Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Christine O'Donnell speaks out on Oxford flap

With the story snowballing about Christine O'Donnell's LinkedIn profile falsely claiming she studied at Oxford, O'Donnell has just put out her first statement on the matter.

O'Donnell acknowledges she studied at Phoenix Institute, not Oxford, but denies she ever established any such LinkedIn profile and calls for it to be taken down:

"There have been reports that I have released false information on a LinkedIn profile under my name. This is categorically untrue. I never established a LinkedIn profile, or authorized anyone to do so on my behalf. I have always been clear about my educational background. I completed undergraduate work at Fairleigh Dickenson University. After my undergraduate work, I completed a summer program run by the Phoenix Institute, at the Institute's Oxford University location. The Institute runs programs around the world at various universities, and participants study issues of human dignity. I also completed a Lincoln Fellowship at the Claremont Institute in Claremont, CA. We would encourage LinkedIn to remove this profile."

As the person who first reported yesterday on the Oxford claim on O'Donnell's LinkedIn profile, let me be clear: I asked O'Donnell's spokesperson, Diana Banister, for comment on the profile's Oxford claim last Friday. Banister never once claimed the profile wasn't put up by O'Donnell. Indeed, in response to my inquiry, Banister justified the claim on the LinkedIn profile by pointing to O'Donnell's stint at Phoenix Institute.

Nor did O'Donnell's spox dispute that the LinkedIn profile was hers when I again emailed her yesterday to let her know I was close to publishing. And, needless to say, O'Donnell hadn't taken any steps before today to get the profile taken down, though it's possible she didn't know about it.

More when I learn it.

UPDATE, 12:37 p.m.: My subsequent email to O'Donnell's spox was yesterday, not Monday. I've edited the above to correct.


By Greg Sargent  | September 29, 2010; 12:16 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Senate Republicans  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The ongoing Palinization of the First Amendment
Next: Dems' bill would help more small businesses than extending tax cuts for rich

Comments

OMFG, hilarious.

What a total fraud and serial liar.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 29, 2010 12:21 PM | Report abuse

Then there's this:

O'Donnell: God Won't Let Me Quit The Senate Race (VIDEO)

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/09/odonnell-god-wont-let-me-quit-the-senate-race-video.php

Almost spit out my coffee.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 29, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

So she is claiming the LinkedIn profile is unauthorized? So someone just happened to know all of that information about her and decided to put up a LinkedIn profile, complete with 94 contacts, just for snicks?

Must have been done by one of those guys hiding in her bushes.

She is beyond nuts.

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

I told you she didn't lie about it.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

I, for one, believe her. But only because she put a spell on me!

I'll tell you what I really think when I get that darned voodoo doll away from her. snark/

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

I'd say when the GOP smear squad finally started looking into the primary when they found out their guy Castle might loose they were terrified at what they found, hence Turdblossum's frank reaction to her win on Fox when he laid into her.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 29, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse

It's just like the movie, "A Simple Plan."

You tell one lie, and you just can't stop.

Joke, do you even know what LinkedIn is? Very few senile people use LinkedIn.

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

There are lies, damned lies, and every single thing that comes out of Christine O'Donnell's mouth.

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't be surprised if some journ-O-list (maybe even Greg Sargent himself) created the LinkedIn bio page just to get this "scoop". Kinda like the IRS targeted her on those bogus tax liens (as set forth in the prior thread ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Ms. O'Donnell should lay the blame, for the false posting, where it belongs.

I bet it was done by a lab mouse with a human brain, and not by Christine O'Donnell; The Lab Human, with a mouse's brain.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

I'm gonna send her a message on LinkedIn, lets see if she bites.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 29, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

bla, I'm not upgrading in LinkedIn to send her a message. Anyone here with a premium account, send her a complimentary message thanking her for running against the establishment.

I'm sure her ego will prevent her from not responding.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 29, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

wow. her explanation must be another lie. unless she's trying to parse it, as in, 'I did authorize a staffer to establish my linkedin profile, but I did not authorize them to include "Claremont Graduate University" and "University of Oxford" under my Education history.'

But even that would not hold up. The information would have to come from somewhere, either directly from O'Donnell, or from an earlier bio, which she would have presumably written.

Also, her profile is extensive, featuring a full bio and complete résumé. Is NONE of it authorized? Could some unauthorized person have completed it in such detail? It is possible, if it was cut and pasted verbatim from some other source. But then, who wrote and or authorized THAT source? Oh, Christine...

Finally, Oxford is most commonly known as "Oxford University." You have to know what you're talking about to render it correctly as "University of Oxford."

Posted by: andrewlong | September 29, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

OT:

Speaking of Republican Tea Party liars, this just out about the racist, misogynist GOP candidate for NY-GOV:

* Many Top Paladino Aides Have Checkered Pasts *

As he mounts an outrage-filled campaign for governor of New York, Carl P. Paladino has vowed to forcibly rid Albany of the wayward officials and misbehaving bureaucrats who he says have demeaned state government, promising to “take out the trash.”

But some of the people whom Mr. Paladino has recruited to run his campaign are plagued by brushes with the law and allegations of misconduct, an examination of public records shows.

His campaign manager failed to pay nearly $53,000 in federal taxes over the last few years, prompting the Internal Revenue Service to take action against him. An aide who frequently drives Mr. Paladino on the campaign trail served jail time in Arizona on charges of drunken driving.

Another adviser has been indicted on charges of stealing more than $1 million from Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s re-election bid last year. And Mr. Paladino’s campaign chairwoman left a local government position amid claims that she had steered $1 billion in public money to a politically connected investment manager.

[...]

And the issue highlights a growing problem across the country for the Tea Party, which has backed Mr. Paladino: the outsider status and ragtag style that have fueled many of the movement’s best-known candidacies this election season often come with unexpected personal baggage.

[...]

“He has come riding in as street sweeper, but the people with him have questionable backgrounds,” Ms. Lerner said. “It raises questions about his judgment and who he will bring with him to allegedly clean up Albany.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/29/nyregion/29advisers.html

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 29, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Be sure to thank her for wiping out the scourge of sex.

That accomplishment alone, should win her a Nobel No-Piece Prize.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

andrewlong, of course you are correct. Poor Joke has no idea what LinkedIn is and how it works, so he's reduced to nonsensical drivel about one of her many enemies creating the page just to make her look bad.

Sure, that's the best way to make someone look bad -- create a LinkedIn profile that's basically accurate but include some hard-to-discover errors. And don't forget to create 94 contacts. LOL

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

andrewlong - Given that she made only 5 K last year I don't see how she could have had a staffer create her profile.

Of course, that is assuming she didn't lie on her taxes, an assumption none of us should make.

It will be interesting to see when the profile was created.

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

watching jake contort himself between the original story and now this has been great fun...

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

andrewlong:

"You have to know what you're talking about to render it correctly as "University of Oxford."

A very good point against it being a journ-O-list.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

The false education claims are just part of a profile, in addition to her failed attempt to sue a previous employer for millions of dollars, proves that Christine O'Donnell is just another High Stakes Grifter.

Even lab mice with human brains know that is the truth of it.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

funkey:

To what "contortion(s)" are you referring? Have you never heard of "plausible deniability"?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

"It will be interesting to see when the profile was created."

The idea that the profile magically appeared, with said information, doesn't seem credible. I know LinkedIn does a lot of connecting-the-dots for you, but that seems to stretch belief.

But that's the best answer--when you're clearly lying about something, don't defend the lie, just deny that it was you. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | September 29, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

yes - plausible deniability has become o'donnell's, and thus, your, motto - even when the deniability isn't all that plausible.

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still:

Many plaintiffs "fail" in their attempts to sue a previous employer (you certainly are not calling Lilly Bedwetter a LIAR now too ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

funkey:

Please point out a single "contortion" then (giving three possible explanations, in and of itself, does not count).

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Joke, there is no plausible deniability. You are just proving my point -- that you know nothing about LinkedIn.

O'Donnell is just digging her grave deeper and deeper.

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Observer691:

Give me your real name, and I will create your "fake" LinkedIn bio this afternoon.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

jake, keep spinning for O'Donnell - it is great entertainment. i have a tough time deciding which is more amusing, though - her own words and actions or your defense of them. lol...

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Kevin - I've never used Linkedln, can you, or anyone, tell me how feasable it is that someone did this without her knowledge?

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Profile Of A High Stakes Grifter:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/citing-mental-anguish-christine-odonnell-sought-69-million-gender-discrimination-lawsuit-again

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

funkey:

If you don't want to answer my questions to you, that's fine with me. Have a nice life : )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Meanwhile, as Greg "Scoop" Sargent continues to focus (to the cheers and amusement of his loyal peanut gallery) his amazing investigative prowess on uncovering dirt about a woman who has virtually no chance of winning a Senate seat, another historically safe Democratic Senate seat comes ever closer into play for Republicans.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/29/nyregion/29conn.html

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 29, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

i hope LinkedIn releases the IP of the user who opened the account. it will mean more dancing for jake!

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Greg Sargent's "UPDATE, 12:37 p.m.: My subsequent email to O'Donnell's spox was yesterday, not Monday. I've edited the above to correct."

So, were you LYING then or are you LYING now?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Joke, you could certainly create a fake bio, but not one that is as detailed and otherwise accurate as O'Donnell's without my cooperation. You just don't/won't get it.

What a sad creature you are.

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

nisleib: Not feasible at all.

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Classic fail on her part. She's the gift that keeps on giving. Wonder what Bill Mahr has in store Friday night. She didn't complete her undergraduate degree until this past summer!

Posted by: MPersow | September 29, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Observer691:

First, Christine O'Donnell's past is much more well-known than your. Second, if you are really "Chris Fox" I could indeed create a fake bio, MORE detailed as O'Donnell's without your cooperation YOU are the one who doesn't get it.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Jake is getting desperate! LOL!

