Not that there is anything wrong with that. I am a strong advocate of unschooling even through college --and even as I prepare to send my kids to school for the first time. I honestly do not think that a college education is worth anything to about 90% who graduate.

The problem's the lying.

Ouch!

How can people endorse her? She's turning into a regular Carl Andrews! Is this all building up to a big scandal of some sort? It's in the air.

It's understandably embarrassing to be a college dropout nowadays and fake resumes aren't especially shocking. Does the status ill-behoove, or does it well-suit, someone claiming to know all about "the strengths and weaknesses of our educational system" which apparently failed Yvette?

By lying about graduating Clarke is doing more than damaging her own reputation. She is cheapening the value of a degree and setting a terrible example. Yes, it is good to see that a non-graduate can get as far as she has, but a public official should be sure to make sure that she encourages others to go.

Of course, it is an elected office she is seeking and at least she has experience in that field, unlike uber-grad Owens.

Well the Oberlin Registrar office doesn't think Yvette graduated

Check it out for yourself
Call The Oberlin Registrar’s office 440-775-8450

Here's an idea...at the next candidate forum or joint appearance, Chris Owens should bring his degrees, the one he has from Harvard and the other he has from Princeton. Hold them up high and say..."Yvette, where's yours?"

Its being reported that at the CBS 2 debate taped earlier today, that Yvette Clarke is now openly saying she will run third party if she doesn't get the democratic nomination. Yvette Clarke is pulling a Joe Lieberman. I say that a democrat who runs in the primary and says they won't support the winner of the primary if it isn't them, is a fair weather democrat. One who is only a democrat when it suits their needs. The democratic party doesn't need people like that. Yvette's loyalty is to herself, not the party, just like Lieberman.

Unfortunately at this debate, Chris Owens was asked this same "third party" question, and said he would consider it. A diplomatic answer considering everyone knows the petitions to get him on the green party line have already been circulated.

Here's a suggestion, if the candidates running in the primary aren't willing to say in advance that they'll support the winner of the primary, that is something that must be considered when you consider whether to vote for them. We need party unity among Democrats!

So what could happen? Yassky could win the primary being the only white guy against the three african american candidates. Then in November, he is again the only white guy against Clarke on the WFP line, Owens on the Green Party line, and that lady who's running on the Independence party line. It would be the primary all over again. I think that whoever loses the primary should be a loyal democrat and not pull a joe lieberman, especially if they want to be a player in the party and not burn the bridges they'll need to run again in two years as a DEMOCRAT...

Clarke: "I spent much of the day today in contact with Oberlin College and Medgar Evers College to retrieve my academic records from two decades ago, convinced of my recollection that I had fulfilled the requirements for a bachelors degree. Contrary to that recollection, I have now discovered that I remain two classes short of the requirements for my degree. This is an embarrassing moment for me, but I feel it is important to set the record straight."

If Yvette had gotten a bachelor's degree from one of those schools, wouldn't she have been sent her diploma and wouldn't she have remembered getting it? The school never sent her a diploma and she assumed she graduated anyway?! Sorry, but she is lying.

Andrews took kickbacks, and Clarke lied about her credentials. Both lack the integrity to serve in Congress and should drop out.

I did not go to school beyond elementary and I am respected by the politicians who give me photos and funds for my Crown Heights community.

Here's an idea...at the next candidate forum or joint appearance, Chris Owens should bring his degrees, the one he has from Harvard and the other he has from Princeton. Hold them up high and say..."Yvette, where's yours?"

Yeah Chris should bring his degrees from these Ivy League schools. Hold them up high and say... Look what I have because my dad had connections.

His degress have no value because the man can not cut it on his own in the real world without the help of his father.

how can you say Chris Owens' degrees have no value. You can't graduate from harvard and princeton without having done the work. Also those schools are a good deal harder to get into I believe than Medger Evers or Oberlin.

You are also out of line to say Chris can't cut it on his own without his dad, he is 47 and has his own life and career that have nothing to do with Major.

Reality check:

1. Wouldn't any other city employee be fired for lying on an official document with the clear intent to deceive?
2. Wouldn't any other city employee be fired for lying on their resume--particularly about their credentials?
3. Wouldn't any other private sector employee be fired for lying on their resume?

For us to issue a "pass" on this one would mean another politician claiming protection from the laws she claims to serve. What an inspiration. Is this really the quality of candidate that anyone in Brooklyn want representing them? How many more scandels do we want in this borough?

