your welfare (oops, retirement) check.
So, Snarky Mark, how long have you been hacking UW’s computers and is your 14-year-old cousin a good lay? Just curious.
72
That’s an equal protection case, not an equal rights case, dummy.
Snarky Mark @73
When did Goldy ever claim to be a journalist? Unlike any rightwing blogger I’ve ever seen, Goldy has been forthright about admitting his partisan bias.
OK, I think i get the picture, Goldy: Stefan pisses you off because he doens’t like Burner. Gotcha!
74
“Speculation is a game everyone can play. For example, I speculate the reason JCH uses an alias is that his real name can be found on a sex offender list (perhaps several). I have no evidence to support my theory and it is complete speculation, but it sounds good to me. Therefore, let’s just accept it as true. Commentby wayne— 4/6/06@ 12:29 pm”
This is the Republican M.O., all right! Combine fantastic assumptions and daring leaps of logic and — voila!* — they reach their absurb conclusions. Presto magico!
* Wingnuts usually spell this word “walla.” What do you expect from idiots who can’t even spell their own fucking names! (E.g., Y’o, who routinely misspells his name as “Yo.” Y’o is a contraction of “yahoo,” as in “trailer park yahoos.”)
Here’s an example of how the wingnut method works. Snarky Mark implies he knows what Darcy Burner’s law school grades are. The only way he could know this is by seeing her transcript, and since UW transcripts are confidential, he would have to hack into UW’s computer to know what Darcy’s law school grades are. Therefore, it logically follows that Stefan’s 14-year-old wife has a twin sister whom Snarky Mark must have married, because a person who would hack into UW’s computer to find out what somebody’s law school grades are is the same kind of person who would marry his 14-year-old first cousin.
And that’s how I found out that Snarky Mark and Stefan are cousins.
Richard:
The issue of discrimination and the Constitution is complicated, even for lawyers, long-eared and fuzzy or not. To condemn someone who was not a lawyer based on a inoffensive comment made 11 years ago on an electronic bulletin board is really stretching.
ROGER RABBIT RIDDLE
How do you know when you’re having dinner at Snarky Mark’s house?
Answer: He keeps yelling at his 14-year-old wife to quit smoking at the dinner table because it sets a bad example for their 5-year-old son.
Richard, is Stefan your brother-in-law? I was thinking maybe his wife was a triplet. Just wondering …
So roger, speaking of 14 year olds having sex, why don’t you tell us the story about your daughter and the serial killer…
I bet the guy was Gary Ridgeway, wasn’t he?
Wayne @ 74
I have been trying to figure out exactly when Darcy Burner would have been selected as an intern for Senator Cantwell. Summer of 2005 would have been too funny, since Burner announced for Congress shortly after completing the Spring 2005 Quarter in June 2005.
In reality, these selections are going to be made well before the next academic year starts. Some students do internships that very summer, and would obviously have to know before June. If it is during the coming academic year, then the student would need advance notice to plan their course schedules. One full quarter (i.e. Fall, Winter or Spring) would be spent in Washington, DC working for Senator Cantwell. And many law school courses take two quarters, so a student needs to know well in advance whether or not they are accepted for an internship on the other side of the country.
What, resume padding? Hmmm…? I remember the horsewhisperer blowing the FEMA guy out of the water with resume padding and now Darcy gets a pass from the same peeples? It’s okay for donks but not Republicans? Hmmm…? Strange land we live in called WA State.
So Rabbit Pellet: Once again, the librul ASSWipes of ASSes are WRONG and Puddy is RIGHT about Rove! Now what happens if the same ASSWipes are wrong about DeLay being Congressman #2? There will be crying and gnashing of teeth in WA State librul land! How does it feel Rabbit Pellet, being so wrong on so many issues?
Under what name did darcy attend Harvard? She says she graduated in 1996, and claims a National Merit scholarship. can’t prove it unless we know what name she was using.
@ 94
Wow, if it’s been this long and you still haven’t discovered her maiden name, maybe by 2009 you’ll know what kind of car she drives.
My lord, this comment thread is going to be the subject of some psychology major’s thesis one day.
I can see the republican campaign commercials now…
Vote for Reichert because his challenger didn’t finish law school?
Is that all you right wing morons got?