Funkey - I too am enjoying Jake's Clintonian Parsing (mostly yesterday) and today's out-and-out denial. He went from saying there is no "lie" in "lies" to now claiming it was all a liberal conspiracy.

Jake - You should stock up on tinfoil; a hat won't be enough for this one, you'll need a full body suit.

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010


How much is your electricity bill every month?


Did you run the numbers yet on how much your plan to convert all electricity to wind power - will cost ???


Did you look up the T. Boone Pickens electricity project in Texas ???


By the way, another problem T. Boon Pickens ran into was the transmission lines - many environmentalists did not want the additional transmission lines going through areas which were previously pristine.


All those windmills you talk about need transmission lines to bring the power you talk about from the points of generation to the areas where it will be utilized - in many cases that means a massive restructuring of the grid - because now the grid goes from big plants near cities right into the cities.


Wind power is more spead out - so new lines are needed. - Also, electricity transmission has high degree of lost energy in transmission - the further it travels, the more is lost. That is another factor in higher costs.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 29, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

funkey:

I could hide my IP address if I wanted to (this is a simple statement of fact, but you will no doubt claim it is yet another "contortion"). It's not that hard to combat you.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

I am now starting to believe in the theory of rapid devolution.

Christine O'Donnell has started to devolve from Human to Monkey, right before our eyes.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Curiously, the July 2005 complaint alleges that "ISI violated its promise to allow Miss O'Donnell time to take master's degree classes at Princeton," thus causing a loss of "earning power."

"Moreover, Miss O'Donnell has lost the increased earning power that a Master's degree from Princeton would have created. In the future with proper finances, Miss O'Donnell should probably be able to return and complete that program, however that increased earning power has been disrupted and delayed for at least three years, given college application cycles, and the damage to her reputation, creating a loss of increased earning power estimated at up to $50,000 per year, for three lost years at $150,000."
______________________________________

Well that certainly contradicts "I have always been clear about my educational background."
The quotes above are from legal documents submitted by O'Donnell in 2005. Go ahead Jake, explain how she is not responsible for these lies, too.

Posted by: veritasinmedium | September 29, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

jake - of course you could hide it - there a are a number of programs out there that any reasonably intelligent person could use to accomplish this (though I guess that would disqualify O'Donnell from using them right off the bat). but you could not point it to a place like, say her campaign headquarters, or her personal residence. *yawn*.

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

veritasinmedium (indeed):

That one's easy. She lost earning power that "Princeton would have created" in FUTURE tense. Look it up if you don't know what that means.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:12 PM | Report abuse

This entire issue has just become silly

The democrats are just trying to throw something else at Christine O'Donnell

It just proves that the democrats really don't want to talk about ISSUES - they don't want to talk about the COST of Obama's health care bill.

They don't want to talk about Obama's 1.3 Trillion deficit.

The democrats do NOT want to talk about how SOFT Obama is on terrorism.

The American People can see all this.

The American People can see all the trial ballons which Obama has sent out on issue - all of which have come down to Earth.

Seriously folks, it was OVER when Scott Brown won - but then Obama just destroyed himself when the False Charges of Racism came out after the health care debate.


That was completely counter to Obama's campaign of post-partisan and post-racial - and Obama destroyed his image then, that day. Nancy holding that stupid gavel - trying to make health care like civil rights did not help either.


The democrats went OFF THE RESERVATION - that's where they stay.

Obama going into a backyard - or holding a rally in a liberal college town isn't going to change anything.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 29, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Greg,


How come Quitter Palin vented her rage at Rahm Emanuel, when he said nothing about her special needs child, but now she remains silent, after Sharron Angle spoke out against providing medical research, to find better treatments for children with special needs?

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

funkey:

Not so -- I will note, however, that you could not answer my simple questions -- I guess we'll call it even.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

jake, if you are so confident you could create an account on FB impersonating someone and also have the IP used denote they are registering from their home or place of employ, i would love to hear about it. how would you do it, jake?

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Princeton U. says that she was never scheduled to attend their school. That makes Christine O'Donnell a person who lied to the court, and just another High Stakes Grifter.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

funkey:

You see, now you should have answered MY questions to you ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

that us basically what i figured. you have no solution to that problem. and thus the contortions. ha ha ha

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Not that this is a big deal, relatively speaking, but Ms. O'Donnell lied on her application for the fellowship program at The Claremont Institute too. She was not a graduate and held no degree from Fairleigh Dickinson University at that time.

http://www.claremont.org/projects/pageID.299/default.asp

Posted by: wkristol | September 29, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

@nisleib: "Kevin - I've never used Linkedln, can you, or anyone, tell me how feasable it is that someone did this without her knowledge?"

Entirely possible, but not likely at all. And easy to determine, as it would have to have been signed up with an email address. And it does a lot to figure out connections--but as I recall, most of the resume you create yourself (it will help, though, in the autocomplete, but O'Donnell has not blamed "Oxford" on the auto-complete.

LinkedIn does not randomly create profiles for people and develop contact lists. Possibly one of her assistants in her non-profit created the page for her based on a resume? Or promotional material for her non-profit?

Pure speculation. If Coons can't beat O'Donnell, it's going to be a sad day for bearded Marxists everywhere.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | September 29, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Wow, I think I have actually gotten under Joke's skin. Kudos to me.

Do you get a thrill out of making yourself look like a complete imbecile? I think you just like the attention because you're a nobody and your life is basically over.

Why don't you go ahead and created a fake LinkedIn profile for Chris Fox, since you seem to be so confident you can do it.

Go ahead, big talker, let us know when it's ready.

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Jake - You claim to be an attorney, right?

So when O'Donnell suggested in a lawsuit that she was pursuing a Master's degree at Princeton University, but later admitted she had NEVER attended Princeton, and in fact she didn't even have an undergraduate degree at the time, was she lying?

Is making false claims in a lawsuit illegal? You say you are a lawyer, you should know, right?

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Jake, jake, jake...
You are too funny.
She had no undergraduate degree in 2005. In order to get a graduate degree from Princeton, she would have needed that. Look it up.
One can't lose future earnings one never could have realized.
Keep up the good work though. Your intellectual dishonesty is most amusing.
Any chance you'd like to weigh in on the mice with human brains?

Posted by: veritasinmedium | September 29, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

wkristol:

That was an innocent mistake (she actually DID participate in the graduation ceremony but got a Bursar's bill instead of a diploma afterwards). No "lie" since it was not intentional.

Observer691:

Only if you admit to lying about who you are.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Joke, if I tell you I am Chris Fox, will you create a LinkedIn profile for me?

Ok, then, in that case I am Chris Fox. Now git 'er done!

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Pure speculation. If Coons can't beat O'Donnell, it's going to be a sad day for bearded Marxists everywhere.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | September 29, 2010 1:22 PM
.............

We will just have to learn from our mistakes, adjust, and next time around nominate waxed Marxists.

A Sign Of The Times;

A Bearded Jesus candidate would not stand a chance with Tea Party Christians.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

nisleib (and veritasinmedium):

I am a retired attorney, so I know that Ms. O'Donnell did not draft that complaint herself. Of course, KNOWINGLY making false claims of a MATERIAL NATURE in a verified complaint is punishable as perjury. No one has proven that yet (and it's past the statute of limitations in any event). If you want more free legal advice, ask someone else and just remember that it's worth the price you paid for it ; )

I did enjoy that cartoon "Pinky and The Brain" though.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

jake - do you have a magic computer? did O'Donnell make it for you? ha ha ha ha

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

"That was an innocent mistake (she actually DID participate in the graduation ceremony but got a Bursar's bill instead of a diploma afterwards). No "lie" since it was not intentional."

So, you're claiming she didn't know she hadn't been granted a diploma?

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 29, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Observer691:

If you tell me that you are Chris Fox, then I will NOT answer your questions to me because, as you know, Chris Fox refused to answer my questions to him (you) at The Fix. See "what a tangled web you weave ..."

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

scat:

Not when she completed that application to the Claremont Institute.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Christine O'Donnell submit the claim to the court. She did not use an attorney to file the false claim. She lied to the court, which makes her just another High Stakes Grifter. She tried to shake down the Conservative Non-Profit Organization for over six million dollars, and lied about having been scheduled to study at Princeton U.

That is how High Stakes Grifters Operate.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 1:38 PM | Report abuse

well, my lunch hour is almost over. i love this guy jake. he is the perfect representative for the tea party and has done more in the past 2 days to discredit then o'donnell's opponents could in two years - and that is saying something! ta-ta, all

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Schrodingerscat: Uh, not quite.

From Politico (9/3/10):

Scott Giglio, assistant director of public relations at the Madison, N.J., university, told POLITICO the Tea Party Express-backed Senate hopeful was officially awarded her bachelor of arts degree in English literature on Wednesday. Citing privacy reasons, Giglio could not explain the reasoning behind the timing, but O’Donnell’s campaign manager said Friday the candidate met a final course requirement this summer.

"She’s gone through the process to receive her degree, that’s not the story. She fulfilled the last course requirement this summer. It was just a general elective course," said O’Donnell campaign manager Matt Moran.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=D86704A0-18FE-70B2-A8C2EA13A35BA191

Posted by: wkristol | September 29, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Since there must have been an email address for the account, and it was active enough to have 90 some links someone could potentially find out who the email address belonged to? If you one of her Linked-In contacts the address should be available.

Posted by: BottyGuy | September 29, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Man, the hit pieces just keep coming. Amazing how the Post will bend over backwards to smear any Republican who doesn't tow the Obama lie but surreptitiously avoid any scandal regarding a Democrat.
Even more telling are the hate-filled comments. Democrats are the true party of hate.

