« Behind the Numbers on the Lamont Victory | Main | Cathy McMorris - A Congresswoman in Conflict? »

August 10, 2006

YouTube - Darcy Burner Campaign Commercial 1

Darcy Burner's first TV ad is up on YouTube.  It's a solid, well-made 60 second biographical spot.  Heavy on her military ties, which I'm sure is a smart move to innoculate her against the inveitable "Democrats are soft on terra-ism" charges to come.

(Why The Stranger is posting political ads to YouTube, I can't say, but I also can't say that I disapprove.)

Posted by Jon Stahl on August 10, 2006 at 09:27 PM in Candidate Races | Permalink

Comments

The juxtaposition of the Burner and Reichert ads is very revealing.

Mrs. Burner offfers a straightforward presentation of herself and her priorities as the United States Congressperson representing the 8th District.

Mr. Reichert gives us an outrageous effort straight out of the Willie Horton school of dirty politics. Mr. Reichert's advertisement is an insult to the viewers and even more so to voters in the 8th District. He constucts a totally unrealistic and unsupported representation. It makes one happy that Jesus Christ is not his opponent, lest Mr. Reichert might call him a charlatan.

One can only hope that the voters will learn who he is and what he stands for, without all of the senseless accusations, so this election can be based on the quality of the candidates, instead of the amount of mud can be fabricated for thowing.

Jack Smith

Posted by: Jack Smith | Aug 11, 2006 9:58:38 AM

The juxtaposition of the Burner and Reichert ads is very revealing.

Mrs. Burner offfers a straightforward presentation of herself and her priorities as the United States Congressperson representing the 8th District.

Mr. Reichert gives us an outrageous effort straight out of the Willie Horton school of dirty politics. Mr. Reichert's advertisement is an insult to the viewers and even more so to voters in the 8th District. He constucts a totally unrealistic and unsupported representation. It makes one happy that Jesus Christ is not his opponent, lest Mr. Reichert might call him a charlatan.

One can only hope that the voters will learn who he is and what he stands for, without all of the senseless accusations, so this election can be based on the quality of the candidates, instead of the amount of mud can be fabricated for thowing.

Jack Smith

Posted by: Jack Smith | Aug 11, 2006 9:59:55 AM

How can Darcy refer to what is apparantly a 3 year job at Microsoft as a 'successful career'?

It appears Darcy has never had a job in her life that lasted more than 3 years, quiting Microsoft for law school, quitting law school to run for Congress...The word 'rookie' seems all too applicable...

Posted by: Jack Murphy | Aug 11, 2006 3:53:02 PM

Jack Murphy,

"How can Darcy refer to what is apparantly a 3 year job at Microsoft as a 'successful career'?"

Welcome to the world of high tech. Three years at the same employer is a long time in that industry.

"It appears Darcy has never had a job in her life that lasted more than 3 years, quiting Microsoft for law school, quitting law school to run for Congress..."

You are incorrect. Darcy did not quit MS to attend law school. She attended law school as preparation for running for public office. This is based on what she told people while she was in law school. Her reasoning then (and now) is that if she was going to run for office to be a lawmaker, she should have an understanding of the law.

If only all candidates showed that level of integrity

Posted by: Darryl | Aug 11, 2006 4:35:04 PM

I don't think 3 years is a 'long time' at Oracle, HP, IBM, Dell, or even MS...Not enough to be a 'successful career'. That's just over the top. I think most people are competent after a year wtih a job, not 1/3 way through a career.

So why DID she leave MS? Why didn't she finish law school? Has she ever stuck with one thing more than 3 years? What's next, med school? As much as I hate Right-Wing Reichert, Darcy is too much of a rookie to place much confidence. I wonder what is in her background we may yet to discover? Besides being a cute air force mommy brat, what SKILLS does she have?

Posted by: Jack Murphy | Aug 12, 2006 8:02:13 AM

Jack Murphy once again, eh?