“SNARKY MARK” RIDDLE:
How do you know when you’re having dinner at Roger Rabbit’s house?
Answer: He keeps yelling at his 14-year-old daughter to quit smoking at the dinner table because it sets a bad example for their 5-year-old son.
97
Is that the best you can do, Mark? Plagiarize my joke? Can’t think of a comeback line? … I thought so.
Wingnut = empty head
95
“My lord, this comment thread is going to be the subject of some psychology major’s thesis one day. Commentby thehim— 4/6/06@ 1:52 pm”
Should be easy to get a federal grant to study why wingnuts marry their 14-yeaer-old first cousins. Carrying out the study may be a different story, though.
To all you Lefties…
Why are you so afraid of anyone challenging Darcy’s credentials or her bio? Shouldn’t she be able to withstand scrutiny?
If the QUESTIONS that are being asked have simple answers, give ’em.
It isn’t as though anyone is questioning whether the children are her husband’s or whether she has parking tickets. If her education or job history are irrelevant, why did she mention them at all?
89
No. Different state, different killer.
Thehim,
I am curious to see your response to this…
You allege that you formerly worked at Microsoft, However a current Microsoft employee posted the following on the Slog, addressing Darcy’s “executuive claim”
“I’m a Microsoftie, and have been taking note of the press references to her as a “former Microsoft executive” for the past few months with growing unease, hoping they weren’t coming from her campaign bio (they apparently were – the bio on her web site refers to her this way). The highest-ranking title I’ve heard attributed to her time at Microsoft is “group program manager” – which is not an executive-level position. To my knowledge, the company considers only director-level titles and above (director and senior director, general manager, corporate VP, and senior VP) to be “executive” posts. A group program manager most often reports to a product unit manager, who in turn reports to either a director or a general manager. Make no mistake – rising to the level of group program manager here is usually a significant career accomplishment, and would often qualify the individual in question for a VP-level job at many other smaller companies in the industry. So if she is mischaracterizing her role here or describing it in terms that are too simplistic so that people understand she had real responsibilities, it’s really unnecessary that she do so. She can be proud of the level she did rise to.”
92, 93
Today’s news story doesn’t involve the outing of Plame. It involves other intel leaks. It appears you didn’t read the story. My oh my, a wingnut puts his mouth in gear without knowing what he’s talking about because he’s too lazy to do 2 minutes of researcy … what else is new?
To answer your question, no, Rove has not been exonerated. He’s still under investigation. Stay tuned for further developments.
The Real Mark (former journalist): Not afraid at all. I’m not in th e 8th district but if I was I’d vote for anyone with a positive agenda who’s independent of the bugman’s corrupt money machine.
Is anybody out there still wondering why we call him “Pudding Brains” or “Putty-fer-brains?” Now you know.
The name “Stefan” sounds kind of pompous — like “Mr. Continental” kind of pompous. I wonder if his real name is just Steve Sharansky like Geraldo Rivera’s real name is Jerry Rivers.
You rightwingers can find nothing wrong with the head of the most powerful nation on earth, your beloved GW, even though his academic career involved a C average and a rejection from the University of Texas Law School, and his professional career was highlighted by driving two companies into the ground. On the other hand, you can fling endless shit at a candidate for a mere congressional seat based on speculation about her grades and her job title. Your hypocrisy is endlessly entertaining. Please accept my heartfelt gratitude. And, please boys, do keep it up.
re 91: The term “donks” is a word that Rufus uses exclusively. I think you are Rufus.
Puddybud: you’re quickly tying with klake for “troll most easiest to ignore on HA.org”.
Apologize for saying stuff against Rove? I never said Rove outed Plame but even if I did I would NEVER APOLOGIZE FOR EVIL.
Case in point: Rove originated the “black love child” rumor against McCain. Rove has done this many times in his career for people he’s worked for.
Mark @43
Did I say they weren’t?
DarcyIsVague @ 94
Darcy Burner graduated from Harvard in March 1996 with a B.A. in computer science. I called the registrar at Harvard College, within the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard University and verified this.
I have been trying to figure out her maiden name. She married Mike Burner in 1993. Since she often went by Darcy Gibbons Burner, I would assume that Gibbons might be her maiden name. But Harvard had her record under Burner, since she was using that last name by the time she graduated.