Posted by: fishguts | September 29, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Liam, you know what the really top-level grifters say, go big or go home.

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

BTW: Observer691, if you are Chris Fox (and, therefore LIED about not being Chris Fox on that earlier thread), you already know that I have your home address, where you've worked, where you went to school, that you suffered from a speech impediment as a youth, the names and addresses of your family (including your recently-departed father ; )

How difficult would it be to make up the rest?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Here's the pattern:

Undergraduate degree--neglected to mention she had none

Claremont Graduate University--neglected to correct to Claremont Institute

University of Oxford--neglected to correct to Phoenix Institute (in dispute as O'Donnell says it is fraudulent)

Princeton University Masters Program--said she was pursuing masters program, when she AUDITED one course.
-----------------------------
See a pattern here?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 1:46 PM | Report abuse

So do it, Jake. Stop talking about it and do it.

We're waiting!

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

As a LinkedIn user, I know exactly how this happened.

When you connect to someone else, you have to indicate how you know them. If it's not through a job or school already in your profile, you have to add it. And it's a pain trying to add a company or school that's not in their automated drop-down list.

The person who created the profile probably connected with someone she knew from Oxford.

Posted by: mapleleaves1 | September 29, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Plausible Denial:

I did not submit those false statements to the court.

I did not post those false educational claims on my profile.

It was my pet lab mouse with the human brain, that did it, and that's the truth.

Now back to my crusade to eradicate sex from the human condition.

I remain,

Yours In High Stakes Grifting,

Christine Chaste O'Donnell

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Jake - ROFLMAO! So now O'Donnell had nothing to do with her own lawsuit and since it is past the statute of limitations it is no longer a lie? Really? The fact that she did not, in your words, "draft that complaint herself," excuses her?

Just out of curiosity, how many plaintiffs draft their own complaints? None, their lawyers do it for them?

About that lawsuit:

~~~~~~~

On Sunday writer John McCormack reported that back in 2005 O'Donnell filed a lawsuit asking for $6.9 million dollars in damages for alleged gender discrimination and wrongful termination by a non profit called the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. In addition to sharing some eyebrow raising details about the alleged harassment, the article questions a claim in the lawsuit that O'Donnell was trying to "take master's degree classes at Princeton". According to the Weekly Standard, the lawsuit states: "Miss O'Donnell has lost the increased earning power that a Master's degree from Princeton would have created. In the future with proper finances, Miss O'Donnell should probably be able to return and complete that program…"

The problem? O'Donnell never took even a single graduate course at Princeton university, something she acknowledges to CNN.

The Weekly Standard article calls this "the latest of many false statements" and question O'Donnell's "honesty and stability."

~~~~~~~

But, as you say Jake, this must all be a lie by her attorneys, right? Those attorneys must have been a part of the liberal conspiracy, right? O'Donnell would never lie, right? Or maybe she would tell "lies" and therefore avoid telling a "lie." That is the logic you used yesterday.


Bwahhh, ha, ha! You crack me up!

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

fishguts, don't mix mockery of a lying cheat with hatred.

If we were truly the party of hate we'd be carrying around signs of her dressed as an African witch doctor or call her a welfare queen or maybe call her a terrorist sympathizer, but we haven't gone there...yet.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 29, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Hey, I know who created the false bio of Christine O'Donnell. It must have been the Delaware GOP, who are the same ones who told reporters about her Princeton University Masters lie.

Bwahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!! Just when you think it can't get any better, it does.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Christine O' Donnell? Way to go Teabagger/Republikans...snark.

Posted by: Jerryvov | September 29, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

nisleib:

I never said that her attorneys "lied". She had in fact APPLIED to Princeton (and, as I understand it, did physically audit at least one course). The lawsuit, therefore, was about an alleged promise by her former employer to give her the time to complete a degree from Princeton, which her employer reneged on. Please look up the meaning of "future tense".

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

For anyone who hasn't seen the LinkedIn profile, here it is:

http://www.linkedin.com/in/christineodonnell

Anyone with a brain would understand this would NOT be the work of someone trying to embarass O'Donnell. Only someone without a brain would make that claim.

This is a profile of a little nobody who tried to fluff up her mediocre educational history and got busted.

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Well, ONE thing we know is that Christine would consider the truthful answer is that she studied at Phoenix Institute, not University of Oxford.

BTW, Phoenix Institute puts on summer seminars--a ONE MONTH seminar.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

@12Bar: "See a pattern here?"

There's that, too. Throw in the lawsuit, her absurd defense of there being no acceptable lie (which is a sociopathic position, from which it will follow, as the night does the day, that that person lies quite a lot--this has at least been my experience of humanity so far).

@liam: "Now back to my crusade to eradicate sex from the human condition."

There's so much rich material based on what she's actually said, it adds nothing--in fact, it kind of detracts--to make stuff up (or to do hyper-hyperbole). Unless you follow it with the conclusion that her position that you shouldn't have sex until you're married is a defacto effort to eradicate sex from the human condition. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | September 29, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

OT:

@benen:

GOP SENATORS BLOCK NATIONAL WOMEN'S HISTORY MUSEUM, TOO

"""...Washington already has a postal museum, a textile museum, a spy museum and the Newseum. You may be wondering why there is any problem getting Congressional support for a women's history museum. Especially since the bill has already passed the House unanimously and come out of its Senate committee with unanimous approval. And since the bill, which is sponsored in the Senate by Susan Collins of Maine, has 23 co-sponsors from both parties. The Senate itself passed a different version of the plan unanimously a few years ago when the museum people were hoping to lease a government building rather than construct a new one.

The answer -- and, people, how many times have you heard this story? -- is that two senators, Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, have put holds on the bill."""

So, what's the problem? For Coburn, the argument rests in part on the notion that there are other "similar" museums, and this one would likely "duplicate" the institution. As proof, the senator's office pointed to the Quilters Hall of Fame in Indiana. Think about that -- Tom Coburn thinks the National Women's History Museum in the nation's capital is unnecessary in part because of a museum for quilters several hundred miles away. (Dear Tom, women have contributed far more to American life than just quilts. Sincerely, Steve.)

As for DeMint, the religious right told him to intervene.

"""Abortion politics are also in play: The senators' action came two days after the Concerned Women for America, a conservative group, wrote DeMint asking for a hold. The group's CEO, Penny Nance, wrote in July that the museum would "focus on abortion rights without featuring any of the many contributions of the pro-life movement in America.""""

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_09/025900.php

Shameless scumbags. Just shameless.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 29, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Summer seminars typically last somewhere between a few weeks and two months. Good catch.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Just got my JD from a box of Co-Co Puffs.

I'm pretty smart now, look at me!

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 29, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

You can't make this crap up, but clearly O'Donnell can try. The GOP knows how to pick them.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | September 29, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

I think Jake misses the courtroom where he can follow the lawyer's mantra:

If you case is strong argue the facts, if your case is mediocre argue the law, if your case is weak attack the other side.

---------------------------------
As entertaining as all this is, how will Christine's day by day disgrace affect other Tea Party candidates. Who is most like her?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

Actually, some "Summer seminars" are as short as six days (albeit "fast-paced"):

http://www.usna.edu/admissions/nass.htm

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

Jake - Ha! Too funny.

~~~~~

... questions a claim in the lawsuit that O'Donnell was trying to "take master's degree classes at Princeton". According to the Weekly Standard, the lawsuit states: "Miss O'Donnell has lost the increased earning power that a Master's degree from Princeton would have created. In the future with proper finances, Miss O'Donnell should probably be able to return and complete that program…"

~~~~~~

The lawsuit says she was trying to take Master's degree classes at Princeton when she didn't even have an undergraduate degree at the time.

So tell us again, why is there no "lie" in "lies?"

HA, ha, ha, ha! Tell the truth, you are a part of the "liberal conspiracy" against O'Donnell and you are here to make her supporters look silly, aren't you? That is the only thing that makes any sense.

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues:

It could have been the Delaware GOP, but I wouldn't be surprised if some journ-O-list (maybe even Greg Sargent himself) created the LinkedIn bio page just to get this "scoop". Kinda like the IRS targeted her on those bogus tax liens (as set forth in the prior thread ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

If anyone wants to know how long Phoenix Institute's summer seminars are, all they have to do is go to their website. That's what I did.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

@12Bar: re "see a pattern". I meant to follow that up: that one or two things could be credibly "making a mountain out of a mole hill". But there's an awful lot of "there" there. That tends to indicate something is up.

"There have been reports that I have released false information on a LinkedIn profile under my name. This is categorically untrue. I never established a LinkedIn profile, or authorized anyone to do so on my behalf"

This is very absolute, and something you wouldn't think a normal person would say if they had, in fact, had a role in establishing said profile. Yet, a sociopath would have no trouble saying that. Instead of the much more credible "I misspoke; linkedin mispoke for me" excuse.

But I think you'd have to be a little overly optimistic about Ms. O'Donnell and her sunny smile to not recognize at least a pattern of mild malfeasance.

Also, these lies are very small compared to the types of lies required of Washington politicians. Thus, I'm not sure she's qualified for the congress. /snark

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | September 29, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

There's so much rich material based on what she's actually said, it adds nothing--in fact, it kind of detracts--to make stuff up (or to do hyper-hyperbole). Unless you follow it with the conclusion that her position that you shouldn't have sex until you're married is a defacto effort to eradicate sex from the human condition. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | September 29, 2010 1:58 PM

.............

What the hell does sex have to do with marriage. Which came first, sex or the human created institution of marriage? T

All the other mammals have sex, without having some shaman utter some rubbish first.

