In what has generated the most comments, emails and page hits, I posted my assessment of the Darcy Burner (Candidate for US House, WA Dist 8 ) campaign video, and how I felt it was deceptive in that it allowed a false impression.

When I emailed her campaign, her campaign manager, Zach Silk denied this was intentional, and even denied it was a realistic impression.

The blog readers, for the most part, disagreed.  I will post some of their comments here, with this qualifier:

Most of the people here likely did not shift opinions.  Those that supported her before, still do.  Those who opposed her still do.

If her video was intended to draw support from the undecideds and her opposition, it failed, at least at this level.

Agreeing with me a few people said:

I was furious when I saw this. It jumps right out at anyone who has been following this candidate but. we already know the truth.  As this is directed to the marginally engaged voter-to-be, it is a LIE, pure and simple.

…

Unfortunately, we apparently live in a world of "relative" truth as it relates to political spin… In my opinion this was little more than a ploy to appear supportive of Veterans while minimizing the actual benefits given…   Why is it these people want to dress themselves up in phony patriotic costumes just before election time? 

…

now i know what i was having issues with in that ad… it did indeed leave me thinking SHE had been in the military

…

An obvious ploy.  Nice work.  the anti-war left always goes to great pains to not appear anti-war.  They support the troops of course!  Just not anything the troops do.

…

As a current Air Force member of over 30 years I found the ad to be deceptive; designed to portray her in a light that is not truthful. 

…

I don’t trust her at all.  She finds the line of deceit and goes as close to it as possible.

So I don’t feel so bad.  It wasn’t just my imagination.

Opposing me though were some interesting posts:

In this case as well as Cantwell’s:
 
I think you want to find something so you can justify supporting Republicans while still claiming to be open minded

Not really.  I meant every word I said in wanting to clarify the issue.  Her campaign has been silent since my initial exchange, so I have nothing further to go on.

To me this is a defining moment for Darcy.  Her campaign has been advised of a point of ambiguity in its ad, and has elected not to change it. By implication they either agree with the misunderstanding or don’t care enough to correct it.  Since one of her strongest running points is her love of the military, I would have though that she would feel compelled to fix it.

Oh, sure, because seeing that picture of Darcy as a toddler makes it seem as if she’s claiming she’s the Air Force vet. 
You are looking for ANY excuse to bash her

As was noted by another person the scene before my capture showed people in uniform, so in context the caption could have been her or someone else.

One person apparently equated Civil Air Patrol (CAP) to veteran.

 Darcy WAS in the civil air patrol.

I watched the ad and was not confused. The style of the ad is the text onscreen is a very short summary of the voiceover.

Your post here amounts to a pile of nothing.

 I disagreed, but this comment brought it more into focus:

As a former civil air patrol cadet myself, I am disappointed there were so many pictures included of the CAP uniform in the making of a deception. Integrity is a core value of both CAP and AF. Technically speaking, CAP is "the official auxiliary of the USAF" but I certainly don’t call myself a veteran even if I did achieve the General Billy Mitchell award (as depicted in one picture)–which thousands of other teenagers have done.

This comment noticed something I had not.  In the segment two occupations are attributed to her father, not one, yet only one was used for the caption, even though in another segment two elements were shown side by side. 

I would be more willing to give the Burner camp the benefit of the doubt if the audio and video matched up, not on the Father was an Air Force Vet but if the video also showed "School Teacher" in addition to "Air Force Vet". 

Well, the concensus was that the ad was decpetive, though whether this was deliberate or not is open to debate.

I will forward this to her campaign for comment, and post any rebuttal they care to issue.