It did take Burner a while to finish Harvard. She was born on November 12, 1970. So she presumably finished high school in June 1989 and entered Harvard in September 1989. She did not graduate until March 1996 — almost seven years later.
The biographical sketch of Burner in The Stranger (which is a LOT more complete than her campaign bio) shows her leaving Harvard in her sophomore year, and going to California for several years. She then married Mike Burner, a former supervisor of hers from Harvard (and 10 years her senior, being born on July 8, 1960), after a long continuation of their romance by e-mail while she was in California. She moved back to Massachusetts in 1993, married Mike, and started again at Harvard.
http://www.thestranger.com/sea.....?oid=31149
Burner apparently has had some extreme personal tragedy with the children situation. The Stranger article references a premature baby being born to the marriage in 1996 and dying that same year, from what Burner says was medical malpractice.
From this 04/23/1993 Google post, it appears Burner was also pregnant in 1993, with an estimated due date of 10/24/1993:
http://groups.google.com/group.....f579746567
Obviously, that first pregnancy in 1993 also had an extremely tragic outcome.
proud leftist @ 107
They have to “fling shit”. 15 seats change hands and it’s all over for them. The Dems will hold hearings on this corrupt administration and make Shrub’s last two years living hell.
I wasn’t for impeachment because then Cheney would take over but no more. A Dem House and hopefully Senate will keep any Republican in the White House in check.
Bring.it.on.
Goddamn Republicans think they are the only ones who can play games with our nation’s most sensitive military secrets. Why should Republicans have a monopoly on disclosing intelligence information? Republicans want a monopoly on every fucking thing! Hell, they even want a monopoly on having monopolies.
Commentby Roger Rabbit— 4/6/06@ 11:41 am
Roger Rabbit your friend Sandy is not the President of the United States, so what is your point? When Vice President Cheney showed up Qatar, in 2002, that location was classified to the public, and no one was allowed to divulge that location. After he left that location was downgrade in its classification due to the entourage of reporters that were with the VP. After the VP left, nothing changed and the enemy was still dieing like flies in the battlefield in Afghanistan, and the War in Iraq started a few months later. Roger classified information is release to draw the enemy into a different conflict that we can win. That is what happens in the fog of War and the dynamics of change on the battlefield dunning the conflict. The reason for losing the Viet Nam War was the many requests to get permission from LBJ to carry the War to the enemy. Roger that time lag cost this nation lot of lives and created your bad attitude. I do believe Sandy Berger was charge and admitted that he remove classified information and destroyed it to cover up or hide what really happen in the White House at that time.
Looking through Google groups, it appears that Burner posted several articles under her maiden name of Darcy E. Gibbons with a Harvard e-mail address between July 17, 1991 and March 16, 1993. There are also four Google posts under “Darcy Gibbons” with a Berkeley e-mail address between June 17, 1992 and August 21, 1992.
Michael G. Burner, the husband of Darcy Gibbons Burner, was a computer system manager working for Harvard University. In December 1993, someone supposedly broke into the computer that Burner was managing, used someone else’s account, and posted a story entitled “I Love Little Boys”, which endorsed NAMBLA and Michael Jackson. Mike Burner had to post something a couple of days later, saying that the offensive article wasn’t posted by the person whose account had been hacked into:
http://groups.google.com/group.....180656c6b5
Roger in Bill Clintons time in office it was referred to the tail wagging the dog when he started bombing Yugoslavia. Today we are still there, the conflict still goes on, and people are still dieing everyday. The only thing of value in Yugoslavia was an old Fiat factory making Yugo’s. The Albanians were crying ethnic cleansing and less people were slathered there than in Iraq. Roger and Gang did President Clinton tell us all the truth and nothing but the truth dunning that time span?
Wow, if this is the best that the right can do, Ms. Burner should be able to walk away with this election.
So, the best the minnow has to show is that people he talks to at Microsoft (no one he is willing to identify though, heck, he doesn’t even pretend to act as a journalist and ask Microsoft for an official statement), disagree with Ms. Burner calling herself and executive. Now, put aside the fact that it is technically correct, and apparently was even used by Microsoft as Goldy has shown. For the minnow, truthiness is more important than truth.