Looks like a right wing operative was told to roam the progressive blogs to seed doubt about Darcy.

Such an obvious tactic is so passé.

Posted by: Daniel K | Aug 13, 2006 2:42:14 PM

Jack,

You don't seem to understand the difference between a "career" and ones last job.

Effectively, Darcy has had two career trajectories. One in software development (with something like a decade of experience). Darcy finished that career as a manager of a successful software initiative at MS, a job in which she managed lower level managers and oversaw a multimillion dollar budget. You seem to confuse a career (which is a trajectory that includes entering the field, merit-based promotions and merit-based changes in employment) with the tenure of her last position in that career.

Her second career trajectory has been to become a lawmaker. She started the second around 2003, and has systematically pursued additional education (law school, Camp Wellstone) and is now in the midst of a campaign (and one that is being take seriously by all sides).

Your "protests" seem to be little more than Wingnut talking-point BS.

But, thanks for playing!

Posted by: Darryl | Aug 14, 2006 12:10:03 AM

Jack,

You don't seem to understand the difference between a "career" and ones last job.

Effectively, Darcy has had two career trajectories. One in software development (with something like a decade of experience). Darcy finished that career as a manager of a successful software initiative at MS, a job in which she managed lower level managers and oversaw a multimillion dollar budget. You seem to confuse a career (which is a trajectory that includes entering the field, merit-based promotions and merit-based changes in employment) with the tenure of her last position in that career.

Her second career trajectory has been to become a lawmaker. She started the second around 2003, and has systematically pursued additional education (law school, Camp Wellstone) and is now in the midst of a campaign (and one that is being take seriously by all sides).

Your "protests" seem to be little more than Wingnut talking-point BS.

But, thanks for playing!

Posted by: Darryl | Aug 14, 2006 12:13:50 AM

Like most people in the 8th (and in Washington) I am an Independant but I have also volunteered on numerous Democratic campaigns (Cantwell, Inslee, Dean, Kerry, etc) and even been to Camp Wellstone, but but I still can't fathom why Darcy is the best the Dems can come up with?

She seems to have the ability to "bend" the truth when it comes to her background when she should just be straight up and honest. Why doesn't she just say that she has only lived here since 1998, (and doesn't really have deep connections in the state) got a job at Microsoft 2 years later (through her husband's connections) and that she like many women likes being a stay at home wife/mom? What exactly has she done for her community? Is she on the PTA, Camp Wellstone hardly qualifies as graduate school, its a 2 day training, has she volunteered on any campagins? She lives in Carnation so what is her position on the growth management act and its influence on the cost of housing?

She doesn't say how she will take on the insurance industry to get affordable health care? What are the tought questions she wants to ask in Iraq? Frankly the last thing we need is someone as inept as Senator's Cantwell and Murray in Congress representing the state.

Alas no one else is running so of course I will vote for her but it highlights the need to develop people with a real commitment to politics and not people who are just looking for a hobby job to fit in around their kids. Be honest, find out what the voters in the district care about and represent us not your own agenda.

Kathyrn
(btw both my husband I started at Msft right out of college and retired after 15 years)

Posted by: Kathyrn | Aug 14, 2006 11:21:11 AM

Hi, Jack again. Seeding doubt. Being passe'. Sorry. I hate to burst your bubble, but I'm a liberal. I just gave some money to MoveOn.

You know, I think I ask legitimate questions, and you just want to call names, refuse to answer...This...arrogance...is why the neocons capture the independents...

If you say Darcy started her second career around 2003, well, that leaves you with a 3 year overlap of her FIRST career in the software industry...which means either her software career was really only 7 years before she lost interest, or, her political career was a part time hobby for much of the post 2003 period. SInce she didn't graduate frmo college until 1996...her experience is starting to slice thin...Either it's NOT a decade of experience, or, she didn't start her 2nd career in 2003...which is it?

