Christine O'Donnell's past has provided almost unlimited material for newspapers and comedians alike (her comments about witchcraft and her anti-masturbation campaign have become overnight YouTube sensations). Social and political views notwithstanding, investigators have begun to throw even more serious accusations at the up-and-coming G.O.P. and Tea Party leader: egregious resume padding, in which O'Donnell lied about her education at Oxford and her fellowship at Claremont.
The Linked-In resume that sparked the controversy and contained this information was immediately rejected by O'Donnell's PR people as not being the candidate's own work (and it was removed thereafter).
However, new information immediately surfaced about a ZoomInfo profile in which O'Donnell used similar language to describe her education background. An official for the company also stated that it was O'Donnell who had provided the information, not an outside party.
Coincidence? In a world where the resume makes all the difference, fudging a few words and dates here and there can make quite the difference in one's chance of climbing up the political ladder. It seems like O'Donnell enrolled in many programs to boost her resume but failed to complete a few of them adequately or lied about what they were and what she did while she was in them. Whatever one many think about O'Donnell, charges of resume padding should be taken very seriously, as they are a sign of a general disposition and not a spur-of-the-moment decision. If the charges are proved (the evidence looks quite damning), it shows that O'Donnell was ok with lying to get ahead, a trait that should never (ideally, of course) find its way into public office.