SHE ought to ask the city to launch an investigation into all of her official documents to assure that this is not just the tip of an iceburg.

how can you say Chris Owens' degrees have no value. You can't graduate from harvard and princeton without having done the work. Also those schools are a good deal harder to get into I believe than Medger Evers or Oberlin.

You are also out of line to say Chris can't cut it on his own without his dad, he is 47 and has his own life and career that have nothing to do with Major.

His degrees have no value. He can not cut it without the help and connections of his dad. You can graduate from Harvard and Princeton as an educated dummy. Those schools are harder to get into due to politics and not because they are better than Medger Evers, Oberlin, or any other college or University. God bless the child that has his own and when examined in depth Chris does not have his own. Mole the truth is never BS. It is only BS to those who are full of BS.

Chris served with great distinction on the school board. -> Opportunist.

He has worked for NARAL-NY (or do you think a woman's choice has no value?). -> Opportunist.

He is the only candidate who is endorsed by a slew of Congressmen rather than merely State and local level politicians. _> How many did Major a favor and How many drink?

He was the founder and chairman of the Paul Robeson Independent Democrats (PRIDE), Chair of the Kings County Democratic Coalition (KCDC), Co-Chair of the New York State Democratic Coalition (NDC) and President of the Weeksville Society. -> Opportunist.

Making false statements in a contentious and racially charged run-off like this one is beyond idiotic.

I don't believe anyone can forget or fail to "recollect" whether they graduated or not, and to say as such insults everyone. Blame should not be placed at her campaign staff, it lies solely with Ms. Clarke. To state that she graduated from Medgar Evers on her candidacy records means she had no doubt about her academic record - yet here she is now, claiming otherwise. Bottom line, she lied, but instead of admitting that, she's trying to dismiss the importance of ethics and honesty.

When are the city's conflict of interest boards and ethics commissions going to get involved here?

They are opportunistic moves which he hopes will land him in Congress.

Mole, loving eyes can never see.

Representing our interests in Washington DC is a different ballgame than working at Weeksville or even the school board. Have any of you been to Weeksville -- or even know what it is? It's important but absolutely not impressive. In my mind the major criterion for backing a candidate is that this person can be smart about how to get things done in DC.

It seems like a crowded field of candidates until you start looking closely. Clark's memory flaw is unforgiveable . And pardon me, Chris Owens is a great fellow but with all he has had going for him--family connections, a family in politics, degrees from prestigious universities, and so on, has he really distinguished himself? Not in my book. His activism has been local and relatively below the radar. Being elected to the School Board..well, my experiences with the NYC Dept of Education and public system suggest that it's just one meeting after another. And if you look at his website it does seem that he's relying on the dynastic approach to politics, because he lists his father's resume on his website and also says he would try to sit on the same congressional committee as dad. Furthermore I find it curious that a person who opted to take a job in a managed care company espouses single payer health care.

Some of you who write in here might not like Yasskys moderate style but if you had something you wanted to get DONE in DC, which of these candidates do you think could do it? IMHO , the only one who has a proven record of getting something done in government and also who knows his way around Washington is Yassky.

Almost all of the people I know who don't like and support Chris Owens have one thing in common....they've never met him. If you met him and know him, you'd realize he's a quality individual. He'll talk for hours on any topic. When I've met/talked with Yassky he's always seemed wooden and distant, and his answers were always too calculated and diplomatic for my taste. Yassky is the type who will do and say whatever he has to say to get elected, but you'll never really know him which means you'll never be able to trust him. Thats the difference between the two candidates. I still don't know who Yassky really is despite the various times I've met him, whereas I've known exactly who Chris Owens is from the very first time I met him. Spend some time with Chris Owens, go down to a pub with him and let him talk your head off about the issues, over a few beers, and I guarantee you'll know exactly who he is and what he stands for and that he's his own person.

In other words give Chris a couple of hours so that he can run the game on you.

Let me start by noting how vastly amused I am that the Yassky campaign has found a new home on the Daily Gotham.

Now let's look at Yassky's accomplishments - or rather, Chuck Schumer's accomplishments, because they're what David is running on. Whose work would he try to claim credit for in the unlikely event he were elected? He already claims to have written and passed the Brady bill, an extraordinary accomplishment, given that he was nowhere near Congress at the time. If elected (a prospect the entire Democratic Party looks at with profound unease, because the black community would be furious), he would be a reliable tool for big developers, whose money he would need to protect himself. Add into that the fact that he just has no clue about the district - witness the Thelma Davis incident - and it's clear that Yassky may get things done, but they won't be the things all of us would like to see happen.