Darcy's 10 year 'career' in the software industry seems vague at best, and weak on details. WHAT did she do? I don't see much of a resume. How about filling it in for us that don't work at MS? Was she a star? Or, just one of about 1,500 35 year old managers? If she was a star, why leave such good money? If she wasn't a star, maybe she shouldn't be name-dropping MS in every other sentence?

Her 'second career trajectory has been to become a lawmaker' is, what, the law school she dropped out of, and...fundraising...what else?

C'mon. Get real. This may be who I vote for, beacuse I hate Reichert, but don't try to sell this 35 year old lady who has 'bounced around the room' as a political heavyweight.... You could leverage her being a rookie, but you can't deny that she is one...

Posted by: Jack Murphy | Aug 14, 2006 9:12:27 PM

You not Jack, you're an ass. Why? Because we have been answering your questions, in ridiculously length and patient detail, but when you do that and a person just repeats the same stuff over and over despite having clearly answered it, then that person can only be dense, or an ass - or a troll.

People aren't claiming Darcy is a heavyweight candidate. We're claiming that she has the smarts and the energy to be a political force for the 8th. We're talking about a 35 year old with a wealth of potential, and a background of top notch education, and a fast track business career in the high tech field. She's entirely a self starter and the fact this campaign is as visible and as viable as it is is because of her drive.

Past Democratic candidates simply have been awful or lackluster. By comparison Burner is far stronger because of her grasp of the issues, her ability to connect with voters, and her ability to frame the debate.

Sympathetic voters as you try to portray yourself do not start from a position of hostility as you do. Your remarks indicate anger and hostility, as if you have a personal vendetta against Darcy Burner.

If you want answers that you believe my multiple responses to your questions at my blog didn't answer, then contact the campaign directly.

Posted by: Daniel K | Aug 14, 2006 10:22:50 PM

Jack,

"Sorry. I hate to burst your bubble, but I'm a liberal. I just gave some money to MoveOn."

Sorry, chump, but when you post the same nonsense on multiple blogs and under different screen names, I am afraid you have the credibility problem.

"If you say Darcy started her second career around 2003, well, that leaves you with a 3 year overlap of her FIRST career in the software industry..."

What are you babbling about? Between Wikipedia and Darcy's own bio, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what Darcy was doing when. Why is it a problem for her to be "part time" in her second career? I mean, becoming a congressperson is a long term goal. Do you have some reason to believe that one cannot begin pursuing that goal well in advance of the actual run for office? What three years do you believe overlapped?

which means either her software career was really only 7 years before she lost interest, or, her political career was a part time hobby for much of the post 2003 period.

Ummm...sorry, chump, but things are not so black and white. First, why do you discount her work in the software industry while she was in school? I had a similar trajectory where I worked in the computer industry for nearly my entire undergraduate career (which was extended because I was a part-time undergraduate). And in graduate school, I earned a living writing software and doing systems administration. Was my work worth less because I was also in school? No, of course not.

Also, your characterization that she "lost interest" is speculative bullshit. She did decide to change careers, but unless she told you she "lost interest," you are just making up shit about her motivation to go into politics. (e.g. I went from being in the computer business to becoming a professional anthropologist, I never "lost interest" in computers, but I did decide to pursue a different direction professionally.)

I am not sure what you are getting at when you say "her political career was a part time hobby." I mean, really, she hasn't made a penny yet as a politician, so I suppose the wingnut interpretation is that she is "a hobbyist." But between going to law school for a year (which requires applying for law school 3/4 of a year before that), and being a candidate for over a year, I think we pretty much cover the last 2 to 3 years. I don't know what day/month she decide to become a politician, but there may well have been some overlap with her career in the software biz. So? Is that somehow bad?

"SInce she didn't graduate frmo college until 1996...her experience is starting to slice thin...Either it's NOT a decade of experience, or, she didn't start her 2nd career in 2003...which is it?"

Well...those of us who started our career before we finished college find statements like this to be rather uninformed.