This is interesting, as many people I know think that Stephan Sharansky is a liar and has an incredibly small penis. Based upon the minnow’s standards, that means it is true. Wow, that makes things easy.
As for Richard Pope, I am very disappointed in him. Assuming he actually went to law school, he would know that there are plenty of people who drop out of law school for various reasons. One of my best friends in the world dropped out of law school with good grades after his first year. It might be hard to believe, but after a year in law school, he decided he didn’t want to be a lawyer. Some might even consider this a noble act. Apparently Mr. Pope believes that to not finish law school makes you a bad person, and we need more and more lawyers.
And I don’t think it strains credibility to say that running for congress, especially with the need to raise money that is required in current elections, is a more than full time job, and that it made sense for her to drop out of law school. After all, she isn’t running a joke campaign for port commissioner.
This is the kind of thing that might have had some impact if it was dropped a few days before an election when the minnow could hope that his truthiness would have an impact before he was truth slapped back to reality. Instead, this will only go to show that U(sp) is an untrustworthy site and that Mr. Sharansky cares more about propaganda than the truth. Of course, the minnow could post a retraction…, but then again, if he posted a retraction on everything he ever posted that was clearly wrong…, well his blog would suddenly be interesting but there would be no room for his normal propaganda, and he would loose readers even faster than he is now.
But, hey, wingnuts, thanks for the laugh.
Thanks, Richard. It appears that she has some hardships both in her personal life and in her ability to have children. And, though she obviously isn’t exploiting these in the campaign, it sure seems like she is going out of her way to avoid talking about them. I grant her that these are private issue.
But she is running for a very public, very national office. If she didn’t want her personal life coming out, of which it seems there is nothing embarrassing or illegal, then why did she put herself out there?
I still don’t think 3 years at ms as an entry level program manager qualifies anyone for congress, but it also doesn’t disqualify someone for going for the nomination and running. If the voters really want this novice in office, then so be it. But she can’t plead foul when the going gets tough.
“me” @ 97 In retrospect…
From the moment I hit [send] on that edited “joke,” I’ve had second thoughts.
Roger, I apologize. My “joke” at 97 was juvenile, in poor taste and unfunny.
Clueless @ 104: “…I’d vote for anyone with a positive agenda who’s independent of the bugman’s corrupt money machine.”
Not sure who the “bugman” is, but if you were to strike just that word I would almost agree with you.
Momus @ 102,
It’s a semantic issue. By the definition of the word “executive” as Goldy referenced, Darcy Burner was an executive. As for who Microsoft considers their “Executives,” which company-wide will be a more restrictive term, that may be different. But that does not change the fact that she held an executive role at the company (as in, she managed a budget and an org). I’d be willing to concede that her bio is not clear, but she’s not lying. And if you think that you’re actually accomplishing something by nitpicking over such meaningless nonsense, by all means continue. You’re entertaining me and wasting your own time. It’s a win-win from my seat.
bugman=Tom DeLay
Thanks, Richard. It appears that she has some hardships both in her personal life and in her ability to have children. And, though she obviously isn’t exploiting these in the campaign, it sure seems like she is going out of her way to avoid talking about them. I grant her that these are private issue.
But she is running for a very public, very national office. If she didn’t want her personal life coming out, of which it seems there is nothing embarrassing or illegal, then why did she put herself out there?
I hear the Curt Weldon campaign could use a guy like you.
Sorry, trying that again…
Thanks, Richard. It appears that she has some hardships both in her personal life and in her ability to have children. And, though she obviously isn’t exploiting these in the campaign, it sure seems like she is going out of her way to avoid talking about them. I grant her that these are private issue.
But she is running for a very public, very national office. If she didn’t want her personal life coming out, of which it seems there is nothing embarrassing or illegal, then why did she put herself out there?
I hear the Curt Weldon campaign could use a guy like you.
-Once again, the librul ASSWipes of ASSes are WRONG and Puddy is RIGHT about Rove! Now what happens if the same ASSWipes are wrong about DeLay being Congressman #2? There will be crying and gnashing of teeth in WA State librul land! –
It still blows my mind JCH Hillary/Puddy can pass for a Christian this day and age. I like it when these barely sane right wingers make predictions, though. Funny thing is – when their predictions go horribly wrong, they go completely silent on an issue they were previously ranting about.