And I'm sorry, Yaskkyites, but your boy is going to emerge from this humiliated. Two words for you: Gifford Miller.

OK, OK, let's focus here. What counts in a Congressional representative? What makes someone good -- or even great? It seems to me that by focusing so intensively on the question of development, you're missing the bigger dialogue and the bigger picture.

I realize that everyone who lives near Atlantic Yards (and I do, too) is going nuts about that process. But in Congress there are other issues to be dealt with.

(And Yes, mole, upon reflecting I still I do think you were mudslinging. Im glad we aren't discussing people's dads anymore. but twas you who imputed Yassky's family for being connected to the biggest baddest of NYC real estate moguls, and that was gratuitoius. And sorry if I didn't chastise the entire chain of command for whomever else has been doing so in regard to other candidates, it's true, I'm new to the blog. Lets face it, mudslinging doesn't really enhance intelligent conversation. But the fact that others are doing it doesn't, as your kindergarten teacher doubtless remarked, make it right for you to do so. It strikes me that you're over the top when you write, "You lose all credibility...±" blah blah blah. Enough moral righteousness.)

As for examples cited: I suppose that we could spend most of the week going back and forth arguing about what each and every candidate did or didn't do in regard to any number of decisions. I personally think something should be developed in the Atlantic Yards and that Yassky['s position is that the issue of job creation and low income housing is meritorious enough to counterbalance the brownstoners concerns. He's taken a centrist position. That's fine with me. I think what we need in DC is someone who can work across the isle, who can collaborate even with those with radically different (read, rightwing) agendas. Yelling and screaming isn't going to get us anywhere in DC right now, we need skilled politicians who can compromise effectively. Sad but true we are in a very tenuous position and by "we" I mean anybody affiliated with core Democratic Party principles.

You write with gusto about corruption, here in the development and also in DC. Corruption is of course an intractable problem up and down the line in campaign finance. I 100% agree that there's been a horrific lack of community input into Atlantic Yards, and that the project managers did a sickeningly brilliant job in circumventing the input actual people who will be living in the area.

But "standing up to cronyism" is frankly not the very first thing I think we need in DC--and in this, we may be reflecting different perspectives. For instance, Barak Obama's a whole different player but one of his strong suits is his ability to work with people of different opinions, to craft compromise. Is there room for that in your worldview?

I think we need people in DC who actually can work out compromises rather than retreat to the safety of the ethically pure high road. There's a role for both in politics. But in this current politically divisive environment, further polarization might not be my first choice. I am looking for someone who can help SAVE Roe not be another voice just saying it should be maintained. There's just a world of difference here.

As I said, Chris Owens is terrific, and resume-error notwithstanding, Clark has been a good public servant too. However there's this obsession on this website about the role of the Atlantic Yards in the Congressional race that's paralleled only by the Times' coverage of the role of race in this primary. I'd like to see some discussion of what it is that will make us the best damn Congressional representative in a hostile Washington administration. And I certainly hope that as of Sept. 13 when all this is over, we all direct this incredible energy toward getting some Republican candidates for Congress ousted.

A PS to BOULDIN POST: I'd be curious to know what you know about David Yassky's contribution to the gun control movement in the United States. Your posting suggests NOT MUCH.

He's consistently supported extremely unpopular positions, and taken a lead in making change where change can be made, for instance in the NYS Legislature in regulating the number of handguns that can be purchased at a time, child protections and other things. If you don't know about this, which I think you don't, give a call to the folks in Manhattan at New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, the state's gun control group, and they will tell you what Yassky has done. As for who drafted what piece of legislation and when, as you know this is a lengthy process. What you may not know is that it took years and years and years for the Brady Bill to pass. During that time the legislation was doubtless recrafted from time to time. Anyway it's a cheap and uninformed shot to suggest that he's running on Chuck's accomplishments. He's done more than most local politicians in the United States; there are about a dozen of them who've taken the lead. I happen to know a bit about this, so Bouldin, please take a more careful look at your claim here. It's incorrect.

I get the feeling reading some of these postings that people don't really know much about what Congressional representatives do in DC or about David Yassky's actual record.

Both this blog and the newspaper coverage of this race seem to be about everything but what these folks would do in Congress.

Are you paid to do this? Do you do this all day long?

I just found Yvette's diploma; it was right there next to Ken Diamondstone's driver's license.

It would not be surprising if Mole gets paid to blog by the Owens campaign. Chris tells him what to say and he comes and blogs.