"Darcy's 10 year 'career' in the software industry seems vague at best, and weak on details."

Wait...she was the lead product manager for the .NET initiative at MicroSoft. Either you know almost nothing about the software business or you are just pretending to be ignorant. Neither would surprise me.


"WHAT did she do? I don't see much of a resume."

In her last position, she was the lead product manager for the .NET initiative. That means she managed the .NET initiative. If you don't know what that means, look it up, but it was one of Microsoft's most important frameworks while she was the lead product manager.

"Was she a star? Or, just one of about 1,500 35 year old managers?

Well...she was the lead product manager for one of Microsoft's most important (at the time, anyway) software development efforts....

"If she was a star, why leave such good money? "

Because she wanted to run for Congress more than she wanted to acquire a great big pile of money. That happens sometimes....

"If she wasn't a star, maybe she shouldn't be name-dropping MS in every other sentence?"

Having interacted with Darcy in a number of semi-public and private settings, having heard several radio interviews with her, and having read a number of printed interviews with her, I assure you that your belief that she is "name-dropping MS in every other sentence" is wildly inaccurate. More to the point, do you really expect us to take you seriously when you when you make such idiotic claims?

"Her 'second career trajectory has been to become a lawmaker' is, what, the law school she dropped out of, and...fundraising...what else?"

You know, I am a professor at the University of Washington (where Darcy attended law school). In my experience, it is not uncommon for some students to attend the University for a limited period of time without seeking a degree. Darcy attended Camp Wellstone (a boot camp for progressive political candidates) while she was a law student. She mentioned to one of her fellow Camp Wellstone students (David Goldstein) that she was interested in becoming a lawmaker and, therefore, decided to take courses from the law school to prepare for that task. So, unless you believe there is a vast left-wing conspiracy around Darcy (there isn't), all evidence points to the fact that she went to law school to prepare for her run for congress. You can make up motives and attribute them to Darcy if you want, but you are only making up shit that doesn't jibe with all the other evidence.

"C'mon. Get real. This may be who I vote for, beacuse I hate Reichert, but don't try to sell this 35 year old lady who has 'bounced around the room' as a political heavyweight.... You could leverage her being a rookie, but you can't deny that she is one..."

You have a very active imagination. I've never seen anyone claim that Darcy is a "political heavyweight." If you find such a claim go spew your BS in that person's comment thread. Darcy offers herself as an alternative to Reichert, as someone with business credentials, as someone who is a better fit to the 8th CD than Reichert. As it happens, she is a great fund raiser, has progressive ideals, and she is (in my opinion) exceptionally bright. She wants to change the direction that this country has been taking under the "stewardship" of the Bush administration and the GOP-controlled congress.

The seat will be won by either Reichert or Burner...your choice!

Posted by: Darryl | Aug 14, 2006 11:39:18 PM

Buner or Reichert - My choice. Let me see -

Mr Reichert represents staying the course with an incompetent administration; continuing a War with no leadership and well over 2,500 American deaths; accepting an economy that is has gone to hell unless you are one of the top 1% of the wealthy in this country; living in a nation of "no bid" contacts for Corporations who rape the envirnment for profit; accepting children living without decent health care and an adequate education. Yes, this is what Reichert's 2 year performance indicates we can expect from his reelection.
- or -
A woman with an excellent education provided mainly because of personal spunk and courage;, a career of debateable length, but but there is no question of its success. And what of her age - are we afraid of "Wild in the Streets" where they were going to kill all p;eople over thirty. Gender and age diversity are important concepts that Mrs. Burner will bring to a House of Representatives that is overpopulated with rich, white men. I see this issue from a different point of view as offering an asset, not a detriment.

The choice between Burner and Riechert is clearly Burner - Frankly it is thumbs up for this woman from Carnation. I will stand by this answer until the 8th District elects her so I see no reason for me to provide additional posts on this subject.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Aug 15, 2006 9:24:37 PM

Post a comment