Why, take a look at JCH/Puddy’s obsession with some no-name Congresswoman from Atlanta. Not only did the “Queen of the Libruls” (Nancy Pelosi) flatly state McKinney was wrong – with pretty much every Dem following suit, but McKinney herself apologized. So much for this huge, insane drum JCH/Puddy has been banging on – that the Dems were going to defend her, and that this type of behavior is typical of black Dems.
JDB – the fact that this is being brought up at sp now, and not three days before the election (ha), seems to show more integrity, not less. So you are saying that shark is less truthful because he asks questions about qualifications? That makes no sense.
I guess dems believe that last minute hit pieces, where the target has no opportunity to adequately respond, are a better way to get to the truth about a candidate.
Okay.
I guess dems believe that last minute hit pieces, where the target has no opportunity to adequately respond, are a better way to get to the truth about a candidate.
Hey Goldy, is there any way we can find out if darcyisvague is really David Irons? Because if it is, this is the funniest thing ever.
darcywillwin @ 126:
If that was true, then at least the minnow has some integrity.
However, you know he posted this because he was quickly becoming irrelevant. His readership is way down, the press doesn’t listen to him since he is never right, and he is still pounding a dead horse that sane people left behind a long time ago (what is it with Republican’s and dead horses).
Of course, a smear before the end of a campaign only works if there is some truth to it. If it is as laughable as this, it usually rebounds on the person spreading the smear. In this case, we fortunately can skip a step and just go to laughing at Mr. Sharansky.
But, if you think he has integrity, go over to his board and ask him to post a retraction of his post. If he really is just asking questions about qualificiations, now that they have been answered, he will admit that, won’t he?
Or, as I’ve proven several times, he really just cares about propaganda and will leave his lies up even when he is shown to be clearly wrong. The minnow doesn’t give a damn about the truth, and he will let his lies stand without correction no matter how wrong he is.
LardASSRedneck: Sorry I didn’t pay attention to the moronic congresswoman from eastern burbs of Atlanta. I was travelling by jet plane! But since you decided to evoke her name, let’s see.
She apologized AFTER the GRAND JURY was empaneled. She DIDN’T apologize before. She emphatically stated she had NO APOLOGY to deliver. Guessed you missed the memo. Maybe that’s why u’s a lardASSRedneck! You have no sense of chronology!
Nancy Pelosi wants this to blow over. Did you read the Demo blogs over the last few days LardASS? McKinney is damaging your sides message. Yes, I will always nail a black donk who loves to cry racism. Why? You libruls taught inner city blacks to cry racism and we the donkocraptic party will come to your rescue with:
1) Charts and placards
2) Words of encouragement
3) Words of eompowerment
4) Words of empathy
5) Words of sympathy
6) Money to fix the great society hell we created – Hell NO!
Nuff SAID!
@10 & 23
I apologize, I was thinking of the years all wrong. I was just looking at the months and was thinking Novemeber 2003 is before January 2003. Which was dumb. Sorry about that.
I still support Darcy 100%, but I’m woman enough to admit when I screwed up.
FTC: Maybe you didn’t say anything wrong against Rove but your leader implied it:
BREAKING NEWS: DeLay indicted!
by Goldy, 09/28/2005, 9:42 AM
CNN is reporting that House Majority Leader Tom DeLay has been indicted by a Texas grand jury on one count of criminal conspiracy.
UPDATE:
From the AP:
A Texas grand jury today charged Rep. Tom DeLay and two political associates with conspiracy in a campaign finance scheme, an indictment that could force him to step down as House majority leader.
DeLay attorney Steve Brittain said DeLay was accused of a criminal conspiracy along with two associates, John Colyandro, former executive director of a Texas political action committee formed by DeLay, and Jim Ellis, who heads DeLay’s national political committee.
The indictment against the second-ranking, and most assertive Republican leader came on the final day of the grand jury’s term. It followed earlier indictments of a state political action committee founded by DeLay and three of his political associates.
The Austin American-Statesman gives some great background on the case, in a story published before the indictment, but I think Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo best sums up what this means for the Republicans:
So let’s see.
House Majority Leader Indicted for Criminal Conspiracy.
Senate Majority Leader the target of an increasingly serious probe of potential insider trading.
Rumors of October Rove indictment in the Plame case.
Is this a problem yet?