Fornicating rabbits need their own Christine O'Donnell to emerge, to show them the sinful error of their organ grinding ways.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Jake, you are as paranoid as Christine. She's a liar, and she's been busted so like many liars she just makes up another lie.

Why you would bother to defend someone who is disintegrating in front of our eyes, is curious. What are you--the friend of the friendless? Are you one of those people who just cannot help themselves? I don't get it.

The wiser person would stand aside and wait to see how all these lies sort out. I mean, you don't actually know her, do you?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

All, check this out: Dems small business bill would help far more small businesses than letting Bush tax cuts for rich expire would:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/09/dems_bill_would_help_more_smal.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | September 29, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Also, these lies are very small compared to the types of lies required of Washington politicians. Thus, I'm not sure she's qualified for the congress. /snark

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | September 29, 2010 2:06 PM |

..............

Attempting to shake down the Conservative Non Profit organization for over six million dollars, is something that you consider to be; something "very small"?

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

nisleib:

No, I am not a liberal -- I already explained what some of her efforts to obtain that Masters degree consisted of -- there may have been other efforts that neither you nor I are aware of. Of course, it's also possible that she's lying about everything.

12BarBlues:

I don't know her personally, but I'm retired with plenty of time to waste here.
Why do you attack her so much?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Liam - Oh come on! Now you want rabbits to have human brains too!

Boy, you liberals with your human brains in creatures that aren't human! Shame on you! If Christine O'Donnell has shown us anything it is that there are many HUMANS that don't have human brains. And you want to go giving them to rabbits just so you can deny rabbits their fornication?

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

A little more detail on the Princeton University Masters thing, the course she audited was an undergraduate course.

----------------------------
Come on. We all know what this is about.

This woman didn't even have an undergraduate degree and she is competing in a world where multiple graduate degrees are common. So she creates a resume that lists her undergraduate institution first, then she takes a couple of courses here and there, and lists them:

Claremont Institute
Phoenix Institute
Princeton (in the lawsuit)

But, that's not presigious enough, so they become:

Claremont Graduate University
University of Oxford

on her linkedin profile. She leaves off Princeton having been burned on that in her lawsuit.

That creates the impression she is at least working toward Master's, and obscures the lack of undergraduate degree. If only it had worked.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Im so glad that all the democrats want to talk about is some summer program in England.


What about the economy?


Obama STILL doesn't have an economic plan - do ANY of the liberals here have ANY idea what kind of economic plan that Obama might adopt ???

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 29, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

"If only it had worked."

November 2nd is still 34 days away ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

@12Bar: "As entertaining as all this is, how will Christine's day by day disgrace affect other Tea Party candidates. Who is most like her?"

Not a lot, unless the economy improves and/or the Democrats get their act together. The only real sign of which would be a vote on a separate middle class tax cut.

Christine is Christine. What will impact the tea party the most, over all, is the economy, the unemployment rate, and what, if anything, the Democrats appear to be doing about it.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | September 29, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

nisleib,

At the recent Conservative Values gathering, one of the featured invited speakers, was Newt Gingrich.

You know, that serial adulterer, and three times married Newt Gingrich!

Christine O'Donnell was also a featured invited speaker to that same Conservative "values" gathering.

If she were anything but a High Stakes Grifting con artist, wouldn't she have spoken out against having a habitual adulterer, such as Newt Gingrich invited to address that "Values" gathering?

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

@Liam-still: "Attempting to shake down the Conservative Non Profit organization for over six million dollars, is something that you consider to be; something 'very small'?"

Upon further reflection, I stand corrected. Christine O'Donnell is imminently qualified to be a DC politician.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | September 29, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

How in the world Jake do you complete a degree from a school where you have never been admitted? Anyone can audit a course even from Stanford and you and Christine delusionally equate that with admission. Oxford, Princenton why has she not included Harvard or MIT? Or did she mean to say Oxford Miss? You might want to brush up on perjury law Jake.

Posted by: leichtman1 | September 29, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1:

She attended a summer seminar at the University of Oxford in the U.K., not Miss. Neither I nor Ms. O'Donnell (to my knowledge) ever stated that she was "admitted" to Oxford or Princeton (even to Princenton ; )

I have no need to brush up on ANY law (been there, done that).

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Mss. O'Donnell,Angle, Palin, and Bachmann all seem to think that the "That shall not bear false witness" commandment is optional.

Posted by: BBear1 | September 29, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

So she she lied about here education? Big freakin' deal. We didn't elect her for her brains.

Posted by: jake555 | September 29, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still asks, "If she were anything but a High Stakes Grifting con artist, wouldn't she have spoken out against having a habitual adulterer, such as Newt Gingrich invited to address that "Values" gathering?"

I think this goes to the Daily Show's Team Stupid vs Team Evil.

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/the-daily-show-debates-is-fox-news-evil-or-stupid-video.php

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Christine has stepped away from the University of Oxford claim--she says someone else created her bio--not her.

And there are people still defending the University of Oxford. Look down--see that branch you're sitting on? Look left--see Christine with the handsaw sawing that branch you are sitting on? Look down--see the ground coming up fast?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

BBear1:

No, they are not the ones falsely claiming someone else "lied".

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

By "Oxford" she was refering to her shoes, which were Oxford style shoes. And it is elitist and out of touch with the spirit of the Founders to think otherwise - just another elitist liberal media gotcha journalism trick pointing out that she lied not once, not twice, but three times about her educational background...how unfair......using her own words against her like that!

Posted by: John1263 | September 29, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues:

Even if someone else created her bio online, it would not be a "lie" had she done it herself. That's a simple sentence, so I don't know what's so hard to understand about it (or why others think that's some grand "contortion").

In logic, it's called "arguing in the alternative".

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

So she lied on the profile, and is now lying about the profile itself? She has got to be f-ing kidding. SNL now has it's opening skit for next week........

Posted by: John1263 | September 29, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

As Yogi Berra once famously said..."It's deja vu all over again.

An unqualified hot looking woman who plays fast and loose with the truth...Perhaps Christine is just trying to go rogue. LMAO

Posted by: rukidding7 | September 29, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

I just want to clarify that though I did not actually attend Harvard University as a student, I did go to the Harvard Book Store to purchase a t-shirt. Therefore my resume is correct that I did go to Harvard!

Posted by: 54465446 | September 29, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

John1263:

No, it's not a reference to shoes but rather to the "University of Oxford" in the United Kingdom, a federation of over forty self-governing colleges and halls, typically abbreviated as Oxon. (from the Latin Oxoniensis), although "Oxf" is sometimes used in official publications, approximately 51° 45′ 7″ N, 1° 15′ 28″ W

It's also not a reference to any other "Oxford":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_(disambiguation)

54465446:

As long as you don't include that trip under "Education" or falsely claim a degree from said institution.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Any conservative "Plague on America" supporter who can say with a straight face that Democrats do not have an economic program and policy but republicons do is seriously derranged or has not paid any attention in recent years, or decades.

Saying "we'll cut spending and therefore balance the budget" is not an agenda. It is a concept, and one that even a cursory glance shows as nonsense. Democrats have been implementing policies that have pulled the economy back from the brink, and are trying to do things like discourage sending your job to China, stimulate small business hiring -- all against the tide of endless republicons filibusters. Wake up. republicon teahadis want to skrew you and me to the wall.

Posted by: John1263 | September 29, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

This country is going to get shafted is these Tea Party candiates win. Imagine, Rand P, Angel, Christine, Miller and all the fringe ones I forgot. Rand would try to get rid of Civil Disabiltity Act, Civil Liberties Act, Angel would force all women to never have a choice again, Christine would be a gold mine for SNL

Posted by: Realistic5 | September 29, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

I went to Harvard once, too, after protesting in front of Henry Louis Gates's house (or was the house owned by Harvard?), and I have pictures.

See, no "lie".

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

O'Donnell lies about her education and gets busted for it.

She then lies to cover the lie and gets busted for that.

No wonder the Republicans are crazy about her.

Posted by: Deirdre_K | September 29, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Realistic5:

SENATOR Al Franken already was a goldmine for Saturday Night Live (albeit they had a falling out ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Deirdre_K:

You do realize that I am saying she didn't lie, right?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

nisleib (and veritasinmedium):

I am a retired attorney, so I know that Ms. O'Donnell did not draft that complaint herself. Of course, KNOWINGLY making false claims of a MATERIAL NATURE in a verified complaint is punishable as perjury. No one has proven that yet (and it's past the statute of limitations in any event). If you want more free legal advice, ask someone else and just remember that it's worth the price you paid for it ; )

I did enjoy that cartoon "Pinky and The Brain" though.

Posted by: JakeD2 |
___________________________

Other than the Pinky and the Brain quip, this doesn't address anything I said. Were I ever in the position to need any, I would sooner take legal advice from a rodent than you.

Posted by: veritasinmedium | September 29, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Look O'Donnell is the silliest possible candidate, who hopefully doesn't have a shot. Miller in Alaska on the other hand has the bio, so while he is on the other side, he's no fool. Just be happy if your a Dem like me, that in such a pivotal moment Angle and O'Donnell, and hopefully Linda McMahon are too ridiculous to elect. (even though it would mean the loathesome Harry Reid comes back) Gridlock is good for investment!

Posted by: 54465446 | September 29, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

veritasinmedium:

Like I said, I'm retired -- I answered EVERY question you asked me, so I have addressed at least some of the things you've said (or typed) -- if you want more answers, please ask another question.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Am I the only one that finds JakeD2 hilarious? He turns the mental prat-fall into an art form. And he usually does it several times per thread. I sometimes wonder if the Post hasn't hired him to make these boards more entertaining.

Posted by: bigbrother1 | September 29, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

54465446:

I would argue that Greene down in South Carolina is the "silliest" this time around, especially since my wife and I will be voting for McMahon ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Joke, does your wife have any idea what a pathetic loser you are?