Donnageddon: Yes you made a reference to Rove so you need not ask citation: “http://www.horsesass.org/my-comments-popup.php?p=889&c=1#comment-57532”
Puddwhack: You should read Tom Wolfe’s ,The Bonfire of the Vanities. I think you’d like it.
-You libruls taught inner city blacks to cry racism-
Right, JCH/Puddy. And decades of white conservative racism had nothing to do with it. LOL!
Just when I thought JCH/Puddy’s insane rants couldn’t get any funnier….
we the donkocraptic party will come to your rescue with:
1) Charts and placards
2) Words of encouragement
3) Words of eompowerment
4) Words of empathy
5) Words of sympathy
6) Money to fix the great society hell we created
You’re right, JCH/Puddy. Instead, the libruls should have just taken the conservatives’ approach: deem them all lazy, stupid and worthless, and call it a day.
LardASSRedneck: You forget, the Democrats were the ones who did those things. History proves me out! White Libruls have run the inner cities from time immortal in the US. Exception is New York. Every now and then the populace wakes up from their stupor and elects a good Republican person. Then Al Sharpton pollutes the minds and a donk gets back in. Lately though they like Librul Republicans!!!
JCH lives in Hawaii! I live in WA State!
Horseless Looselips: Anything you suggest is a run from event!
Delay Indicted for a felony.
McKinney – NOT indicted for anything and grand jury is only CONSIDERING a misdemeanor.
Cunningham – CONVICTED for a felony.
Abramoff – CONVICTED for a felony.
Kenny Lay – Indicted for a felony.
No wonder the right wing morons want to change the subject. They can’t keep their guys out of jail long enough to have a real debate!
Right, JCH/Puddy. And decades of white conservative racism had nothing to do with it. LOL!
Just when I thought JCH/Puddy’s insane rants couldn’t get any funnier….
Commentby LiberalRedneck— 4/6/06@ 5:12 pm
No more like decades of liberal public education. Of course they know how to put a rubber on a cucumber.
Yeah – that’s it. It all comes down to condoms destroying the moral fabric of the United States. How old are you, RUFUS? 81? You sure sound like one of those cranky old bug-eyed guys. I haven’t heard that ridiculous talking point since the Craswell/Reagan days.
JCH/Puddy, RUFUS, etc:
Ever hear about something called the “Southern Strategy?” Well, it was Strom Thurmond who kinda got the ball rolling when he left the Democratic party in 1948 – and it was successfully practiced by some of your more enlightened leaders, like Jesse Helms and Lee Atwater (GHW Bush’s campaign manage)r – who explained the concept in 1981:
You start out in 1954 by saying, “N_____, n_____, n_____.” By 1968 you can’t say ‘n_____’– that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.
And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “N_____, n_____.”
And you right wingers may recall that last year, the chairman of the RNC decided to apologize for the GOP basing their overarching political strategy on racial divisiveness several decades later. Needless to say, conservative gurus like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity became UNGLUED when Mehlman disavowed the Southern Strategy. Nobody else in the GOP really noticed, because they know that if you don’t whip up racist Republican “Christian” voters in the South every 2-4 years, the GOP would be nothing.
I seem to remember another character assassin that was trying to destroy a political candidate on the local blogisphere…………
Oh, now I remember, that was Goldy attacking the character of Dixon!
jaybo Freak – why don’t you try attacking the bona fides of Darcy Burner rather than make a fool of yourself supporting Dixon?
It’d be more true to what you are.
Another socialist example of what’s OK for me is not OK for thee. Revel in your hypocrisy Goldy.
At Microsoft “executive” means someone who is a: director, general manager, corporate vice president, vice president, senior vice president, president, or chief officer.
It may, but usually does not, include Product Unit Managers and Business Unit Managers, but sometimes they are executives, too.
Executives have a special fiduciary responsibility to the company and a person’s status as executive or not is well-defined.
Goldy:
Lets face it, she has an integrity problem. No matter how much sugar you attempt to place on her, she still has an integrity problem.
I managed people with over a million dollar budget, and trust me I was not executive. She stretches the truth and I for one do not her in our Congress. Washington already has one rep who has an integrity problem because he thinks releasing illegal tapes to the media is okay but thinks legal wiretaps are not. Go figure.