BTW, how's my Chris Fox LinkedIn profile coming? I was expecting it to be up and running already.

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

bigbrother1:

You're not the only one -- although I am not now nor have I ever been employed by the WaPo or any of its affiliated entities -- I do find myself hilarious too (not about this though ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Observer691:

What part of "I will NOT answer your questions to me" are you having trouble understanding?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Retired from what? What the bleeding hell are you going on about? I never asked for legal advice. I never wanted any legal advice. If I ever did, I certainly would not ever place any trust in the likes of you.
I was simply responding to your post addressed parenthetically to me. I have no idea why, as I just posted, since it doesn't appear to have any connection to the post I addressed to you.
I point that out because it is clear to me that you do not wish to respond to what I said in that post. Thus your continuing attempts to change the subject.

Posted by: veritasinmedium | September 29, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Stupidity doesn't excuse lying.

Posted by: jimsteinberg1 | September 29, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse

54465446:

Of course, from those candidates who DIDN'T make it passed the primaries, Basil Marceux.com took the cake (and obviously ate it too)!

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Jake, you senile old fool, you announced on here that you could easily create a LinkedIn profile for Chris Fox. Guess you were lying when you said that.

No wonder you support a liar like Christine O'Donnell.

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

veritasinmedium:

I am "going on" about answering every question you've asked of me. If there's something else you've posted that you want me to address, please ask another question. As long as you answer my questions in a civil manner, I will always return the same common courtesy.

(See also, Turing test ; )

Otherwise, just shut up.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

The linked in page has been removed. But thanks for saving it from yesterday. And i can see why today she took it down and is denying she never put it up. Turns out O'Donnell embellished nearly everything about her education. Turns out she never went to Claremont Graduate University either instead it was something called Claremont Institute which is the reason that they are now claiming that in this response to your email. She got busted today on that account. Let's face it she is a lying pandering, self-promoter who stumbled backward into a U.S. Senate race that she was ill-prepared for, even though this is her third shot, and now that she actually has to account for herself she is having a hard time doing so.

Anyone who said what she said about the Constitution in her press conference the other day doesn't know enough about the constitution to have taken any meaningful class on it anywhere, which was my point yesterday when I first suggested that this should also be checked out.

I still maintain O'Donnell couldn't read a menu!

Posted by: Prakosh | September 29, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

This country is going to get shafted if these Tea Party candidates win. Imagine, Rand P, Angel, Christine, Miller and all the fringe ones I forgot. Rand would try to get rid of Civil Disability Act, Civil Liberties Act, Angel would force all women to never have a choice again, Christine would be a gold mine for SNL

Posted by: Realistic5 | September 29, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Observer691:

I am not "senile" nor am I "lying" -- I could easily get up and hop on one leg, but I'm not doing that either -- I also said I would do it if YOU admit to lying (that's called a "condition precedent" look it up).

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Prakosh, you can still get the page here:

http://www.linkedin.com/in/christineodonnell

I'm sure there's more embellishment in there.

Posted by: Observer691 | September 29, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Realistic5:

You do know that SENATOR Al Franken (D-MN) was already a goldmine for SNL, right?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Folks: Are You Feeling Nostalgic For The Bush/Cheney Great Recession Times.

Now is your chance to return to those times, that you are missing so much.

All Aboard The John Bohner Pledge to America Express. In No Time At All, He Promises To Land You Right Back In That Economy Ditch, That You Have Lately Being Pining Over.

Full Steam In Reverse; Back To:

More Feasts For Fat Cats,

And More Starvation For All The Rest Of Us.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Jake wrote:

"I would argue that Greene down in South Carolina is the "silliest" this time around, especially since my wife and I will be voting for McMahon ; )"

Your description is accurate about Greene, especially since no one even seems to know how he got on the ballot! Perhpas I should have said silliest with any shot at winning at all, since even O'Donnel and Greene might tecnically not be the worst.

Your not disturbed by the seedy, misogynous, criminal operations of the WWE, or is it that you hate Blumenthal that much?

Posted by: 54465446 | September 29, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

No.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Christine has not been very visible lately in public, b cuz she is busy trying to hide her huge collection of vibrators, ha ha ha. She is such trash.

Posted by: euroguy | September 29, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Yah, it looks like she attened Dipsh!t U, not Oxford U.

Posted by: trenda | September 29, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

If she would post a picture of herself NAKED on her Linked-In page I, for one, would certainly forgive her!

Posted by: trenda | September 29, 2010 3:51 PM | Report abuse

If she would post a picture of herself NAKED on her Linked-In page I, for one, would certainly forgive her!
----------------------------------------------
I wouldn't, her knockers r starting 2 sag, so there is no reason whatever for her 2 run, ha ha.

Posted by: euroguy | September 29, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

How do you know god dislike celibates?

He created Christine O'Donnell....

Posted by: lovinliberty | September 29, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

A Pew Trust poll in 2009 indicated that 87% of all people on the internet that say they are attorneys or doctors are lying.

87%Jake=lies and filth. Just sayin', no offense ;)

Posted by: RogerRamjet2 | September 29, 2010 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Jake:

So you're not disturbed by a misogynistic woman who runs an organization that has routinely threatened rivals, provides illegal drugs, and has been sued for sexual harrassment by it's employees, to say nothing of the serial philandering of her husband and his activities?

Posted by: 54465446 | September 29, 2010 4:04 PM | Report abuse


How do you know god dislike celibates?

He created Christine O'Donnell....

Posted by: lovinliberty | September 29, 2010 3:53 PM

...............

How do you know that there is such a God? and if there is, how do you know that it is a "he". Have you been peaking through the Hubble Telescope at your "God's" Cosmic Wilie. Also, if God is a He, why does he need the male genitalia?

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

RogerRamjet2:

Do you have a link to that poll?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 4:15 PM | Report abuse

jake - you figure out how to spoof an IP to someone's address yet? magic computer?

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

54465446:

I said "No" I don't hate Blumenthal (which is why "compound questions" are objectionable ; )

As for your characterization of McMahon, that could also apply to any female CEO of a Fortune 500 company (it is difficult, if not impossible, to effectively control everything that goes on by every employee, let alone your husband):

http://www.realonlinedegrees.com/top-15-female-ceos-of-fortune-500-companies/

For the record, however, I do not agree with anyone who thinks it is acceptable to be misogynistic or run an organization that has routinely threatened rivals, provided illegal drugs, and condones sexual harrassment in the workplace.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

no? not yet? well keep contorting...

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

funkey:

You keep asking me questions, even though you refused to answer my question to you.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 4:37 PM | Report abuse

no? not yet? well keep contorting...

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 4:33 PM |
...........
Wasn't that the Motto of her Wrestling Enterprise?

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 4:37 PM | Report abuse

i didn't assert that i could do something that isn't practically possible, like you did. you want an example of contorting - there is one for you...

dance dance dance, jake. your crazy high priestess is playing another tune!

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 4:40 PM | Report abuse

in addition, your question was basically aimed at changing the subject. so you didn't have to discuss O'Donnell's ridiculous claims. it is understandable, as defending O'Donnell gets harder and harder each day...

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Wait a minute. Didn't Ms. O'Donnell complete her FDU degree last summer? If so, how did she manage to slip in a summer program in England with a fellowship in California at the same time?

I'm a graduate student, and I know how difficult it is to get fellowships, even at a far, far right wing dump tank like Claremont.
I believe their fellows are more along the lines of David Frum. Perhaps Ms. O'Donnell picknicked at the Institute?

Posted by: rogied25 | September 29, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Look at the pictures 'Elephants with a Degree' to the article from the Ukrainian Institute of New Virology on http://uionv.com/.

Posted by: 555ffa | September 29, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Look at the pictures 'Elephants with a Degree' to the article from the Ukrainian Institute of New Virology on http://uionv.com/.

Posted by: 555ffa | September 29, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

funkey:

It's not hard to defend O'Donnell against allegations that she KNOWINGLY lied (short of her admitting that was her intent, I fail to see how anyone here can prove that, so you have indeed asserted that you can do something that isn't practically possible). OTOH I've "asserted" that LinkedIn bio and IP addresses can be faked. You don't have to believe me; you can easily look that up on Google.

I've also "discussed" every claim made by Greg Sargent or anyone else who said that Christine O'Donnell lied, explaining at least one possibility how it's not necessarily a "lie". Not sure how that is "changing the subject" but then, again, I've already learned my lesson about asking you any questions.

Have a nice life : )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

ah well, i guess making specious claims and then running from said claims are to berexpected of a lawyer...

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 4:51 PM | Report abuse

JakeD2 - no jake, i asked specifically about IP tracking. you can mask an IP easily enough. however, spoofing it to a specific location is not as easy, if practically possible. you disagree. i would like to know how you would do it, since you seem positive it can be done...

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 4:53 PM | Report abuse

rogied25 (from the Claremont Institute's own web site):

"Christine O'Donnell is President and founder of a national youth organization, The Savior's Alliance for Lifting the Truth (SALT). Ms. O'Donnell is a graduate of Fairleigh Dickinson University, where she majored in English and communications. She has made numerous television appearances, been interviewed and profiled in national newspapers and magazines, and works as a media and public relations consultant."

http://www.claremont.org/projects/pageID.299/default.asp

Have you read any of the above comments?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Chastine O'Donnell is so believable!

But then most religious nuts are.

Posted by: kishorgala | September 29, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

funkey:

I know what you "asked" (I am no longer answering your questions).

Anyone else who wants to know the answer, you can start here:

http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_10-4/104_ip-spoofing.html

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

basically what it thought jake - you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to making a phony LinkedIn account or spoofing an IP. i appreciate your 'enthusiasm', but you strike me as a bored retiree spending too much time on line...

i enjoy the rest of my day. you enjoy your waning days as well....

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

who are the retards that voted for this lady????? you would have to be an idiot to believe anything she says

Posted by: rmk1122 | September 29, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

JakeD2 knows about as much about Law, as a Polar Bear does about owning a time share in Miami.

The clown just said there is no way of establishing if Christine O'Donnell lied, unless she admits to having done so.

People who never admit to having done so, get convicted of having lied, to the Feds, or for having lied under oath, all the time, in courts across the land. Yet JakeD2 claims that he was a practicing attorney, who graduated from Stanford law school.

Imagine this JakeD2, Fantasy Lawyer; as a prosecuting attorney:

"Your honor, since the defendant has not admitted that they are lying, it does not matter what the evidence shows, so I move to drop all charges".

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

kishorgala:

Is there a specific "lie" of hers you don't think has been de-bunked (please, PLEASE, say "tax lien")?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

you truly have no conception of IP spoofing, but you are holding dearly to it like some sort of life raft. lol...

Posted by: funkey | September 29, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

At The Fix Jake bragged about voting in Ca then he said he would be voting for O Donnell in Delaware and now he is voting in Connecticut. You understand Jake there are close races in Colorado and Nevada as well so you might want to also register to vote in Denver and Las Vegas real soon. Time is running out for you to vote in 5 different state elections.

Posted by: leichtman1 | September 29, 2010 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still:

I didn't say "there is no way of establishing if Christine O'Donnell lied, unless she admits to having done so".

People who never admit to having done so, certainly do get convicted of having lied, to the Feds, or for having lied under oath, all the time, in PHYSICAL COURTROOMS across the land. But, they don't get convicted here, on the Internets, in The Plum Line.

Sorry if you can't tell the difference between those two places.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

At The Fix Jake bragged about voting in Ca then he said he would be voting for O Donnell in Delaware and now he is voting in Connecticut. You understand Jake there are close races in Colorado and Nevada as well so you might want to also register to vote in Denver and Las Vegas real soon. Time is running out for you to vote in 5 different state elections.

Posted by: leichtman1

.......................

We should get that O'Keefe Pimp on his case. JakeD2 has become a one man Albino ACORN!

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

leichtman1:

I never said that we would be voting for O'Donnell in Delaware (we did move from California to Connecticut in May). I do know how to spell "Princeton" at least ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 5:12 PM | Report abuse

kishorgala:

Is there a specific "lie" of hers you don't think has been de-bunked (please, PLEASE, say "tax lien")?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 5:02 PM
=================================
You allowed me to deviate from the current subject....Thank you!

I am still fixated on her sex-related claims. I think her being Chaste is a lie. Has that been debunked?

Posted by: kishorgala | September 29, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

The Woman lied about having a degree. She lied about being scheduled to pursue her Masters Degree at Princeton, and Princeton said that was false.

The woman lied, and it has been proven, so of course people on the internet have established that she is a liar, a con artist, and a nut job, and that JakeD2 is her beard.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

If she's been "chaste" since college, it's not a "lie". Next one?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 5:16 PM | Report abuse

It would appear that O'Donnell and JakeD2 are from the same shallow end of the gene pool.

They seem to have the identical problem in distinguishing truth from deception.

Seriously, though, can anyone imagine being represented in a legal matter by anyone as obviously brain-dead as JakeD2?

Or being represented in the U.S. Senate by anyone as obviously brain-dead as Christine O'Donnell?

"She's not a viable candidate for any office in the state of Delaware. She could not be elected dog catcher." ~ Delaware state Republican party chairman Tom Ross.

"The Delaware race is now viewed as Solid Democrat in the Rasmussen Reports Election 2010 Senate Balance of Power rankings. This marks a remarkable turnaround in a race that at the beginning of the month was rated Solid Republican and was on track to be a GOP pickup." ~ Republican pollster Scott Rasmussen

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Could someone with LinkedIn experience tell me how hard it is to delete your profile? Wouldn't you need a password to do such a thing?

Because her LinkdIn profile, apparently, is no longer up. If she didn't have anything to do with it how did she take it down? If it is, as Jake says, part of a "liberal conspiracy," why would those pesky liberals take the profile down now?

I guess she could have contacted LinkedIn and complained?

Occam’s Razor would point towards her using her password, but that would imply that she set up her profile herself, which would mean she is a liar...

The story isn't over, expect more information to trickle out over the next few days. Indeed, O'Donnell's staff has no idea how to respond to this.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/09/team-odonnell-tells-tpm-were-still-trying-to-figure-out-what-to-do-on-linked-in.php?ref=fpi

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 5:29 PM | Report abuse

If she's been "chaste" since college, it's not a "lie". Next one?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 5:16 PM
=================================
So am I between weekend to weekend!

Posted by: kishorgala | September 29, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

It's hard to know which is more absurd.

Christine O'Donnell claiming that she was going to pursue a graduate degree at Princeton.

Or Shaky Jake claiming that went to Stanford Law.

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Sorry to hear about that. Seriously, though, two DECADES is slightly longer than five (5) days ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

It's hard to know which is more absurd.

Christine O'Donnell claiming that she was going to pursue a graduate degree at Princeton.

Or Shaky Jake claiming that he went to Stanford Law.

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 5:37 PM | Report abuse

I think it is more the case of her not being chased, as opposed to her being "chaste".

She comes across like just another of those frigid Republican Stepford Wifesicles.


As I have often advised:

If you want to keep your beer very cold, place it close to a Republican woman's heart.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 5:37 PM | Report abuse

The tax lien and other O'Donnell lies:

http://www.delawaretomorrow.com/christine-odonnell-errors-mistakes-smears-and-thug-politics/

http://www.delawaretomorrow.com/christine-odonnell-why-are-we-learning-the-truth-now/

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Given O'Donnell's shaky grip on reality, and her open hostility towards honesty, I'm expecting the s-e-x tapes with her and the entire cast of The World's Deadliest Catch to be made public any day.

I loved Seth MacFarlane's (Family Guy) comment about O'Donnell on last weeks Real Time, "I'd wreck her."

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

BTW: WhateverHeSaid

You refused to answer my questions too, so I never told you the WHOLE story on the prior thread -- the IRS admitted that the tax liens against Ms. O'Donnell were a “computer error.” During her previous campaign against then-Sen. Joe Biden, she was (by sheer coincidence of course) audited by the IRS. That's why I wanted to get you on the record about Paula Jones's IRS audit.

After a long appeals process, however, the issue was supposed to have been warpped up this past spring. Yet, in March, rather than a letter finalizing the appeals process, she received the erroneous tax liens claiming that she had not responded to previous correspondence. The IRS has since sent a letter clarifying that it was their mistake and issued a Certificate of Release of Federal Tax Lien on May 19, 2010.

You can see both of those documents here:

http://christine2010.com/christine-counters/

You can also call Stanford Law School (Registrar's Office) at the phone number I provided to "cheles" on that thread and easily verify my graduation in 1961.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still:

Don't tell "rukidding7" because he thinks she's very good-looking.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

loved Seth MacFarlane's (Family Guy) comment about O'Donnell on last weeks Real Time, "I'd wreck her."

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 5:42 PM
====================================
He should have said it with a few pebbles in his mouth.

Posted by: kishorgala | September 29, 2010 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Sorry to hear about that. Seriously, though, two DECADES is slightly longer than five (5) days ; )

Posted by: JakeD2

____________________________

As usual, the facts says you are wrong.

O'Donnell admitted drinking too much and having sex with guys with whom "she had no emotional involvement" when she was in college (1989-1993).

Her "chaste" claim was made in 2003.

No "two DECADES" there, Shaky Jake, not even by your educational standards.

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Sorry to hear about that. Seriously, though, two DECADES is slightly longer than five (5) days ; )

Posted by: JakeD2

____________________________

As usual, the facts says you are wrong.

O'Donnell admitted drinking too much and having sex with guys with whom "she had no emotional involvement" when she was in college (1989-1993).

Her "chaste" claim was made in 2003.

No "two DECADES" there, Shaky Jake, not even by your educational standards.

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

An aide to O'Donnell, during her campaign against Senator Biden, has come forward and stated that Christine O'Donnell had no independent source of income, and that she illegally used campaign donations to pay for all her personal living expenses.

That makes her just another High Stakes Grifter. After her big time Grift attempt to shake down a company for over six million dollars failed, she had to fall back on her small time Grifting skills, to tide her over, while she set up the next big score.

She now has pulled of that score, and is pulling in millions from all Fox Cable Pigeon brained viewers.

Idiots who will lose money buying Gold Coins, on the world of Hannity or Beck, are easy marks for a High Stakes Grifter.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

So who, or how, did that LinkedIn page get taken down?

Jake, if it is disclosed that she was indeed lying about having anything to do with the LinkedIn profile, will you admit you are wrong, that she is a liar?

Or course you won't. Even if she were to admit to it, you wouldn't.

Posted by: nisleib | September 29, 2010 5:55 PM | Report abuse

WhateverHeSaid:

I was discussing that with "kishorgala" not you -- and I am assuming that she's remained chaste since 2003 as well -- nonetheless, even one DECADE (not plural) is still slightly longer than five (5) days.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 5:58 PM | Report abuse

JakeD2 "I will always return the same common courtesy.

(See also, Turing test ; )

Otherwise, just shut up."
_____________________________________

Right. You can't respond, you tried to change the subject, now you just want me to shut up. I'll chalk that up as a win, then. If you ever do find an actual response to what I actually said, I'll be waiting.

Posted by: veritasinmedium | September 29, 2010 6:00 PM | Report abuse

BTW: WhateverHeSaid

You refused to answer my questions too, so I never told you the WHOLE story on the prior thread -- the IRS admitted that the tax liens against Ms. O'Donnell were a “computer error.” During her previous campaign against then-Sen. Joe Biden, she was (by sheer coincidence of course) audited by the IRS. That's why I wanted to get you on the record about Paula Jones's IRS audit.

After a long appeals process, however, the issue was supposed to have been warpped up this past spring. Yet, in March, rather than a letter finalizing the appeals process, she received the erroneous tax liens claiming that she had not responded to previous correspondence. The IRS has since sent a letter clarifying that it was their mistake and issued a Certificate of Release of Federal Tax Lien on May 19, 2010.

You can see both of those documents here:

http://christine2010.com/christine-counters/

You can also call Stanford Law School (Registrar's Office) at the phone number I provided to "cheles" on that thread and easily verify my graduation in 1961.

Posted by: JakeD2

________________________________________

1. She denied there was a tax lien. But there was one -- as even you admit. And as can be seen from a photocopy of the lien here: http://www.delawaretomorrow.com/christine-odonnell-errors-mistakes-smears-and-thug-politics/ So why did she lie?

2. Post your name along with a verifiable phone number, otherwise calling Stanford will be a waste of time; you could have extracted James Moore Dort's name from just about anywhere. (BTW: If, as you claim, you graduated in 1961, your posts are more easily explained: senile dementia.)

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

WhateverHeSaid:

I was discussing that with "kishorgala" not you -- and I am assuming that she's remained chaste since 2003 as well -- nonetheless, even one DECADE (not plural) is still slightly longer than five (5) days.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 5:58 PM
====================================
I did not get that the 5-day reference was with respect to my claim of being Chaste from weekend to weekend. Stupid me!

So it is a question of length?

Posted by: kishorgala | September 29, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

nisleib:

By all means, if she admits to lying, I will admit that she lied -- at that point, however, we could compare her directly to then-Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) who finally admitted to lying and plagiarism -- but, he kept getting re-elected to that same seat and is currently Acting President of the United States ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

WhateverHeSaid:

I was discussing that with "kishorgala" not you -- and I am assuming that she's remained chaste since 2003 as well -- nonetheless, even one DECADE (not plural) is still slightly longer than five (5) days.

Posted by: JakeD2 |

____________________________________

This is a public forum, Shaky Jake.

There are no private conversations.

Your admission as to your error is noted.

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 6:07 PM | Report abuse

So Chastine O'Donnell says she studied issues related to human dignity at Phoenix Institute.

Doesn't appear she did too well.

Posted by: kishorgala | September 29, 2010 6:07 PM | Report abuse

kishorgala:

Yes, it can be. "Chaste" is not necessarily the same as "virgin".

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 6:08 PM | Report abuse

This woman is an idiot, a liar, and a narcissist. Yet, it is frightening that she has won a major party's nomination to run for the U.S. Senate and has an outside chance of winning. Our republic is in very serious trouble. At a time when government has never been as important, this is what we have.

Posted by: makeitwright | September 29, 2010 6:08 PM | Report abuse

This woman is unbelievable - Sarah Palin, Christine O'Donnell, the Angle woman - Sharon, I think her name is - not really worth remembering!- where do the Republicans find them??

Posted by: jeanneree | September 29, 2010 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Well we all knew it was a lie, no way would she be smart enough to go to Oxford, in fact I have a hard time believing she went to High School.

Posted by: audrey2010 | September 29, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

WhateverHeSaid:

I never said it was a "private conversation" nor have I admitted any error.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 6:11 PM | Report abuse

makeitwright, jeanneree, and audrey2010:

She DID attend a summer seminar at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom. Is there any other specific "lie" of hers that you don't think has been de-bunked?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 6:14 PM | Report abuse

kishorgala:

Yes, it can be. "Chaste" is not necessarily the same as "virgin".

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 6:08 PM
=====================================
Since we are having fun, what do you mean it can be?

Is it or is not? A question of Length?

Posted by: kishorgala | September 29, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Some things never change.

The following is from ThinkProgress, August 21st, 2007.

Jake,

First, you are not posting here to contribute to the discussion, or to learn. Your posts are intended to disrupt and derail the thread. Time and time again your 'positions' are refuted on one thread, but you repeatedly post the same nonsense.

Second, you are not a 75 year-old veteran as you claim. I don't know who you are and don't really care, except that you are an imposter.

Third, you are wrong 100% of the time. You are a sycophant, one of the pissants sent out from the nest to defend the queen ant. You are a mindless, senseless, sexless drone.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/08/21/attorney-charges-rove-with-role-in-her-firing/

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 6:22 PM | Report abuse

I said "Yes". Think of it like one of those 12 Step programs. If you say "I was chaste today" that's not a lie (assuming you actually were ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 6:25 PM | Report abuse

WhateverHeSaid:

I never said it was a "private conversation" nor have I admitted any error.

Posted by: JakeD2

______________________________________

1. You originally claimed "two DECADES" and then admitted it was only one.

2. In an attempt to divert and avoid addressing your idiocy, you claimed to be having a discussion with another poster -- as though this were not a public forum. I was the one who pointed out that this is not a place where private conversations are conducted.

3. Have you experienced at some point in your life a serious closed head injury? A mental breakdown? Have you ever been treated for long-term drug or alcohol abuse?

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 6:29 PM | Report abuse

That last post was actually to "kishorgala". The operative word as to the length of time was that she "REMAIN[s]" chaste. If you want to continuing the discussion, just let me know. All I request in return is that you answer my questions as well : )

Like too many troubled youngsters, Ms. O'Donnell was drinking too much and having sex with guys with whom there wasn't any emotional connection, when she finally had an epiphany and chose to live a life of chastity. It was her junior year when a friend "asked me if I knew how an abortion was performed ... She showed me the medical journals, and it was frightening," she said. "There's only truth and not truth. You're either very good or evil. I went back to my dorm and asked myself what I was."

O'Donnell decided then to drop her acting ambitions — she was a theater major -- she became an evangelical Christian, a departure from her relatively lax Catholic upbringing. She joined the College Republicans and campaigned for the Bush-Quayle ticket. She went on to hone her pro-abstinence and anti-abortion platform, speaking to girls from experience, about what it's like to "live a life without principle," one report said.

http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/20100916/UPDATES01/100916020/Tea-Party-s-newest-darling-turned-her-life-around-in-Morris-County-NJ

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse

I said "Yes". Think of it like one of those 12 Step programs.

Posted by: JakeD2

____________________________________

As suspected, Shaky Jake has familiarity with "12 Step programs"

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

P.S. to WhateverHeSaid:

As you know, I am no longer answering any of your questions to me because you've refused to answer my questions to you.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 6:35 PM | Report abuse

kishorgala:

If you want to make fun of Alcoholics Anonymous living a "sober" (my analogy to "chaste") life, one day at a time, let me know.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

Another blast from Shaky Jake's past:

"Let's just HOPE there are no race riots when Barack HUSSEIN Obama loses."

Posted by: JakeD | May 26, 2008 7:43 PM

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 6:44 PM | Report abuse

P.S. to WhateverHeSaid:

As you know, I am no longer answering any of your questions to me because you've refused to answer my questions to you.

________________________________________

I have no questions for you, Shaky Jake. The ones about your mental health were rhetorical. No answers required.

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | September 29, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

He still hasn't lost, WhateverHeSaid.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Good, because I am no longer answering any questions you post (rhetorical or not).

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if, every day between now and the election, Greg Sargent is going to libel Christine O'Donnell? At some point, even he will cross over the "public figure" threshold?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton was a "Rhodes Scholar". He went to Oxford. He roomed with Tony Blair. He (Bill Clinton) never took a test!!! Why, you might ask? Because the "Oxford Method" is to go to university for three (3) years (no quizzes, no tests, you have to retain everything), and take one final exam. Bill never showed up! Too bad Monica wasn't there. He would have taken the test with his pants off!!

Posted by: cusshut | September 29, 2010 7:04 PM | Report abuse

They weren't roommates though.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 7:11 PM | Report abuse

She is a crook and a liar--doesn't that qualify her to go to Washington?

Posted by: PennyWisetheClown | September 29, 2010 7:34 PM | Report abuse

Jake, it's interesting that you are one of the elitists that you hypocritically complain about--Stanford Law, etc. According to you, only a lawyer can distinguish what's a lie from what's not. The rest of the unwashed masses are just too dumb to figure it out, & should just accept what Christine says, regardless--a lie is only a lie if you say it's a lie, right? Typical teabagger.

Posted by: nyskinsdiehard | September 29, 2010 7:39 PM | Report abuse

cusshut:

Perhaps you were thinking about Tony Blair's older brother, Judge William Blair?

Upon graduation from Georgetown in 1968, Bill Clinton won a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford (University College) where he studied Philosophy, Politics and Economics, though as a result of switching programs and leaving early for Yale in 1970, he did not obtain a degree there either.

Tony Blair started attending several years later and graduated from a completely different school at Oxford (called St. John's College) in 1976, no where near when Bill Clinton was there.

nyskinsdiehard:

Not at all -- I even said at 6:06 PM that I would admit she lied if she admits she lied -- my definition of "lie" = "intentional misstatement of fact". For instance, I've never complained about elitists, so you just lied.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 29, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't be surprised if some journ-O-list (maybe even Greg Sargent himself) created the LinkedIn bio page just to get this "scoop". Kinda like the IRS targeted her on those bogus tax liens (as set forth in the prior thread ; )

Any other conspiracy theories out there? She also claimed she spent a semester at Princeton, ha, ha, ha in a nuisance law suit. She finished college this year, ten years after she started and finally paid her bills, probably from campaign funds, which appear to be her sole source of income, aside from laughable appearances on tv talk shows. Have you no pride, or do you just support anyone with the right letter before her name, R? If so, you believe the Pat Buchanan theory that it doesn't matter if candidates are stupid as long as they vote the right way for the right things. By those standards, you might as well endorse a pre programmed robot.

Posted by: Koko3 | September 29, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Pat Buchanan is not a Republican.

Posted by: clawrence12 | September 29, 2010 8:22 PM | Report abuse

Yes, that must be it. Greg Sargent also filed her lawsuit in which she lied about having been accepted into Princeton to study for her Master's Degree. That Greg Sargent sure is sneaky. That was him, wearing a wig, and pretending to be Christine O'Donnell, on all those Bill Maher shows.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 8:23 PM | Report abuse


Pat Buchanan is not a Republican.

Posted by: clawrence12 | September 29, 2010 8:22 PM

....................

He ran seeking The Republican nomination for President, on more than one occasion. He also worked for Richard Nixon.

You need to enter a clinic, to undergo treatment for your addiction to stupid pills.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 29, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Jake: I seem to recall you agreeing with a poster that "book learnin'" wasn't necessary for someone who aspires to public office. If it wasn't you, then I humbly retract. Nevertheless, you can't win your argument about what a lie is, at least not with anyone who has an ounce of common sense. Would love to debate further, but gotta help my kid study for a test tomorrow. Next time.

Posted by: nyskinsdiehard | September 29, 2010 8:37 PM | Report abuse

Wow, Liam, why so hateful? Mr. Buchanan is not currently registered as a Republican.

Posted by: clawrence12 | September 29, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

As usual, the liberal scumbags are lying about Christine O'Donnell. In the minds of Democrats, the only way to win is to lie, cheat and steal. Personally, I am sick and tired of these two faced politicos. I hope every single Tea Party candidate wins election. The "Washington Club" of liars and cheats needs a new face. Namely, the face of the common man. The elites, along with their communist and socialist friends can all burn in hell together. Their cumulative losses will please me immensely. Let them rot, and good riddance.

Posted by: jerdjon | September 29, 2010 8:46 PM | Report abuse

I agree, jerdjon. It seems now as if the liberals were lying about O'Donnell even posting this bio, same as they lied about Palin getting booed on Dancing with the Stars.

Posted by: clawrence12 | September 29, 2010 9:00 PM | Report abuse

@clawrence,

Before your mind snaps shut on the liberal conspiracy story, you should know it was the Delaware GOP who disclosed the Princeton Master Program whoops-a-daisy lie.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Christine Blames Her Attorney

But asked by The Associated Press earlier this month about her educational record, O'Donnell denied she ever enrolled in a master's degree program at Princeton.

"I wasn't pursuing a master's degree. I was taking an undergraduate course at Princeton," she said.

Reminded about the assertions in her lawsuit, O'Donnell replied, "Well, then my attorney got that wrong."


Read more at the San Francisco Examiner: http://www.sfexaminer.com/politics/congress/del-gop-senate-candidate-christine-odonnell-says-online-profile-with-wrong-info-isnt-hers-104030088.html#ixzz10yFwV3nq

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 9:10 PM | Report abuse

So, here's the scoop:

Christine doesn't lie. The Delaware GOP lies, her attorney lies, LinkedIn lies, but Christine ALWAYS tells the truth even if Jews have to die.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 9:13 PM | Report abuse

So where's the dirt on what's-his-name? You know, the other guy running for the Senate from Delaware?

Or is he just too boring for anyone to care whether he has had a romantic encounter with a 12-year-old girl or boy? Or is addicted to prescription drugs? Or would not be allowed on the Intelligence Committee because he can't get a security clearance? Or are there any funds missing, or any relatives on the state payroll who don't actually do any work?

Posted by: JBaustian | September 29, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Mike Castle is a liberal Republican, so they do exist.

Posted by: clawrence12 | September 29, 2010 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Bill Kristol and Fred Barnes lie Say O'Donnell is "No Sarah Palin"

O'Donnell says Kristol and Barnes are Liars
-------------------------------

The charge: both men, editors of the conservative magazine the Weekly Standard, are trying to undermine Delaware Republican Senate candidate and tea party darling Christine O'Donnell, or so her campaign manager says.

...In an interview with CNN, O'Donnell bemoaned what she called "Republican cannibalism" and alleges GOP operatives are spreading "false accusations" about her as they "are fighting for not only my opponent's political career but their own political career...

The Weekly Standard folks sound unfazed. In a reply to an e-mail from CNN, Bill Kristol offers this: "I know Sarah Palin. I respect Sarah Palin. And with all due respect- Christine O'Donnell is no Sarah Palin."

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Attorneys sometimes get things wrong. It's called "malpractice" for a reason.

Posted by: clawrence12 | September 29, 2010 9:21 PM | Report abuse

Let's review the bidding:

Delaware GOP lies
O'Donnell's attorney lies
LinkedIn lies
Bill Kristol lies
Fred Barnes lies
The liberal conspiracy lies
Greg Sargent lies

But, Christine, she don't lie. Just ask her, she'll tell you she NEVER lies even if Jews have to die.

I wonder what the answer would have been if it hadn't been Jews?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 9:24 PM | Report abuse

Wait, add this to the Liar's List

Karl Rove lies

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 29, 2010 9:29 PM | Report abuse

I'm surprised that this idiot bimbo can even spell Oxford.

Posted by: golfer78015 | September 29, 2010 9:51 PM | Report abuse

Christine O'Donnell, Karl Rove, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Ken Buck, Sharon Angle , Rand Paul and "sissy" grizzly in Alaska are a disgrace to the American voter.

One lie after another. What irrates me the most is their dumbing down of a U. S. Senate Seat. There are thousand upon thousand of occupants of Arlington, and every military cemetery who gave the ultimate sacrifice to
protect and respect that precious seat in the land of the free.

These lying idiots stand behind a liar and a cheat. A woman whose minimal record is one lie after another, no experience, no job and stole her campaign money.

GOD WANTS HER TO WIN-cheap, lying phony idiot. A walking talking nut case.

Posted by: COWENS99 | September 29, 2010 11:10 PM | Report abuse

Poor woman. I actually feel sorry for her. She does not appear to be qualified for the Senate. Perhaps her advisors will have the compassion and courage to urge her to withdraw her candidacy and return to private life. Meanwhile, give her a break, guys. Yes the voters need to examine her qualifications or lack thereof, but isn't there a kinder way to do it? BTW, as a life-long Democrat of the Liberal persuasion, I know what it means to be vilified. Nevertheless, I continue to believe that being a Liberal includes compassion and respect for others, including those whose partisan policies or practices I do not agree with.

Thought I'd clear that up so readers know where I'm coming from on the O'Donnell issue.

Posted by: castleb | September 29, 2010 11:46 PM | Report abuse

Poor woman. I actually feel sorry for her. She does not appear to be qualified for the Senate. Perhaps her advisors will have the compassion and courage to urge her to withdraw her candidacy and return to private life. Meanwhile, give her a break, guys. Yes the voters need to examine her qualifications or lack thereof, but isn't there a kinder way to do it? BTW, as a life-long Democrat of the Liberal persuasion, I know what it means to be vilified. Nevertheless, I continue to believe that being a Liberal includes compassion and respect for others, including those whose partisan policies or practices I do not agree with.

Thought I'd clear that up so readers know where I'm coming from on the O'Donnell issue.

Posted by: castleb | September 29, 2010 11:47 PM | Report abuse

There is no need for anyone to feel sorry for Christine O'Donnell. As soon as the election is over she will probably pop up on FOX as a paid conservative bomb-thrower. She will be the new darling; sort of a Palin mini-me.

Posted by: CMAN27 | September 30, 2010 1:01 AM | Report abuse

Did this woman ever have a job? earn a living? Sounds like a slacker.

Posted by: Rivery | September 30, 2010 1:15 AM | Report abuse

"Just a weak ago I coldnt spel Oksford graduwate and now I are one.

Posted by: thrh | September 30, 2010 2:45 AM | Report abuse

"Did this woman ever have a job? earn a living? Sounds like a slacker.

Posted by: Rivery "

Living on govt. handouts. Welfare queen.

Posted by: thrh | September 30, 2010 2:48 AM | Report abuse

"Did this woman ever have a job? earn a living? Sounds like a slacker.

Posted by: Rivery "

Living on govt. handouts. Welfare queen.

Posted by: thrh | September 30, 2010 2:49 AM | Report abuse

"Nevertheless, I continue to believe that being a Liberal includes compassion and respect for others, including those whose partisan policies or practices I do not agree with.

Thought I'd clear that up so readers know where I'm coming from on the O'Donnell issue.

Posted by: castleb"

Fortunately, being unincumbered by such doubts, I can continue to have a healthy belly laugh at O'Donnell, Palin and such ignorant doofuses, and call them what they are. Or could, if the WaPo would print it.

Posted by: thrh | September 30, 2010 2:52 AM | Report abuse

Here, you want to "spoof" an IP Address?

Install TOR on your machine.

http://www.torproject.org/

Get the plugin for firefox.

http://www.torproject.org/torusers.html.en

It's not the same thing as a "spoof", but for general public understanding of what spoof means it should suffice.

Posted by: eezmamata | September 30, 2010 4:36 AM | Report abuse

eezmamata:

There's no use trying to reason with those like "funkey". Thanks for trying though.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 30, 2010 11:12 AM | Report abuse

For anyone else still interested in "fake" LinkedIn bios (thinking they can't be done):

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/hillary-clinton/16/599/15b

HINT: she graduated from Yale Law, not Harvard, and it didn't take her six (6) years ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 1, 2010 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company